HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Environmental Advisory Committee_Tab 01_2/12/2020Agenda Item #1.
Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC)
STAFF MEMO
Meeting: Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) - Feb 12 2020
Staff Contact: Department: Site Admin Group
Update on Activities of the Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating Council and Tequesta's
Role Therein
Update on Activities of the LRMCC
LRMCC Minutes 092319
Lox River Pollutant Reduction Plan 92019
Page 5 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
memo
Village of Tequesta Environmental Advisory Committee
To: Environmental Advisory Committee Members
From:
Thomas G. Bradford, Chair
CC:
Date: February 5, 2020
Re: Update on Activities of the Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating
Council (LRMCC)and Tequesta's Role Therein by Matthew Hammond, PE,
Director of Utilities, Village of Tequesta
Comments: Per your request, Matt Hammond has agreed to provide the EAC with an update
on the activities of the LRMCC. In this regard, Matt provided me with some
documents that included the LRMCC Plan and the agenda and minutes for the
last meeting in 2019. I have attached the minutes and Plan for your review and
future reference.
Page 6 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LOXAHATCHEE RIVER MANAGEMENT COORDINATING COUNCIL
MEETING
Monday, September 23, 2019 2:00 pm
The River Center
805 N. US Highway 1
Jupiter, FL 33477
MINUTES
I. Call to Order
Chairman Jonathan Ricketts called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. and welcomed everyone.
II. Roll Call
Albrey Arrington — Loxahatchee River Environmental Control District
James Erskine — Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission
Howard Jenkins — Martin County
Chad Kennedy — Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Nate Litteral — Village of Tequesta
Justin Nolte — South Florida Water Management District
Jonathan Ricketts — Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District
Gary Ritter — Florida Farm Bureau
Dick Roberts — Martin County Environmental & Conservation Groups
Ill. Approval of Minutes from the June 24th meeting
Chad made a motion to approve the minutes and Dick seconded. Minutes were unanimously
approved.
Albrey shared that he would like to propose to have a brief discussion on the Loxahatchee River
Management Plan sometime during the meeting. The Loxahatchee Management Plan is one of
the primary jobs of the Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating Council.
IV. Public Comment
Dee Halpirin, a resident of Juno Beach, made a request for the SFWMD to clean up some large
debris along the river going out of River Bend Park.
V. Project Updates
A. Loxahatchee Reasonable Assurance Plan Update — Tiffany Busby (60 min)
MINUTES FOR THIS ITEM WERE PROVIDED BY DEP
Tiffany Busby, Wlldwood Consulting and contractor, introduced herself and shared that Julie
Espy with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) was unable to attend
today because of other meetings in Tallahassee this week. However, Moira Homann with DEP
was present today and could help answer questions. Tiffany noted that she was presenting on
behalf of Julie today.
Page 7 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 2
Tiffany reported that during the June 24, 2019 meeting, the Council assigned DEP with the task
of drafting a memo promoting the 4e approach that the Council could send to the responsible
entities and stating the Council's support for moving forward with a 4e plan. Also, one of the
points that should be included was that the Council's vote on supporting a 4e plan approach
was non -binding on the entities with projects and monitoring efforts in the 4e plan.
Jonathan Ricketts passed out a revised version of the memo for the Council's consideration,
which had some marked revisions on the memo that was sent to the members in advance of the
meeting. Jonathan explained that he wanted to add some information and make some minor
edits to the memo that DEP drafted. He also noted that he asked Tiffany to review the memo.
Tiffany added that she made some minor editorial edits that are included in Jonathan's version
that he shared with the Council.
Albrey Arrington asked Tiffany if DEP wanted the memo to be sent. Tiffany clarified that the
Council voted in June 2019 to initiate the memo. The assignment to DEP was to draft the memo
and so DEP has now completed their assigned task. Whether to send out such a memo was
and is the decision of the Council.
A motion to approve the memo was made by Albrey Arrington and seconded by Dick Roberts.
There was discussion about the memo and members indicated their general support for sending
a memo out. Albrey suggested that the word "enhance" in the last sentence be changed to
"restore" as restoration is a higher goal that enhancing the Loxahatchee River. James Erskine
asked if the memo was drafted by DEP. Chad Kennedy responded that yes, DEP drafted the
memo. DD Halpern commented that she is a professional copy editor and she agreed with the
word change to "restore."
The Council voted to approve the revised version of the memo, including the edits from
Jonathan and the word change suggested by Albrey. There were no objections.
For the next part of the update, Tiffany mentioned that a webinar to demonstrate the
Loxahatchee Pollutant Load Screening Model (PLSM) was held on August 19, 2019. During the
webinar, the use of the PLSM to estimate project credits was shown. The credits are based on
a geographic information system- (GIS-) based treated area. The model, the GIS file, and the
PowerPoint from the webinar are all posted on the DEP site.
Tiffany added that the take home details from the webinar included the following: 1. Use the
PLSM GIS file from the DEP site for any calculations; 2. Use the DEP guidance for the percent
reductions for project credits; 3. The main use of the PLSM tool is for urban best management
practice (BMP) credits; 4. There are some other calculation tools for certain kinds of projects. 5.
If you want to use your own calculations for credit in the 4e Plan tables, save your calculations
and be prepared to submit them with your results. There were no questions about the PLSM
webinar.
Next, Tiffany gave an update on the nutrient projects for the 4e plan. Tiffany stated that more
nutrient projects were received over the summer based on the request for additional projects
and more information about unquantified projects; she thanked all the people who provided
additional information. Tiffany showed a table that summarized the types of projects that are
currently included in the project table for nutrient reductions; there is a separate project table for
fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) reductions.
Page 8 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 3
Tiffany also reviewed the estimated total reductions based on the projects received. For all
projects, the estimated reductions are 34,198 pounds per year (Ibslyr) of total nitrogen (TN) and
5,385 Ibslyr total phosphorus (TP). These account for 94 % and 130 %, respectively, of the
total load reductions needed. If you review the reductions from the completed projects (since
2008), the total reductions are 31,823 Ibslyr TN and 5,285 Ibslyr TP. Tiffany noted that most of
the projects on the list are already completed and there are not as many projects that are
planned or underway.
After the reductions, Tiffany showed a chart of the TN project reductions over time, based on
the project list. She explained that for ongoing projects, the completion date does not apply
because those activities occur year-to-year and must continue in order to continue the reduction
(and the credit). Ongoing projects include efforts such as street sweeping, BMP clean -out,
public education, and agricultural BMPs. Since there is not a clear completion date for these
efforts, they are included in the first -year count of reductions, which is 2008.
She noted that the chart shows that we are close to achieving the TN reductions we estimate
are necessary to meet the water quality target. However, the TP chart is more confusing. The
TP chart indicates that we achieved the reductions in 2009 and that we have greatly exceeded
the total reduction needs. While it is possible this could be the case, the measured water quality
data do not correspond to the TP project chart.
Tiffany showed water quality data from waterbody identification (WBID) area 3226A from 2017
and 2018. These data show that for these two years the TN concentrations met (were lower
than) the water quality criterion, but the TP concentrations were higher than the criterion.
Tiffany acknowledged that we have three sets of estimates that we are working with —the
watershed model, the correlation among TN, TP, and chlorophyll -a, and the project credits. All
three have some error, so we expect some numbers to diverge. However, the water quality
data are actual measured concentrations, so those are the most known numbers we are
working with. The fact that the TP project credits don't agree with the TP concentrations would
provoke some questions from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if we were
seeking reasonable assurance. For this reason, it is advisable to pursue a 4e plan instead of a
reasonable assurance plan, to implement projects, and to collect more water quality data so that
we can see if we can better explain what we need to do to address TP concentrations.
There was discussion about the TN chart, the TP chart, and the water quality concentrations.
Chad asked where WBID 3226A was located and Bud Howard responded that it is in the
Southwest Fork. There were questions about the average TP concentrations in other WBIDs,
but Tiffany said that she only had the data summarized today from WBID 3226A. Albrey
mentioned that the Loxahatchee River District's recent water quality data correspond to the DEP
results that we look pretty good with TN concentrations with a few exceptions, but still have
issues with TP concentrations in areas of the Loxahatchee.
Briefly, Tiffany noted that there were no additional projects added to the FIB project list since
June. Then Tiffany explained that the timing is good to finalize a 4e plan since DEP is in the
process of running the assessment of the Loxahatchee water quality that is done every 5 years.
Currently, DEP is pulling the water quality data and comparing the results to the state
standards. Based on this comparison, DEP will update the list of impairments for the
Loxahatchee. A draft list is expected by the end of the year.
Page 9 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 4
Tiffany explained that the 4e approach means that EPA does not conduct a formal review of the
plan, so we avoid addressing immediately our current anomaly with the TP projects compared
to the TP concentrations. Putting the 4e Plan in place postpones a total maximum daily load
(TMDL) and gives us time to collect more water quality data and understand the system and
TN/TPlchlorophyll-a concentrations better. Finalizing the 4e plan is a simple administrative
process and allows for a 4b/reasonable assurance plan in the future. There was discussion
about TMDLs and how the plan would prevent a TMDL from being developed. Moira noted that
DEP has a schedule for developing TMDLs through 2022 and the Loxahatchee is not currently
on that schedule. Based on the discussion, Moira and Tiffany offered to provide the link to the
TMDL schedule called the "Framework Document" on the DEP website
(https:llfloridadel).govldearlwater-quality-evaluation-tmdllcontentlsite-specific-tmdl-
prioritization).
At the end of her presentation, Tiffany provided a list of all the entities that have projects listed in
the plan. Those are the entities that should check their project lists, their monitoring plan
activities, and their process for approving the plan. DEP will need to hear back from each entity
indicating they are ready to move forward. Tiffany asked these entities to send comments on
the draft 4e plan and their approval schedule no later than October 31. Several people asked
when the plan would be posted. Tiffany stated that she was awaiting a review from DEP and
then her office would address those corrections. She hoped that those would be completed by
September 27th, but it could take until the following week based on the time needed to address
the DEP comments. Tiffany added that the draft document would be posted, and a link would
be emailed out to everyone, so that a large file would not limit the notification. Also, that each
responsible entity would receive their own email that includes the personnel that provided the
project information. Chad asked if a cover email would be included to describe the review
needed and the deadline. Tiffany indicated that a cover email would be included and would
describe the expectations and schedule for the review. Jonathan clarified that DEP expected to
hear back from the individual entities and not from the Council. Tiffany agreed this was the
expectation.
B. Loxahatchee River Watershed Restoration Project Discussion - Jeremy McBryan
(20 min)
Jeremy McBryan provided some information on what Palm Beach County is doing with regards
to the Loxahatchee River Watershed Restoration Project, the direction received from the Board
of County Commissioners and some of the technical work they are doing and next steps. In
April, he presented to his board some preliminary thoughts on his review of the draft project
implementation report that the Army Corps of Engineers had published. The board approved a
motion supporting the state and federal efforts to restore the river. They had some concerns
and wanted to make sure they were communicated. They expressed interest in collaborating
with the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the Water Management District on how best to
reconsider the Mecca Reservoir. That was one of the elements of the plan that probably had
the most stakeholder concern. The Water management District and Army Corps of Engineers
both seem to be open on figuring out a path while also preserving the current path the project
plan is on to get authorization in WRDA 2020. Jeremy shared that on July 2r", the board
approved a consultant services agreement with Kimley-Horn to conduct a Loxahatchee River
Restoration Local Initiative and Mecca Site evaluation. On September loth their board also
approved the proposed state legislative agenda which is a comprehensive document that
Page 10 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 5
guides their efforts on the local level in their interaction with Tallahassee and local legislators to
convey what their interests are as a county.
Jeremy shared some of the objectives and major tasks of the Loxahatchee River Restoration
local initiative and Mecca site evaluation. Completion is expected by end of October 2019. He
also shared some potential concepts and features considered for further evaluation and
proposed alternatives.
Currently they are working through some of the modeling that the District has done and they are
also evaluating an alternative path. They have an update scheduled on October 17ih at their
Water Resources Task Force meeting. They will keep their Board of County Commissioners
engaged and by the end of October they will be able to come to the SFWMD and explain what
they've done.
VI. Watershed Status Updates
A. Loxahatchee River Dashboard Overview, Albrey Arrington, LRD (5 min)
Albrey shared a brief comment on the Loxahatchee River Management Plan. He shared that
the Loxahatchee River Management plan is one of the most significant products that should be
derived from this group. The last update was done in 2010 and it should be revised every 5
years. Albrey asked for concurrence from the Council to do a plan update with a 2020
publication date. He recommended creating a committee to revise the plan and have the
committee come back to the Council periodically with updates or concerns. Loxahatchee River
District is prepared to commit staff resources to facilitate this. Albrey thinks this is something
that needs to be done and shared that the timing was good with the EPA revision of water
quality within the watershed.
Dick shared that he and Marian presented in 2016 and felt it was time to revise the plan and
they brought it to the Council. The Council voted to say that they wanted to wait for the Corps'
document on the plan. It was the Council's decision to delay it until we had the document from
the Corps. We have a draft now and can proceed with it.
Jonathan shared that they were proactive about looking at the individual stakeholders in doing
these projects. The potential for projects to get us to the goal are there and those projects have
been permitted but because they weren't specifically permitted for water quality, they are not
given credit for that so there were limitations placed on them for MFL and other issues. We can
go back and work with those stakeholders and potentially get those projects to move forward.
We can do water quality within the district stakeholders ourselves, we should be proactive, and
we should be pushing the agencies to update that plan with the information that's already out
there.
Chad shared that historically, DEP took the lead last time and the water management district
should take the lead this time and that they continue taking turns in taking the lead on the
updating the plan. He suggested that we put this on the agenda for the next meeting to discuss
and give the Water Management District a heads up.
Chad proposed that this be made into a more decisional type of agenda for the Council to
consider whether it's an appropriate time to update the management plan and if it's a good idea
to establish a sub -team made up of various agency representatives.
Page 11 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 6
Jonathan shared that at the next meeting they will bring forward the discussion of whether this is
a good time to update and identify members of the Council as to who will be the liaison within
the team and who would report back to the Council.
Albrey added that it can be structured in such a way that the committee has been subject to
sunshine or has not. That may be a piece that's worth discussing.
Chad shared that if it's a technical working group then it's not necessarily subject to sunshine
law. They wouldn't have any decision -making authority.
B. Water Quality, Bud Howard, LRD (5 min)
Bud reminded and invited everyone to visit their website LoxahatcheeRiver.org and he reviewed
the great tools available to get water quality and river data. He shared that one of the things
that they are keeping an eye on during this time of year are flows going into the river measured
at Lainhart Dam. Also, they are trying some new instrumentation that measures chlorophyl and
turbidity to monitor high bacteria counts.
Bud expressed his appreciation to Rob Rosmanith for all the work that they do as part of the
river keeper program.
VII. Field Trip Planning & Discussion
Kathy asked for suggestions for the next field trip scheduled for January 131h. It was decided
that the meeting will be held at the Kimball Center and the field trip will be to visit the Oxbow
project.
Vill. Member Issues (brief, verbal status update)
A. Land Management
B. Flood Control
C. Environmental Issues
D. Recreation Opportunities
E. Permits
Albrey had a member of the public approach him about a fallen tree blocking the river
between Trappers and 1-95 and they asked what the protocol was. Rob said that it is on
their radar and he will be working with staff to address the issue. Albrey also shared that
he was at Lainhart and Masten Dam recently and the work that was done there was
excellent. The Water Management District did a great job. A nice outcome to a project
that needed to get done.
• Dick shared that before he retired, he tried to rewrite the stipulations on what they were
going to do with the brush issues and problems with canoeing the river. The policy went
up to Tallahassee. He shared that we need to address these issues for safety concerns.
Either the agencies or the Council should work out something to address this issue.
• Chad shared a situation update. Martin County has been working on the Cypress Creek
project and they have an application in with the DEP. DEP is currently working through
some stakeholder concerns. Adjacent upstream property owners are concerned about
maintaining their flood protection. DEP is working through that and will hopefully have it
Page 12 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
LRMCC
September 23, 2019
Page 7
resolved within the next week. Also, he wanted to acknowledge the Jupiter Inlet District
for their efforts in both the Mangrove Isle restoration and Oxbow work that was done.
• Kathy LaMartina gave everyone a heads up that the 2020 LRMCC meeting schedule is
listed on the agenda. She also reminded everyone that the election of officers will be an
item on January's meeting agenda.
• John Lock introduced himself as the new Park Manager for Jonathan Dickinson State
Park. He also shared that Rob Rosmanith is the 2019 resource manager of the year.
IX. 2020 Meeting Schedule
All meetings will be held at The River Center — 805 N. US Highway 1, Jupiter, FL 33477
except for the January 13th meeting.
January 13, 2020
March 30, 2020
June 29, 2020
September 28, 2020
X. Adjourn
Meeting was adjourned at 4:17 p.m.
Next meeting and the field trip will be held on January 13, 2020
Page 13 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
- DRAFT -
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Flan
developed by the
stakeholders in the Lo ahatohee River Basin
with support from the
Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration
Water Quality A_se =Trent Program
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
septer7ber 2019
Page 14 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Acknowledgments
The plan was developed by the stakeholders from within the Loxahatchee River basin
identified hP ! nw (Table A-1) with support from the Florida Department of
Environmental Nrotection (DEP). The Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating
Council provided a 'orum -:or collaboration during the development of this p1=n,
Table A-1. Loxahatchee River stakeholders
Type of Entity
Mame
Martin County
Palm Beach County
Lcca� Ga�uern�nk
Town of Jupiter
Village of Tequesta
Flo-ida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Florida Department of Transportation
Florida Fish and Nildlife Conservation
Agenciev
Commission
f-16711 Florida Water Management District
U,S. Army Corps of Engineers
U,S, Department of interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Citizens
Florida Farm oureau
Indian River Keeper
Jupiter Inlet District
City of Palm Beach Gardens
Landowner Representatives
Local River User Groups
Loxahatchee River Environmental Control District
Other Interested Stakeholders
Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating
Council
Martin County Conservation Alliance
Northern Palm Beach County Irrprovement District
Palm Beach County Florida Native Plant Society
Chapter
South Indian Rarer Environmental Control
District
Treasure Coast Regional. Elanning L , r, i I
Page 2 Gf 5
Page 15 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments......... .............................................................. ............................ —2.
T,i hle of Contents................................................................................,............................................3
Listof Figures. . ........... ........... ....................... .................
................. ..... _5
Listof Tables....................................................................................................................................6
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations...............................................................................................7
Section1 : Background....................................................................................................................8
1.1 Purpose of the Plan......................................................................................................8
1.2 Pollutant Reduction Planning Process...................................................................8
1.3 Geographic. Boundaries of the Plan— ... ...............
.. 19
1.4 Stakeholder Involvement...........................................................................................10
Section 2 : Impaired Waterbodies..................................................................................................11
2.1 Description of the Impaired Waterbodies...........................................................11
2.2 Pollutants of Concern...... ... — .... - ... .......... ...... — ... — ........
...........................1
Section 3 : Water Quality and Aquatic Ecological Goals..............................................................14
3..1 Water Quality Targets...............................................................................................14
3.2 Use of PLSH for Watershed Loading Estimates... ..... - ... ...........
........... — .... .... - 15
3.3 Schedule to Meet Targets and Restoration Goals.............................................17
Section 4 : Proposed Management Activities................................................................................1
4.1 Responsible Participating Entities .....................................................................
21
4.2 Management Activities for Nutrients ...... .................. ............
........................ —.,,.21.
4.3 Management Activities for FIB. .....
..... . 8
4.4 Commitment to Implementat ion.................................................................................33
Seetion 5 : Monitoring, Reporting Results, and Adaptive Management .......................................34
5.1 Water Quality Monitoring.........................................................................................34
5.1.1 objectives ......_........................................._....._..............................................._......34
5.1.2 Water Quality Parameters, Frequency, and Network...
..... ..... 34
5.2 Data Management and Assessment.............................................................................42
5.3 QAIQC...............................................................................................................................42
5.4 Frequency and Reporting Format for Implementation of
Management AC -ions
43
Page 5 cf 59
Page 16 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 2619
5.5 Adaptive Management Actions ............ ................. ................. ........... A3
Section6 - References........... ................. ...... -.- ............................................................................ 44
List of Figures
Figure 1. Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary ..............10
Figure 2. Loxahatchee River WBIDs ..........................................12
Figure 3. Least Squares Regression Analysis Between AGM and AAM Within the
Loxahatchee Estuary ........................................................15
Figure 4. Annual Mean Chlorophyll -a Concentration Compared to Simulated Nutrient
Loads for TN and TP ........................................................16
Figure 5. Adjusted Target for Chlorophyll -a ................................16
Figure 6. 80th Percentile of Nutrient Loading ..............................17
Figure 7. Target Load Reduction ............................................17
Figure B. Treated Areas Within the Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary .......18
Figure 9. TN Reduction Schedule Based on Project Completion Dates ..........20
Figure 10. TN Reduction Schedule Based on Project Completion Dates .........21
Figure 11. Water Quality Stations Monitored Monthly Within the Loxahatchee River
Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients ............................37
Figure 12. Water Quality Stations Monitored Quarterly Within the Loxahatchee
River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients .......................38
Figure 13. Hater Quality Stations Monitored Bimonthly or semiannually within
the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients ......39
Figure 14. Hater Quality Stations Within the Loxahatchee River Pollutant
Reduction Plan Boundary for Bacteria .......................................42
Page 4 Gf 50
Page 17 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
List of Tables
T=bl_ R-1. Loxahatchee River stakeholders.......................................................................2
T71D1e
1. Loxahatchee River Impair rents ..... .........................................................12
Table
2. NNC Water Quality Targets...................................................................................14
Table
3. Rainfall Averages Within the Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary Per
NE R A D
...........................................................................................................................................16
'cable 4.Estimated Reductions from Management Activities Completed Between
2086
and2018 .................................................................................................... .........18
Tables, Estimated Reductions from All Management Activities Through 2022...
...... Is
Table
6. Nutrient Management Activities.........................................................................22
Table
8a FIB Efforts in the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan .... .......
29
Table
9. Water- uu_aality Monitoring Parameters for Nutrients...................................35
Table
10. Water Quality Monitoring Stations Within the Loxahatchee
River
Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients .........................................
38
Table
11. eater Quality Monitoring Parameters for Bacteria..................................AO
Table
12. Water Quality Monitoring Stations Within the Loxahatchee
River
Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Bacteria............................................42.
PB95 5 G f 50
Page 18 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
pS,/L MYcrogram Per Liter
AAM Annual Ari,hmetis Mean
AGM Annual Geometric Mean
8,.,.AP Basin Management Action Plan
BHP Best Management Practice
DEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection
EMIC Event Mean Concentration
ENR Estuary Nutrient Region
F.A.C. Florida Administrative Code
FAR Florida Administrative Register
FDAC:=- Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
FIB Fecal Indicator Bacteria
FLUCCS Florida Land Use and Cover Classification System
FSAID Florida statewide Agricultural Irrigation Demand
FHRA Florida Watershed Restoration Act
GIS Geographic Information System
IWR Impaired Waters Rule
lbs/yr Pounds Per Year
LR'D Loxahatchee River Environmental Control District
LRMCC Loxahatchee River Management Coordinating Council
mg/L Milligrams Per Liter
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Seiner System
NELAC National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference
NELAP National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program
NERAD Next Generation Weather Radar
NNC Numeric Nutrient Criteria
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O:k=,,TDS Orr -Site Treatment and Disposal System
PLSM Pollutant Load Screening Model
QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
RAP Reasonable Assurance Plan
ROC Runoff Coefficient
SFWMD South Florida Water Management District
SCIP Standard Operating Procedure
STORET Storage and Retrieval (Database)
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TN Total Nitrogen
TP Total Phosphorus
Page 6 of 59
Page 19 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
WE -In Waterbody Identification (Number)
WIN Watershed Information Network
Page 7 c f 59
Page 20 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 2e1
Section 1: Background
1.1 Purpose of the Plan
The purpose of this document is to provide information on implementing a
v,-lu,,ta-y pollutant reduction plan in which stakeholders in the Loxahatchee
River area have or will provide nutrient management activities in place to
nuke progress toward returning the area's water quality to the targets set for
n_.trients. Key local stakeholders have initiated this plan to proactively
,-,-:dress cuter quality impairments without the regulatory requirements from a
t _tas rri=xi--ium daily load (TMEjL) or a basin management action plan (BMAP) . This
p_an is focused on restoring wa-er quality in the Loxahatchee River through
local, cooperative efforts.
Additionally, the stakeholders have included information on fecal indicator
bacteria (FIB) and efforts to control bacteriological pollution in the
Loxahatchee River. The information on FIB and management activities provided
in this plan expresses the desire of the stakeholders to proactively address
bacteriological impairments and assess the causes of FIB ere.ceedances in
segments of the Loxahatchee River. Stakeholders intend to 1-loN throug-1h the
processes designed by DEP to assist in identifying FIB sources and, where
feasible, implement management activities that have the potential to reduce
FIB either on their own or in conjunction with nutrient management activities.
The efforts of the Loxahatchee River stakeholders to address the nutrient and
FIB issues and to measure the response to these management activities are
presented as a 4e pollutant reduction plan and are described in this report.
The Impaired Waters Ru_e IWR), Chapter 63-303, Florida Administrative Code
(Identification of Impaired Surface Waters), establishes a formal mechanism
for identifying surface craters in Florida that are impaired (do not meet the
applicable water quality standards) by pollutants. Most raters that are
verified as impaired by a pollutant will be listed on the states 303(d) list
pursuant to the Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) and section 303(d) of
the Clean Water Act. Once listed, total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) will be
developed for the pollutants causing the impairment of the listed craters.
However, as required by the FWRA, the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) evaluates whether existing or proposed pollution control
mechanisms will effectively address the impairment before placing a water body
on the state's verified list. If there is documentation that there is a
Page 8 of 80
Page 21 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Paver Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
P-llutant reduction plan for the impairment that will be addressed by the
control measure(s), then the waters will be included on the study list. This
pollutant reduction plan for nutrients and FIB provides the documentation that
1..Fr-hlorophyll-a and FIB impairments are bein.- addressed. If during future
reviews of this plan stakeholders are able to provide documentation that the
n,_,trient impairments are being addressed to an extent that there is reasonable
assurance that the water quality targets will be met, GFP will work with
stakeholders to amend the pollutant reduction plan to a reasonable assurance
plan (4b).
1.2 Pollutant Reduction Planning Process
To provide documentation that the pollution management activities will
contribute to the restoration of designated uses, the following information is
provided in this document:
Section two providers a description of the impaired water including waterbody
identification (WBID) number, type of waterbody, water use classification,
designated uses not being attained, area of impaired outer, the pollutants o
concern, and the potential sources of concern.
Section three provides water quality -based targets, aquatic ecological goals,
a discussion of how these goals will result in the improvement of water
quality, and a schedule to meet the targets and restoration goals (both
interim and final).
Section four provides information on the proposed management activities,
including responsible participating entities, existing and proposed management
strategies, estimated pollutant load reduction expected to occur from
implementation of management activities, future growth considerations,
implementation schedule, funding opportunities and deficiencies, enforcement
programs and ordinances, and stakeholder commitment to plan implementation.
Section five details the water quality monitoring network that exists,
including stations, parameters, and frequency of sampling that will be i_spd +o
demonstrate progress. This section also details quality assurancelqual-ty
control (QRIQC) compliance, data entry requirements, reporting frequency and
format for implementation of management activities, and methodology for
evaluating progress towards goals.
Page 22 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 2e151
Section six describes proposed corrective actions for non -improvement of the
impairment, deviations from management activities or activities not completed
on schedule, and notification of D5P for corrective action implementation.
1.3 Geographic Boundaries of the Plan
The Loxahatchee River watershed included in the loading model for this plan
(Figure 1) covers an area of approximately 51,834 acres which includes the
lands surrounding the three main tributaries (car forks) within the Loxahatchee
River watershed. The modeled area and acreage listed excludes most open craters
within the boundary as they do not contribute to nutrient loading. The plan
area includes both the northern portion of Palm Beach County and the southern
portion of Martin County. Major population centers within the Loxahatchee
River Pollutant Reduction Plan (40 boundary include the Town of ,Jupiter and
the Village of Tequesta.
Figure 1. Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary
s2pr4mbar 17 201$
Cowniy SOUmdarler, ED LD11al1=h@t POIlLrianc Ra0E1Cklon Flan B"dary
0 011y Ortri+1!dk141&
a mI
0 1A )4 7Mm
1.~ 1.L-IEME.4 -, Plrt - M1-i10 CIA FAR 0 4Wi
Page 18 of 540
Page 23 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber eel
1.4 Stakeholder Involvement
Tr,e Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan was a result of s--akeholder,
interest in addressing outer quality impairments. The Loxahatchee River
Management Coordinating Council (LRMCC) provided the initial forum for
stakeholder engagement to develop the pollutant reduction plan. The
collaborative process to develop the pollutant reduction plan began in 2016
and provided an opportunity for local, regional, state, and federal
governments, environmental groups, business interests, and citizens to
actively engage in the development of the plan. Public meetings were noticed
in the Florida Administrative Register (FAR) held throughout the development
of the plan to solicit feedback and information from stakeholders.
Participari-s in the process provided data, research, technical expertise, and
locate knowledge which informed the development of the Pollutant Load Screening
Model (PL H), monitoring plan, and management activities to achieve nutrient
load reductions. Stakeholders assisted in recruiting relevant members to
participate in the efforts set forth in this plan and provided commitment to
the management activities and monitoring as prescribed in the pollutant
reduction plan.
section 2: Impaired Haterbodies
2.1 Description of the Impaired Haterbodies
This pollutant reduction plan was initiated by stakeholders to address
impairments listed on the 303(d) verified impairment list in which waterbodies
were assessed as impaired under the IWR Cycle 3 Assessment of the Group 2 St.
Lucie - Loxahatchee Basin. Haterbodies within each basin in Florida are
divided into Laatershed areas with unique W®Ib numbers. The Clean Water Act
requires surface waters to be classified by their designated uses. An
impairment indicates that a waterbody is not meeting the criteria of its
designated use. The Loxahatchee Rider includes Class II waters, which are
designated for shellfish propagation or harvesting, as well as Class III
graters designated for fish consumption, recreation, propagation and
maintenance of a healthy, quell -balanced population of fish and wildlife. The
Loxahatchee River estuarine system is complex and dynamic due to the variable
tidal flow, salinity, precipitation, seasonal variability, land use
characteristics, inputs, and mixing of fresh and marine water.
Page 11 of 50
Page 24 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 2615t
V-are are seven WBIDs within the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan
area (Figure 2) . Numeric nutrient criteria (NNC) covering the Loxahatchee
River Estuary were adopted in June 3013. Table 1 provides the WBID number,
DR., wa-erbod,-i name, impairment type, status, and waterbody classification for
the Loxaha-chee Fiver.
�WcYlmen
tlti"a k'e•
Y}rY 997{II �r
,ra{rI
laaru
1•
r.Wb n. FIN aala
OAtM LC4r I
A yd -1
{___ Inl-1
4 '1
Ya`aA�
_ 4
r, laaii. tl ,y
� y 4
� 4 �
w f►Al lIU4"
S$pMrnfxlr 19 n,•, 1: `,1 1, t-1 YI
,C=]I.
x. ':§. i. Y ;3d4gWQW1 I''Iv Sessa"f.L 11cm S.-.nx..s -a"sen{:,,"4r[•_=: ..
Figure 2. Lomahatchee River HBIDs
'age 12 o f 50
Page 25 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
Table 1. Loxahatchee River Impairments
Haterbody
WHID Nuffber
ENR
Neterbndy Name
IWaired Fes`
status
Clessillmtion
3224A1
Laxahatchee River
Fecal collform
803(d) LLzt
2
3226C
ENRQ4
Southwest Fork
Chlorophyll -a
303(d) LL.;t
3M
Chlorophyll -a,
3226A
ENRQ2
Northwest Fork
303(d) List
Fecal CIO li4a-ir
3226D
ENRQ2
Loxahatchee River
Fecal calliarm
303(d) List
2
Nutrients (Algal
3230
Jupiter Farms
303(d) Li,,[
3F
Hats)
2.2 Pollutants of Concern
The Northwest Fork and Southwes- Fork have been determined to be impaired for
chlorophyll -a because they do not meet the site -specific NNC.. Pollutants of
concern include TN and TP, which are contributing to elevated chlorophyll -a
levels. A regression analysis was performed and suggested that 67 of the
variability in chlorophyll -a could be explained by nutrient loads (TN and TP)
(Section 3.1).
Additionally, as demonstrated in the listings of impaired waterbodies, FIB has
become a pollutant of concern in the Loxahatchee River. There are fecal
coliform impairments for several of the WBIDs within the pollutant reduction
plan boundary. The Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan is a voluntary
plan which seeks to reduce pollutants of concern.
'age 13 of 50
Page 26 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutarri Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
Section 3: Hater Quality and Aquatic Ecological Goals
3.1 Hater Quality Targets
Table 2 lists the crater quality standards for each ENR and the WBID numbers
included in the ENR. NNC water quality targets are set for chlorophyll -a, TN.
and TP for each ENR and are based on an annual geometric mean (AGM).
Chlorophyll -a is measured in micrograms per liter (09/ 0 while TN and TP are
measured in milligrams per liter (mglL).
Table 2. NNC Hater quality Targets
Hetrrbady IRFormtlon
Herter quality Targets (FIM Criterion)
WHID
ENR
Haterbody Mane
Chlaraphyll-®
TN
TF
Loxahatchee River
3226A
ENRQ2
(Northwest Fork)
4.0 pZ/L
s 0.8 rogfL
s 0.030
Loxahatchee River
3226C
ENRQ4
(Southwest Fork)
s 55 pglL
s 1.26 ngfL
s 0.075 m91L
3226D
ENRQ2
Loxahatchee fiver
s 4.0 }igg/L
$ 0.8 mg.1L
s 0.030 mglL
The goal of the pollutant reduction plan is to attain the NNC chlorophyll -a
criterion in the Loxahatchee River segments. The water quality targets in
Table 2 are expressed as the AGM; however, the PLM model used to determine
the watershed loading provides results as an annual arithmetic mean (RAM)
rather than an AGM. To provide required reductions that were based on the
modeled loading attaining the NNC, there was a need to convert the 4.0 j.g/L
AGM to an equivalent RAM value. The conversion from AGM to AAM was done
through a regression analysis where in the AGMs were regressed against the
AAMs for the three HBIDs for the baseline period of 2006 through 2015. DEP has
previously used this approach to convert AGM -based criteria. The regression
analysis resulted in a robust and significant relationship between AGM and AAM
for chlorophyll -a in the Loxahatchee (River (Figure 3).
'age 14 of 50
Page 27 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber eel
r
Auuaal GrvweUit Mra+i {IJ-a [I�dl
F'i1,r1re 3. Feast Squares Regression Analysis Between. ACM and AAM Within the
Loxahatehee Estuary
To convert the NNC to water quality targets based on the AAM, an analysis was
conducted on data from the three waterbodies listed in Table 2 that drain into
the estuary. Impairments existed for TP in NBID 3226A and for chlorophyll -a in
WBIDs 3226A and 3236C. Thera are no impairments in 3226D, which may be more
representative of natural conditions. DEP utilized the NNC for TP, TN, and
chlorophyll -a in the analysis. The regression relationships for measured data
at primary data stations within the three WBIDs for the time period of 2006
through 3014 were analyzed for relationships among TP, TN, color, salinity,
and temperature to chlorophyll -a. The analysis used the land use and annual
precipitation to estimate the TN and TP loading in the PLH. DEFT compared the
annual mean chlorophyll -a concentrations to the simulated nutrient loads from
the PLSH (Figure 4) and the resulting regression suggested that 67 % of the
variability in chlorophyl -'-a could be explained by nutrient loads. The
chlorophyll -a criterion was adjusted based on the average difference between
the ARM and the AGM for the 10-year period (Errorl Reference source not
found.). DEP added the difference between the AAM and ADM to the chlorophyll -a
criterion for WBIDs 3326A and 3226D to be protective of the main estuary. DEP
calculated the starting load as the 80th percentile of nutrient loading
(133,093 pounds per year [lbslyr] TN and 15,060 lbslyr TP) and identified the
target load of 96,603 lbslyr TN and 1,931 lbslyr TP that would bring the Both
percentile of loads to the adjusted chlorophyll -a criterion. Consistent with
the expression of the NNC, chlorophyll -a not to be exceeded more than once i-
Page 1s of 50
Page 28 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Riven Follutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
a 3-year period and using the Both percentile for loads allow for some
exceedances while demonstrating that the estuary will be in compliance with
the NNC. Through this analysis, DEP determined that the target watershed
reduction is 27 % for TN and TP. The TN and TP reductions to meet the NNC of
36,489 lbslyr TN and 4,129 lbslyr TP are expected from the watershed loads and
should be focused on anthropogenic land uses, as natural land uses and
atmospheric deposition are not controllable.
.. 1�
E
n.,,k li .4SIlMllWl.......................................................................
u =1.�fd�Shcdi$N�aVA4......................................................... ......„...
NCB Hn1 1111Y IV] 191} 10 1411
Talul Nil iiiNm (I W 11
* H' . fi d4,54 i
rwxIzam....................................................................
10 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tulul P111molvl m I1000 fa6r)
Figure 4. Annual Mean Chlorophyll -a Concentration Compared to Simulated
Nutrient Loads for TN and TP
3.3 Use of PLSM for Watershed Loading Estimates
The PLSM was developed to estimate the watershed loading and the changes in
watershed loads that Mould result in the restoration of the estuarine waters
of the Loxahatchee River, The PLSM is a spreadsheet model that considers
loading contributed by overland flow based on various land uses and rainfall.
The PLSH utilizes event mean concentrations (EHCs) to represent land use and
runoff coefficients (ROCs) to represent rainfall. It looks at the relationship
between land use and runoff and produces load calculations that are a product
of those inputs. The rainfall input consisted of precipitation estimates from
the fjex-. Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) system which provided an average
rainfall in inches within the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan
boundary (Table 3).
Table 3. Rainfall Averages Within the Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary Per
NEXRAD
inches of
Rainfall on
Year Average
'age 1£ of 50
Page 29 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber eel
2006
36.2
2007
53.1
2008
56.3
2009
49.9
201$
55.6
2011
S2
2012
60.6
2013
We
2014
63,4
2015
a + . -
Land cover and land use inputs are based on the F?or°da Land Use and Cover
Classification System (FLUCCS). EMC:_, u'--,r,d in the PLSM originated from the St.
Lucie River Basin Management Action P_an (BMAP." and the Soil and Water
Engineering and Technology studies (SHET 2006) and were adjusted with
stakeholder input. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(FDACS) provided detailed land use categories for agricultural areas based on
the Florida Statewide Agricultural Irrigation Demand (FSAID) IV, South Florida
Water Management District 2007/ 2008 data, and aerial photography. The
associated EMCs for agriculture were based on literature reviews. The Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) provided revised transportation EMCs based
on studies and literature. The area of various land uses was also refined
during this stakeholder engagement process. Existing treatment was estimated
as a percent reduction of the EMCs for the acreages already receiving
treatment based on the implementation of best management practices by local
governments. Areas with existing trea*mPrit were provided by Palm Beach County
and Martin County by utilizing environmental resource permit (ERA) information
to estimate treated areas by treatment type. Existing treatment for
agricultural areas is provided by FDACS, however these best management
practices are credited in the management activities rather than in the model.
Page 17 of 50
Page 30 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
PIW'
r.ra 4
�Ri Iryke
Yv'H ... II}I IBIYu.i A Onr
Ii
6
yr, Ibai -.
nto ehlu
.��mm
Oki
''•' , I lia, Pr I.
'Ru . CNIt p
@Vb
Geptember 2E R014 1.1 ".4340
hrewed Ivr,A+; In R+r. I nxmKildirn I ONhlrenl Redke- orl PlAn 1141ii�llyd
4 I.T& !4 Frrr.
I'+1In1 hl el: `i .ilIII"{ I'H .1NO L ryl-i II Or Jnl Traaierf
y hta,r r«.ure 'm. .wv , Pe,i+rre.,p utis=
Figure 5. Treated Areas Hithin the Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary
Stakeholders also provided feedback on the ROCS utilized in the PLSH. The
initial ROCS were based on estimates of impervious surface according to land
use types utilizing the Schueler formula (Schueler 1987). To increase the
accuracy of the ROC estimates, the original methodology was supplemented with
raster -weighted percentages of impervious surface for various land use types.
To ascertain this information, raster data from the 2011 National Land Cover
dataset was used to estimate the percentage of impervious surface in each 30-
meter by 3 -meter cell. Those estimations were performed by the Multi -
Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium which utilized aerial ;photography
to geo-rectify the cells and assign a weighted average based on both land use
and percentage of impervious surface.
'age 18 of 50
Page 31 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
3.3 Schedule to Heet Targets and Restoration Goals
This plan is designed to be updated as more information is known about both
water quality and the relationship of loads to chlorophyll -a concentrations in
the Loahatchee Estuary. This version of the plan includes management
activities completed from 2008 through 2018, as well as planned management
activities through 2022. The starting date for management activities was
established based on the 2008 land use data that was used in the PL M to
estimate watershed loads. The end date of 2022 was the furthest completion
date for °the management activities submitted by the local entities. It is
expected that additional management activities will be provided in future
years, as new efforts are identified and more information is available to
estimate their associated water quality benefits.
Based on the management activities completed since 2008, the load reductions
achieved to meet the NNC chlorophyll -a concentrations are summarized in Table
4.
Table 4. Estimated Reductions from Management Activities Completed Between 2008
and NO
Description
T
(lb/Ur)
TP
I (lb/yr)
Revised PLSH Reduction Estimate
36,469
4,1t:°°i
Reductions from Management A" ivyties
Completed
31.023
5 , ° 8�)
Reductions Remaining
4,666
(1,156?
Percentage of Reductions Achieved
6 TX126X
When all management activities are included —completed, planned, and underway
the estimated reductions increase, as described in `fable 5.
Table 5.Estimated Reductions from All Management Activities Through 2022
Description
TN
(lbAjr)
TF
Ublyr)
Revised RLSH Redui:tian Estimate
36,489
4,129
Reductions fram A11 Hanagement
Activities
34,196
51385
Reductions Remaining
2,291
(1,256)
Percentage of Reductions achieved
94%
130°6
It should be noted that there are significant credits included for on -going
activities such as public education, source control ordinances (e.g.,
'age 19 o f 50
Page 32 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutarri Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
fertilizer ordinance), and agricultural BMPs. These credits are shown to be
completed in the first year of the project period —in 2008, regardless of their
actual start date, The reason for this approach is that many ongoing
activities do not have a distinct starting date as they were phased in or the
level of effort changed over time. Rather than trying to assign a specific
start date to on -going activities, it seems more practical to list them all in
the project database as starting in the initial project year to make it more
transparent and straightforward when they are represented in the timeline.
This means that the year 2008 reductions are overestimated because the efforts
may have begun at an earlier or later date.
Based on the completion date of the nutrient management activities, the
implementation schedule for the reductions are shown below for TN and TP,
respectively. While every effort was made to apply conservative estimates of
project reductions based on each project's characteristics and the estimated
load treated based an the PL M model, there is uncertainty in the results.
38A00
MAW
— 34,000
-� :iO,IMiNM
� MAIM}
26,000
x
2.4,000
C
4
22,000
20,000
18,000
Lvxahatchvc TN Project Reductions
--4—"P% Prujeul Rrduc[iuns TN Ntvdird
FmNle led=LLMM -.
shown in Ono"
2iM M- 09 M10 NMI M12 200 2014 2015 2016 2017 2019 NO NM 21)21 2D22
Year
Figure 6. TN Reduction Schedule Based on Project Completion bates
'age 20 of 50
Page 33 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
5 W)6
5,400
4LDO)
000
Loxahatchee TP Project Reducticns
—0—TP nnjcri Ri-durlimks TP Nr(4rd
r
F7rfhrce rckc6nns Fire
MJJOWFI III uf1l1I C
21JOS 2UW Ni4 MIS 2012 2013 2014 NON 2016 2011 2018 2019 20N 21J21 2U22
YesiY
Figure 7. TN Reduction Schedule Based on Project Completion Dates
WI-ile the graphs above indicate that the reductions are close to meeting the
necessary TN reductions and exceeding the necessary —P reduct=ons, recent
eater quality data are less positive. For TP the amb:en- water quality data
indicate that the AGMs for the TP concentrations _n 2017 and 2018 exceeded the
inter quality target in WBID 3326A. Therefore, while the Loxahatchee Estuary
has benefited from the many management activities thit have been implemented,
more efforts are needed that benefit the central estuary. This plan provides a
process to document and track, additional management activities as well as to
monitor the response of chlorophyll -a to those reductions. With more
management activities and additional water quality data, a better
understanding of the relationship among TN, TP, and ch11_Irophyll-a will
hopefully be realized and the plan can be adjusted as a result of that
information. This is referred to as "adaptive management" and is necessary
when there are spa many variables that male it challenging to quantify the
watershed loads, the biological response of chlorophyll -a to TN and TP
Page 21 of 50
Page 34 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 26151
reductions, and the project credits. Adaptive management allows the plan to be
updated and calculations adjusted as new data and management activities are
Put into place along with accounting for land use changes that occur over
time.
Section 4: Proposed Management Activities
4.1 Responsible Participating Entities
Entities responsible for the development and implementation of the Loxahatchee
R=ver Pollutant Reduction Plan are listed in Table R-1. As a measure of
o.F:pected reductions and support of this document, the stakeholders in the
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan have provided the management
activities identified below and have confirmed that the activities provided
reflect the commitment of the stakeholders.
4.2 Management Activities for Nutrients
The activities listed In the Lo.x.ah.atchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan
represent structural and non-structur,�il activities designed to restage water
quality and were proactively initiated by the local stakeholders. Table 6
details the management activities voluntarily submitted by stakeholders and
their associated reductions. Management activities eligible for credit towards
pollutant reduction goals were those non-structural activities that are
ongoing, such as street sweeping and education efforts that contribute to
controlling sources of nutrients, and structural activities completed on or
after January 2006 that treat runoff and reduce nutrient loading from nonpoint
sources. These structural activities provide treatment not accounted for in
the model and represent nutrient load reductions. Future management activities
are given only the portion of the credit that is over and above permit
requirements since permit condi-ions regUire mitigation of new loads, but not
treatment of the already existing loads contributing to the impairments. See
Table i for a list of nutrient impairments. The activities listed in Table 6
represent the structural and non-structural activities which stakeholders have
contributed. The project credits are calculated from applying the appropriate
best management practice (BHP) efficiency to the starting load based on the
model described in Section 3.2.
Page 22 of 50
Page 35 of 97
Agenda Itof
CA
W
L)
CE
fir_
C
ai
bo
0
C
ai
+�I
IL
Q
Q
4
a
C
1
CL
.,j U)
44`
3
m w
R t'
i0 +•
i@ �'
>
of t'
n3 t'
16 t'
.
O
0 �
� �
�oi � �
n �
� �
q
iy
�
G
�
bap
.t�-�I
�+
0 .v
a
�
1�
lei a�i
-i
l~i hi
.i
ILL 4i
d
I�i
d
I�i
.�
di
d
e�i
J
J
++
J
m
CJ
41
d}
ll
ll
ll
0>
'0 t }
a
O
lJ'i 4
Cl
71
-9pLp _
V
P.
-9
P. v
UM
iM
W G7
73
0U
w
'
r
L)
43
L
�
y
du �
ti
9?
-
3
-
O
-
-
4 �
4}
C5
4 YI
C VJ
C i!1
C
C 4'1
t
C
L
r1 ill
ID�J �:
•,ty S. .J
l¢ .
b0
it
c
rp � �
0 r® � L 9:
4t r GT
�
0 r 0
� I �
0 L �^e+ G
' L O
y
0 �
O J
O 'J
O J �,, C�
O 3 cu
o � 0
�
L Om0 �U
�
Ca � 4} � R
}}L
r4�yy} �1
'@C q41 4}
�C C4�} C
�C �U,I G
m aj 0 00 r
73 0 Ul
� yam,
@
E
Q � � 46
d0 ih
d0 W Vi
IE l8 .0
64 10 *'
d0 u0 d 8l
R ba a+
4
c i N °]
c w
afi
,
G'i L
L.
e L g}
4'+
C L w L o
.p
.. 9B
O
6
l9
*'
GS
00 'r+
G wu
a oo L
.¢
..y
O 7 ,-y
.+
O 3 .,y
rfl ++
4 a
-y en a+
ID L
vl m a�
.. 7
,fl a
„a
++ ',
yam,
9, G
" +. m
Qy
m yJ �
+•
O
v L
'Lp m
r C H
u dl py
++
m yp
r 0
u '� `' m
a+ C b0
u m w m
b4
u U m
4 U
�y
L *,
w
44 L *r
C +° o
m R O
0 L O
;
qy
+� O b0
w M -3
+• 8 G .g
w 4 AS
•+4 Q bdW S3
+] E
„Ey
^,
ru 8a' 4 mCU
bl
1
Q
1 C '4 L
� L es~
0 1p i0
O
ID
0
fly
YJ
U
W
wL C
a �
E
h ICJ 9
� �
w N G
� $ [C
Q
7 l=
2:
Ci
dfl ' re
4] � c
0 g L C
L ar ..
' r
-
.--I *,
rts�qq+ Vb r
41 9} Ca
cu
lA
L Of4 Vi C
L c
i d0 c
a ?3 Q.
OR O
�"
U M 4i
0 L 00
,.5 m
�L c m
l.� fl m
(w(/fl
4�
_c
u
C�C
d,l L
3
III 0
C' w v
m Q y-' V
0L y
m
n
m
LO `~
91
*+
m
'r R '7
r
Q'
-,c O �'
L
m +-1
[3 L 4
c, L 4
� L R
� L • I
� L. 4
� L 4
cu
++
y w
D y �'
{Il w
0 w
a y }'
b {A w
O yfi wd;l
3
3
L7
O
C
0
0
Q
3 of 97
IA-- -LLA
Agend
A lt%,l
I I Tr I
LO
U-)
LO
69
4;9
73
ND
>
ff
No
u
w
LO
cu
w
0
<r
2t
=S
z
LLI
any
d)
19
C)
C]
L.
0
M
Lr
LF
CL
4.
03
w
0
m
L,5
19
(0
Q9
itl
Q:
Cp
a:
Iu c 0 75 fA
C, Q - - w
bp 2;
ID 0
13L2
OR
— cu OL
C:
_N0
& ILI 16 CL d, Lj ID
0
E -0
FL A
0 M
u z 0 0 0 -0 C3
4A
-0 0
fl;
I a
L a UO �55 1 91 in
714 K V.
CL
Qu m c
r L.
CC
cy
w
3
E 'a
Q:
73 a O pippp Cc 0' -0 C7 L)
Li
um Z m
S
L
Q Q 0 0 CD L� m
tko
:3 tio
0
0
Q Q 9
Ty 9 0 0
96
Qj
-0
m
z
03
u
Li bo
ct
M 11)
a)
(L
:5
rG
03
G
ui
95
w 5 ; 4u
du
-0
m
L
u
ci
me
7)
Lf)
4D
cu
D ID
G Q
LLI
pl.
Page 37 of 97
•
c
l
N
N.
L E
7
m
Ot
a
C
}
O
f'-
'�`�
4}
qN
YA
ko
7-
W
L
03 ID
y
IL �
e1
QF
Cfi
Z]
3
73
++
LV
m
d}
4]
z
_
(M
cu .�
-9
rl
O
4V
W u
•1+
_
i
—
L.
1
W
)
}e 41
rt+
0} U
r-
t
as
C.0
is
W
x
Lu
-
x
W
0
O
U)
E w
� *,
06
C I
hG
� 4 L
cu C�
[}
y91
L r L y
w t W
w w G Gn
IIO i] {g
C O
L}
�,
W
,�
uA
w w L w C
C fl --i m
:1 C
•' Z -
L 07 1.} � RI 3
B
c
i a �
L
� 4� � ff
DO m
O r
++
19-
w
lJ d6 L
£ v
y
L 16 t�,
0�
~
,
�
o w
L
y w
{] C O
L 'w � w
m t s rll i Ed a
Vi
E
•r W
N a N m
'L5 E E.,
ff" d0
0
a u a
x s,
a w+ + a
.4-i
U
4 �. []
.y�
3 t r W W OQ
g '~
.�'.
U Q L}
r i w
a L O) +J €-
C L-0
b R f,
O
Q 5* W 16 C N a
'3
r"� 3
,�
T C {}
L IL
--I
3 {e}
44 r Q
�
+-i +-i [S C1
u 11J 0 cy J- C 0
Oi
fl
9� L
6
LO -a
9Y
i m
r L
fn
C N j u 00
�_ 4} A C -3
m
3�
Q +- �
frl
C 0
� L U
G} L -•-I 06i
~ L
�y
i m #'
C
O *F L
[y
fp C
� V1 L
']u Lcl
m �
L
`% 4 r
V,
s L
G w
r
4? 05
a'
�'
w
cu
rr
L
W
�-
m C
'-11
C
�' -
_
se
�
M L 40
N � aCi � -0
'�
�
+�9 pC�}}
61
-
w pCy}
� 4i c:
£3 06 U
L
¢�
_�
^+�
O
fl3 O .�F1-'. 73 M
_
i 4C}
.- _
0� 0 o
E V,
� L.
[�y
E
�i
C3 +J'
a � Q
U L1} cu '_
d 0 Gl p
C 1'
E
Ln
E
O bra 1
CL
G!4 GC
Iy UJ
,.
�
n
G
4
1
w
#+
U,
H it
d— FS
H
H.-
PqnpJ
38 of 97
•
p�yy
ypp
LL
O
CL
a
u in
6
+
r- kv 00 r
\
\
-
0
0
L.
g
Q
2 3 U
-
r
w
m
iy
u
n
2
Ca
N
cu .�
w
-I�
03
ac
W G]
lL•1' w
_
�
4}
N
}
Gk
W
{u
bF
�
`
0
L
-
0
49
L
ffi
i
DIP)os
w
LJ
I m
U
�+
-+J
D
u.;
w
c3
G +�
L u L ao
}.
W
IA
fob d0
f#
~
ry .y
d7 ID L N ay C
di M 0
i 4
41
Q w
R 9 Cy
M1 iJ C ¢5 c
O , O.
L-
4i
r W
U 4} 57 V.' be
li
L W 0}
a:a +
�c � -0-
CL
d0 U
to
�, r
yen
'l+
�
f= r
g
•�+ +•
4} {ri •G i'Im Sri -I
L 45 4' �L6
C �y
+fi 6!
Ib m L y
QF
i
+ L o
Li 3
a LL
L y oo
x to oo ao .�
[] d C 6 Q
rp E
.`r
3
Jr�,'
�
�
a _
E=73
L �
C .,� *' �" J Sr�ii � w
U ,-:
O �
� 0 y"
YY
Le 0
~ � � � 4? � di � G
+' C
-
L
m
V
_
G3
-0 �. L
m
�,}
ri
~ -
tCi
.1 --1-1
oy
E
9d [h
_ C
L.
L
C � *•
C t� y
C �y 00 Y!
L�i C � �
nr,
_
� 0}
IpC�
0
00 LLI ?
w
IL
,L
0 L. Q M-• O
lay
pL,
sf
L
s[
t r a S w
O r19 g fll
y
t y
IL.
E
w 1�1
d
Li
06
tb
IL
-.e' 3
ink
Tl }y
L
O bF
uo
iL
r
SL
_
,y —
G' 7`
.y
E �'
•y y
C
W 3'
J
m o
o. 0
00 o
n o
L
e 39 of 97
•
41
LPI m r
Ip 4 mr
►y
*' w
*' w
►r
p m_
mJ
m flC
N!
2
U4
J
!R
$
Cl
J CC Cq
J �„ Oc 5f
J OC lsy
YYFF
i$
fl
QF
m
m
y a
l
y-'
9
9
cs,
l
i }
f -
yr.
f 5 }
Lr?
cl
f.l
n
}1
r
Kc
cn
ti
to
8
{V
N
N
N
W G]
CU
IL
I:
-t
w
in
L
_
_
O
_
_
_
f.
�
f, 5
fj
Lj
L
_
G
r
to
-
ID
OS
D
5
v7
0
ID
0
w
0yy0�� 1-
CL
CL
CL
OL
(LL
AIL
L C
�
rUyj'�i
f{j�ry]7
..
PI5
o
F
G7
U
tJ�S
W
E
o O
w
Y 6
C
G5
0
0
'
0
I?
4
a 90
a
a
I
GI
€3
� o �
as
v�i �
`^ �
0
47 �
0 ern
vi
a Pin
VP vi
da L . . di
..
m O
N r
Q
VU ad
F Q
.f}
'
,tea v7
1� O
cq
L
L
v"n
Q
C
d1
S
'j3
y
C
I
P1
vC-v
O
G
O
C
O
V
ay L..
w 7g dy
�'
- w
- w
- p
r ID
VP Ls
c O 0
t O�
G� rh
U 00
Ian
'� M
L
L O m
L L
0 14
L L
L O fD
L L
W
av L tL
+• O
a' d} U
Y 6Y Q E
J L
a.+ d5 Q d'L
L
t' W Q IL
V L
W L. CL
R3
i
z
, L- cu
44
L t4
n tU
~ it 04
t0
25 �d
�®
m y �
m@ y
.-a
m ®C ,may
.-}�I
m w ,�
.�i
m OC „Ca
z Y .y
�Sw
m iC .LEr
e-rw
IA iC G
L
a 7
o " qiq�I
p qiq��
p '� (yg,,s
'~ pLyy
-1 Lyp}
-~ ppa
~
'113
iL
J iC ID
2 3
J
2 3
J 3
2 3
J Z 3
J Z
0
41
4i
6]
m
N
0
1
Ln
CD
{-
-p
L 9F L
L iF L
L it L
L ® L
L 0] L
L N i
L N i
L N i
,r
175 �
9x6 � } r r
Ix6 � ? a+ r
10 � } r r
r } +• r
a0 r � .. r
00 s } .. �.
ayy��0 �
1=
6 L5 .-I
O [C .-I
G v [C .-I
O v [C . i
ym�
O �
4 d[
4 4G
O
W
J r3
J 'a
J Q
J
J
J G
J O
J 0
Page 40 of 97
•
ao
a
w
a
w
73
'm
u
s 4D
n
3
v
Cl
Z' Q
- O
7 OC
O
Cl
g
a
OL
iL) J
g
a
a tr
10
t+
_
9
_0
++
w
m
m
w
f 5
n
+
-
Ln
Jae y
8
p}
N
CU
W G]
di
—
L
�
L
�
�
f
LL
L
�
L
QL
L
-' O
rFJ
aE�4wE�ryry7
gEgn
�E
0
(A
G�5
�
r%
71
0 �C °6 �
[] O L
O
L
Q
p
Q �
s„ y
0 IE i.i � ID
Gii
45
di
qj
0 ■I
illl
4i $I
VJ r/l
d1 0
� 0y
0 L ,y
m 0
.
di
di
Ll
Ll
Ll
C]
{3
.L
11
m
py ii $°
an
-9a
9
da �o
L�
4 0
L
UO
rM
5
A° o
�°
uVn+ ,ti
m }
r-U
m s
d5
m n
RS
O
�y
ii Lo
m L
L a L L4
R'
E ,�
t-'� G ,b�
�'°'
SS C
.M '~
m
L-� .5 '-1
w
m t
L •w ,�
m eL
ve 4d
m m
m m m
p
Cl)-+
>C „y L
o+} -+
X o L
Rrn L
)S W �5
L
K ,y p�
x .,y pyy
]f
X ,y CL
L.Lm iv.2 0
_
c
L
2 3
z 9
Z 4}
ar 3
fl9
J tl�
2D
J z 3
iY
J y -
Z
l L m &
Injry
a
m
u�
cn
�cn
to
.2 U
G2
p}
rr}
v
CC
CL
tY
[L
Ct
4n
°.
u
- u
OD u
I6
++ u
i �
as
m
m
+= u
++ u
175 } rt+ rt+'
96r
6 4
-P4
v !4)
v cc 1
u ^
O udc i^
m
O ude
a a
d
LaJ
r3
J 'a
J Q
J Q�
J
J G
J O
i]
41 of 97
t*
0
0
C
QD
z
a
a
CL
CL
Q
rL
'0
_0
m
T3
00 0
m
0
z 0
0
p
w
L
Q
a
wl
0
_0
73
73
_0
73
73
73
-0
-u
0)
z
m
r3
0
a
LIJ
a
0
Q
0
m
DN
u
w
n
m
m
U
1 0
1
cu
w
0
-9
C3,
ac
C',
LLI u
cu
d)
(U
•
�j
u
E-)
f:
C}
c
Nr
03
ba
03
w
ti c
m
OM
CL
r-
LLL,
z
u
Q}c
0
m
2
w
0
(A
;:3
-C
L
t1i
cr
LU
E d) -0
IL
tLO
10
w
Q 5
IL
4� no
�b
k -
L 0 0
a h
Q W M
1? 9 �!
c w u
w m
- -
W 0; L.
-9 6�
12
z .q .2 ff A.
Aj Q. 0
I 1
e
-1,
a
n
L 0 w
d, Q ct
L
OR 0
Q '- S
-
L,
— r- " wr-
4a
ro -
u 13
Q �4
16
V
11
a,
-1; E
M 5 0
0 a w M J--
L
W
ID 0
A
C: C-
5c
0
L) 0
0
B E
CL
L
I
W v
L) 9 S
a CL
z
j 6)
Ex
m
1:1 =
Q
-0
L. C2
LU
f- I In
Ln
02
c L M
O
L)
C:
a,
T
L
E
w
>
c 'a
-0 CL
ID
41 L
CL
ac
Q
L6
5N
V)
m
-0
0 abo
-0
0 - 4%
m
bo
m
0.
-7 :a
<E
Lm cu 0
L. a d)
0 :$
0
m
4D
-L99
LL
C,
66 LIJ
pVl
A
I of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 2e1
4.3 Management Activities for FIB
The bacteria reduction activities below were voluntarily submitted by stakeholders and
represent bacteria -related efforts that have the potential to reduce bacteriological
loading. Reduction estimates are not performed for bacteria -related activities and
efforts. The stakeholders in the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan will be
working on systematic programs to help in the identification of bacteria sources to
address root causes of FIB impairments. See Table i for a list of impairments. The below
information is listed by stakeholder, however collaborative efforts in the identification
of sources would be beneficial to addressing bacteria.
Page 30 of 50
Page 43 of 97
Agenda 11
L
O
4-
vh
W
m
F-1
U-
5
rj
5
�L S
y
Nggyy
.�i cu
�5
'H Q}
ti !Iyy5
N qy
. QF
9
L
L L
L � L
L
y
LL
r
W
. R n!
--1
UD
w
o
2 `y r-! N r! [;=
� a
o
00
9t ,y •-• '� .•!
IL
.y ,-! 6`'
L9 L L
m
CiC!
rt��.
dc
o
N
=
x
s
t.i
o
-
e
_
u
ID
a
Q
W
cuIL
CL
Q
r�
UP
G]
a 0
M W
L.
L.
L
L
to to
i
w
""A �
H J i+ 'n•I }
1••I � M.' � �j
H
M
i
H
6••I J rt" � �
d..!
IL
LL L
!.I
LL L
�L Q C +'
LL L
cm
c
�r
cu
W r-.
•� �q4
'~
fpp
w
10 Q
0 Q
@
$
E
L. W y! M
!� a 0 m
0
!y
L C Q
L C Q
E
C
U TO
90
L
F'-' t7 .-Ri r
U a
O
4
L ho
C
O
G O
ail, L) CL
Q @
"Ci
a
7!
G
VP
L
,r 0 9J 6w1
•-!CL
O C
y 3 C,
_ 44
b4 ~ 0
4!
a
lrF
#
h
Q n
C a
C
U
-0
a
V
CL
CLa
n
n
m
-
_
CL
m
1b C
U4 @
O
LG dM1 9Q
CD
0
it r
'y
a
c
o
CL '� r E
ar' bo
o
Qj
�-
a
rn
-12
L
L
L
40
Q}
G,
CD
7
Y
9r
m
Q3
m
LL
U-
H
F
H
CD
-
I
H
H
Cl
CD
_
_
_
O
C5
J
LL
LL
.
LL
411,1
p
Page 44 of 97
Agend
4i
81
>
a!
81
di
0
a.
w
41
�
_
0
0
�.
73
�J s
=m
L
�m
C.
•a
m
LL
�f
�a
L
�m
L
�®
L
L
�f
L
_f-
L
W
a
a
c
a
a
a
c
a
a
L 0
� 0
� m
� m
'� is
� m
U y
� m
� y
.4 0
N
23
qp
L i.
yy
L i
�5
L L
L
ppyy
pa}}
L
LL
ypy
L
0
O
GA
Ci �
.m-I
Ia 3
0
4 sa 3
J
U
LL
LL
L�
m
U
a1
0
YI
di
di
Gr
QI
41
t
g
0
4 A
O 7 -0a
0
O 7
�3 O}
Q}
-0Q}
O } -o
O}
O}
a
W
4
-
+3
fl
CL
Q
Q
2
Q
Q
AF 0 OG
a Ca 00
441
N
E Q ®
11
N
l
N
+dui 4 W
U
LV
p�
6 i
ri
ri
.y > --I
m i L
�..I
ri
T-I
ri
^
+y } T
R L L d LO
N
ri
'.F L
m C.
+-1
L w a
Ln
LPM
a_ aF a_ .� ;..1
LI`.
Lf?
'°
Ll
�. 0IL
�
,.
a CI
� N
_
i'
°
i
y-°
I
z 7R aS L
z i6 L6 L
W
-9
ai
ai
ai
w
a
ai
ai
+
ai
a1
Y
ID
B
+
u
ai
0
C
L
m l8
L
L
L
L
IL
.�. w
as +-I
ID
+p6'
Y°le
4t
W
++
Y61
�
3°
w
I -I �
w
►rt 7
E
E
w
w E
►a
6
6
cn N
o
w
a
B
Q
♦ s
vi
6JA
Gi
{f1
V1
t7
V}
VJ
L
°)
8
c
m
M+
�o Z s
a
a
a
L
a}
fi
W
L)
�
L
6
C1
}
_ _
_
°La
a1
T;
O
O
V h3
Y =
L -V5
C
m
W It
.•aa
J4Il4i
U
Q L
LL4]1
qLV]
qLaJ
re
Q
LL
1
,Q
a�Ly
O r9U1
,�
L
u
O L 3a-
7
W
ii
m
1dO
47 £2
4CE V
MOVJ
.aa-��
6�
-
++
��J1
ad
N
av
3
6
�.
� fi
dl L
a U�#
L E
u D-
6F $
4L n'�
ym„
9G
`+~ � . °
ry
0
Q O
.1� 6}
IE 7
� fl.
421
C
1
'=°
n1
W
C
m
,y E
L
. cu
U
C
IL i
9
Y �L �m
-3a �
•y
ifi
O
r3
0
g
d�4
�
-
D
r�
O
�
m
a
0
a_
o
,, y ,y
(ri
C L
C Im-I
_
ad
rtay+ a C E
x^
0
L
D
CL
p p
J
pp
(HJ� W
y■
pp
_ W
--I
m
m
IL.
C. O
+a
�i r iF
L N
L
Idl
y
b} 3L°'
GyJ
I.y (� C 4°
`_
_
_..
°'}
A.s"
GS
I„I
L
�
OL
V
S
L}
_
En
{�i
.
ip'
N
m
�r
°D
n
r,
m
m
..
UL
IL
LL
LL
LL
LL
W
tL
LL
6..
IVY
0
a0
al
4}
a1
ad
W
93
m i+F
Im
w M
Gb � .�
0 0
G5 "�
W 0
dQ -le.-I
0M
d0 i, .-I
m 0
�
it m VI
W N
m m @
�,
{+
+i
H
+"i L
ff
+i L
flC6
+"i L
€1 Q
L
ff
L
fl
'•"I C
S2 CL
'•"I C
,L a Q
ch L
C S2
+ i L
ff6 C
O $
,may,
1y
J
pOp
IL
L Cam.
y
L U!
L .
L.G
i d?
L
N L CLa
L C IfB
�
L 4}
L ILG
d7
t
a L
L
L
W
H C
i°- HC
LL
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
Page 45 of 97
Agend
y *'
V
w
8J
d1
85
:L
AI
y
c R
x a
7
o
Q } 7.7
x a
6 } _0
z a
O } -c;
t
O } -.
z
O > ..
x
O > -0
Z a
O 7 L'
Z a
7=
L.. -
L
L
L
a
L
L
a
L
L
a.
L
L
i
L
0
a,
w
a
a
a
.y
..
I a
I
t>
z
o>
s
a
dri
a
'
p
L
p
L
a
L
n
L
a
L.L
L
a
'
G
O
rt+
Rki
w
w
8a
W
N
_
ml
Iki
�.•
O +E•I O
O } ?3
0 } _0
Q. } -0
G } -0
O } r1
O } �
� ,
�
O > -0
O } ?3
iS
z f-
L
L
L
L
L
_
x L
2 i
W
CL
..
R
G
R
CL
.-.
'q
a
ti
L
n
{U
N
n
LV
in
C5
cl
Icl
-I
m
-
O
Y
X
m
z
®
a
�1
;
L.
dv
c
NJ
Olp
c
�
w
w
w
+
w
C
�
C,C,
G
L *F
6
m N
m 0
m lh
m 0
Ib dry
a 0
A dh
i
Ib N Ti
.U-
rs 2
dr
U .U- .9F.
w -.4i -�.
.�. �
d� - -
U. ry
-
y �
w
W
+•
6 G6 i. O
H=-
it C .�
-+
Q 'r G '}-
-+
U '� G .•
0 '� c
� U �. G�
� U � C' y
' 0� G r
�
f
C 16 Q)
m L a'
►•I a r : 7
m L +-i a'
" 3 rt+
� L +--I a
Fa 7 w >
m L +-� a .�-.
F•I 7 .+
® L- a-
1y 3 p •••I
L- a-
Fy 3
m L a
'� }
►+ E
I--^
I m g
E
D C r+ .H
day ID r
O C ++ .}.
{h 4} �
1� a = ++ +-9
Ch ID
�L a C ++ -.�i
M 0 ++
iL a C +' - .}i
0 0 *+'
l.L a w
co 1 I'
l.� a C -1= +-I
w u rt+
I� L
L
iL
Lwd,o
di des
'U
L FO
o
L 0
to
L -A
a '-I
Lfu
a
L ti
o
r C
o
L 1u
o rl
O C
• o
'j
InL (U
LL W
CL 0)
LL cu
tL IDL
'zI
6- it
4b4 CO w
a to
r� F
fi +•
r s r
LL �. u
C] L
CL w
U r
.+
t
t+
r 5 Z-
+•
L
+m
IL W
L m
1- C
�
�
4
•+a i £3
� L {y
# �
� L N
�� L [tl
� L N
'� L RI
4� L dV
41
� n U
rt6•
m 9L pps�ii
}}g
@ rt+
91
O -
'4 '-
-a
a
$ #'
9
r. .�
@
5=
--1
d}
3
3 ^�
3
3
' ?
L «
Im
vC:X:-31
aGZ
o�T-
1 Z
C, um, a � C-
uJ
e
,
C 0A2
9>
O
--I O
L =
-Q
0
y C
.0
��
~tll
i m it R$qyy fi
"
a 4~} �.
3 w
a 0�
3 u
a 8M �
3 to �
3 �
O~-N 3
7 e7
77
..
7
CL
u
Q) hr
C, m
r U
w E
`t �.
i •r d0
i •�
L +- .,
£ "r
L
L •r
T3 to U 9J
w a
:g rJ3
H ril
H V+
+-i N
+i I!t
'-I <R
+-I M
4 -2 E
�c
m e
a,
=
ea
ii
ca
w
LL
p�,}y
ppj�
w 91
•� r
r3
_
CL =1
- =
d
(L
W
_
CL
r]
L] - a
(L
U
m
LU
ID
-�
o
Y
L -
---•
CL
M a
.-.
fi
p
b
-" ❑
w L
7 coQ}
l.�
L}
Al L.
O L
dr
-
M.
6
L3
e
{�
03
❑':
Y
13-
CL
■ r
E C }'
E +-
E ,-
E G r
6 C r
A G r
L
0 G
m 31 -�
r•
^I al U
W 71 E '�
r•
^I w L3
m E -�
'-I a}
m 7n
�--i
IA 7� -
.-, 4.J
A} 3�
L
-; i..l
f6
L
Q7 E
0
Tl }
Y iF L
tL L
dl SI L
d L a+ > L.
?
d > L
C 7
iL
r > L
'C
d _ > L
O]
C
2
w WE 8
r
'ID w
a•'q
w
°� q7q a*
CSCC�++
J �L
►may
..
L m L} C
O
fa m
L -�Yi
m i} �G
yam•' O
!� ® Gi G
!� m G3 �Q
6a. U La Q
m U La Q
Z 1••! #'
7. k•I �-
Z M a+
T. F•I Y-"
7. W Y
� 41 Y'
I
� r91 Y'
�
Page 46 of 97
Agend
m Ul
�
W
T7 ^
+J'
$f � + W CRJ
iNs rsi
O '✓ Td
x ,n
m
P5
O5
P5
�
�' � �
a
d5
u0
N
05
i14
iR
LIP
H
H
-
�^.
�^
6
O
O
O
O
0
L.
(L
rt+
C
4
1
W
N
Sh
w
D
•!
O $
iS
r�Gf-51
co .. +
n ] V
0 } TI
P5 04
m {Q
0, $
N QO
{'} 0
a > '0
O > -0
W
M
�if+w±yy
v3
c
a
W
ik
5R
tr
pr
--1
N
..L
r L
a m
M. L
a 91
m
wf
N
r�
--
a
'r
m
~
m
m
LI
~
m
m
-E - O
G
t
fa
+
16 OF
L
L
L
i
L
L
L
16 UI
3 rtr -w }
►rt
►y 6
m E
N
w
►r
a-i
w E
wi E
.-i E
'-, 3 w •-i '}
�
6
LL O C +' +Y
fh wrtf
LL L
6
LL L
O
LL L
4
1� C
6
LL C
d
C
G
LL L
O
�L C
O
LL. C
O
LL
fh GIrt+
L
C
c
Pi
4r
+.++ O.
w
4}
rt+ ,}
�
L
r
s+ .--I C
� � �
eF
�
�
L
=J 3
i 0
LL
� rt+
4J
Sl5
U
4?
O.
O I1gqBv�
�
3 �
� 3
Q
`�
C «
Z7 O
-
r
C
n:
,� do
.Q Y
r *, rA
E 3
L C
O OD Si
++
1
�,
Ga
al,
ID
w
s as
y
rt„
_
� ++ U
�.
3 y�
.L. O
,�
ifi C m
w
1R -C
4
G
U Qy
W
�+
L
1F'
4cu}
L
a
3e +1
L
9Y 4}
V
L
C
L
_ Y
L
m
G7 90.
y
:-•
m
c
E
a
pLj
C a
o u
w
o
�O7 ,� ran c
^'
m
X
C +I� Z
gapyy rt+
p E 1R 0 c
[}
8
G
'r by r
o M
0i I
c
O
C E
r-s rt+
Q5
UI -� *;
C +`+
+--I C3
}E
r 16
C
11
11
6 L
@ c M
Li
.3
ym
L.
'0
o ru
as
4
C YI
n N
W 6
�y
L
4 dL}
m
I
ti 5
64
*G+
r
QC5 �M
s
6
c _
"� c'
G yy
a
Ca 5
.,Ly
,
Ql C
a,
Sri
W N
O
O Q C
-.i
U
3
L
++ w m
,'may a
++
Vi
m
U'Ti
*,
o o
U +° r
s m
O L
a5 t
L5 A L.
.�.
ti
r w
,_
L
Lo
CC y
Zy
ffpp .,r R L�pp.
X
4
w 6
Sd
2
a r¢
E
+•
3
W ++
iB L1
�'.
rry+y+
E
Q .¢i
'�I
��
A 7
3ppss
97 ri.+
---L-,, ca��a
—
}
w
4} �
L
�
of c
'Ei CS
C
f3 La
ar
W m
rw
a
c
CL
G'J
'-i
C
4
-
K
CC
L)
VJ
m
[r
Sri
sD
Ss
+r
—
',l',
F9
f
0 C
LL
L.
LL
LL.
�..
L6
LL.
F-
H
F-
'rt• L
L
'rt• L
+h L
'rt• i
'rt• i
+r i
L
w L
+� L
+f t
ai
S3 w
O 0
O V
G W
O w
S3 w
S3 w
O tiw
J W
H h
H a s
H M S
F ►5
H ►s
H ►�',+
H J
H �]
F ►5
F ►i
H Fri
p
J.
L'k
Page 47 of 97
Agend
N
AD
a V H 4
i� 96 f-
v LI! Ln
'c 'R
v M 0
U !6Y
42
O '7
J' a P+ FIS
4} J W Cl)
m
r- J f: @
W J a gD LD
+1�
N
ru
Ll
fv
LL
f.
0
3
0
O
G
�
O
rt+
41
M
m
d�
r
Gd
Lr
++ O
O 3 ?3
9"+ 11D
tD
dfp @
N
x m
INNn
firf+ry'-y
(v(±'7}a
���*r}ay
m
m
%§
W
q
64
U4
44
n4
e;9
64
W
sO
4ryCOy
ail
+�LDV!
J.h
pm
m
!1
H
O
O
O
Ca
m
m
In
w
du4
4}
4
ti
a
LL
CL
4J
a
u
0
G}
L w
L
i
L
L
L
n.
'..
m =
m
,a 3
=
m
m 3
m
C 19
H
I
r-0 E
MI fl
e
MI 6
LL
Ff
LL L,
C,
C,
LL L} 3
In
di des
-
¢
C
L U
m
-C
-
-
m
o
w �,
.3 ®
3
..
4El
w as
m 0
N
a, ,
°�°
C
r T
u
y
O
0)
d!! r
t
_
O
9F
C 9
!
Iki WE
1 Z7 L
9}
_
!J
O
'� to
p
8
L }
V1 C YV
dl J
4: u
.1 3
+-I
i
+ 9 L
G Qe T
O 4
O y
. ..
-1 w
9
44
8
ty
C
5= u,
G �
-
m
S
N
GZ
W
y
[
W
r
p
ID
w
as
L
s
in
w s
m
a=
m
va
o
f }
[3
1' LL
kn
-
- r
cm
ca
L�
C
O
L O
rd
dGG
�--i
db. 73
fa
E
Q-
w
L ..
W
..
'2
ti
06
❑
_ L _
- _
W
_
V
f
_
fl
L
n }
n
G d7F
G !!
4 47
4 9F
O 41
O 4Y
w
Page 48 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 2e1
4.4 Comitment to Implementation
Successful implementation of the Loxahatchee Pollutant Reduction Plan requires
the commitment to management activities, monitoring, and adaptive planning.
The goals of the Lo:i,.ahatchee Pollutant Reduction Plan are to implement
nutrient reduction activities targeted at reducing loading from anthropogenic
sources, continuing to monitor the response of chlorophyll -a, and identifying
the sources of bacteriological impairments. Rs a measure of pollutant
reduction and in support of this document, the responsible stakeholders in the
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan have demonstrated their willingness
to address the impairments within the pohlutan� reduction rilan bc,undary.
Stakeholders have provided project submissions for management activities
identified in Section 4.2 of t h s document.
Page .36 of 50
Page 49 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 2e1
section 5: monitoring, Reporting Results, and Adaptive
Management
5.1 Hater Quality Monitoring
The Loxahatchee River Environmental Control District (LRD) routinely collects
cuter quality samples at approximately 28 sites located within the Loxahatchee
River Pollutant Control Plan boundary. 18 of the sites are sampled bi-monthly
(every other month) or quarterly, while ten stations are sampled monthly.
Additionally, the Town of Jupiter conducts water quality monitoring in the
South we,;�t Fork associated with its wastewater discharge and also for ambient
monitoring. The Town or Jupiter monitors a total of 7 sites. The data
associa-ed with -he toun's wastewater reperting are submitted to DEP through
discharge monthly reports. Additional data may be uploaded together with the
LRD data to DEP. Specifically, for this pollutant reduction plan, the Torun of
Jupiter has added an additional sampling site at a location downstream of the
5-46 structure. Samples are collected at this site each month.
5.1.1 Objectives
Focused objectives are critical for a monitoring strategy to provide the
information needed to evaluate implementation success. Since the pollutant
reduction plan implementation involves a stakeholder driven, iterative
process, the monitoring efforts are related to primary and secondary
objectives. The primary objectives focus on achieving crater quality targets,
while the secondary objectives focus on water equality parameters that can be
used to provide information for future refinements. The monitoring strategy
may be updated as needed.
Primary Objectives
• Measure the water quality in the impaired Loxahatchee River before and
during implementation.
• Document changes in nutrient and bacteria concentrations in the
Loxahatchee River.
• Focus BMP efforts by using crater quality results combined with
appropriate project information, land use data, and statistical and
spatial analysis tools.
Page 37 of 50
Page 50 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber 261
Secondary Objectives
identify areas cohere additional monitoring might help in understanding
the impairments and trends.
• Identify and implement more effective nutrient reduction strategies.
• Utilize bacteriological indicators to assist in identifying potential
sources and solutions to address FIB impairments.
5.1.2 Water Quality Parameters, Frequency, and Network
To achieve the objectives listed above, the monitoring strategy focuses on
collecting water quality data to track improvements in water quality for
nutrients and FIB. Nutrients and FIB are considered separately and, as such,
the parameters and monitoring for these two categories are monitored and
assessed separately. Each category is addressed individually in the sections
below. For each of these categories, core and supplemental indicators are
listed. The core indicators are directly related to the parameters causing
impairment or concern in the river while the supplemental indicators are
monitored primarily to support the interpretation of core water quality
parameters. The monitoring network consists of existing and proposed stations
which were established for a variety of reasons and are supported by various
agencies and entities with an interest in the Loxahatchee River.
5.1.2.1 Monitoring for Nutrients
For nutrients, chlorophyll -a is considered to be the key core parameter
measured, to track progress in decreasing concentrations in phosphorus and
nitrogen. The other parameters are considered supplementary parameters for the
pollutant reduction plan, as they build information about the overall water
quality. At a minimum, the core parameters will be tracked to determine
progress towards achieving pollutant reductions. Parameters are listed in
Table 0.
Page 38 of 50
Page 51 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Lcxahatchee River Follutarri Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Table 8. Hater quality Honitoring Parameters for Nutrients
Core Paremers
supplemental Perame#ers
Field Paremers
Nitrate + Nitrite (as
Alkalinity
Hater Temperature
N)
Color
pH
Total Kjeldahl
Turbidity
Specific Conductance
Nitrogen
Total Suspended Solids
Salinity
Chlorophyll -a
Ammonia (as N)
Sample depth
Total Phosphorus
Total Organic Carbon
Tide Stage
Ortho-Phosphors.
Organic Nitrogen
Secchl Dej17-1
Dissolved oxy�'l
Light at im and zu,
Error! Reference source not found., 12, and 13 show the water qualii y
monitoring stations for nutrients within the Loxahatchee River Pollutant
Reduction Plan boundary. At a minimum, these sites will be monitored for the
core parameters listed in Table 8. However, it should be noted that not all
parameters are measured at each of the sites. The monitoring network for this
plan builds on existing efforts in the basin.
Page 39 of 50
Page 52 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Luxahatchae Ri var Pollutant Reduction Plan - SepteffAber 20151
M
.. Fr:lory iar Jf... 20IR
1 1 I'.9inr. r lurrie.i d MI I'ird 111:3 11 r;
L_mhatcriee Rv-r PaIlulani ReduccoI I-. I i+
.P WM
I•Ysl
_ f:cYonw
� � I
is
•
• 5{
?7 hq=idq
i
s 775 1k—
Figure B. Hater Quality Stations Monitored Monthly Hithin the Loxahatchee
River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients
Page 40 of 50
Page 53 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee R var Pollutant Reduction Phan - Septeffber 261
P1 gu re 9. Hat er Quality Stations Monitored Quarterly Hithin the Loxahatchee
River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients
Page 41 of 50
Page 54 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 2e1
34
a, .h4'iit�-.i'
`;eGr rrYdr:;I 20,9 1:36.112
ore u�uG ,.i
Loxaha thee Nuhiern Mon1todW Srailons I' Sen l,anmkgly
c aQ 0.K I'TWM
Bimonthly
I nxahacr:r.--lto,ri r',lUn3nrRPrillrslnll f rerC9niu}ili}iv rnr ao,s...+w —ft— sa—
Fi urelO.Hater quality Stations Honitored Bimonthly or Semiannually Within
the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients
Table 9. Hater Quality Monitoring Stations Within the Loxahatchee River
Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Nutrients
GIs Hap
Sampling
Staticn Number
Station Descrip#ion
Sampling Frequency
Number
Entity
or Name
Loxahatchee
1
100
Cypress Creek. - Northwest Fork
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
2
104
Hobe Grove Canal
Quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
D
River District
105
Cypress Grove Canal
Quarterl..
4
Loxahatchee
107
River's Edge Slough
Monthly
River District
Lexahatchee
5
40
Miner Railroad Track
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
6
42
Pennock Point
River District
Page 42 of 50
Page 55 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Rider Follutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
9IS Hap
Sampling
Station Number
Station Descrip#ion
Sampling Frequency
Number
Entity
or Name
Loxahatchee
51
north Fork - Tayuesta Drive
Quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
R
55
North Fork - Countyline Road
Quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
o
60
Nnrthust Fcrl - 6al
Monthlq
River District
Loxahatchee
10
62
Northwest Fork: - Islandwdi
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
11,
River District
66
Porthwest Fork - Hobe Graves
Quarterly
12
Loxahatchee
67
Northwest Fork - Trapper's
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
13
68
Northwest Fork - Interstate 95
Quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
14
69
Northwest Fork - S.R. 706
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
i5
71
southwest Fork - ,tones Greek
Quart—ly
River District
Loxahatchee
Southwest Fork - Loxahatchee
16
72
Mont hIj
River District
River Road
Loxahatchee
i7
73
Southwest Fork - Sim's Creek
quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
Sim's Creek midtoy between 78
18
735
Bimonthly
River District
and 74
Loxahatchee
State Road (SR) 706 - Sim's
15
74
Bimonthly
River District
Creek
Loxahatchee
Sim's Creek downstream of weir
.-)
74UN
6lmonthly
River District
at Indiantown Road
Loxahatchee
21
75
SR 706 - Jones Creek
Sl.rronthly
River District
Loxahatchee
22
81
C18 Canal - S.R. 706
Quarterly
River District
Loxahatchee
Jupiter Country Club Outfall 1
23
86
Quarterly
River District
EAST
Loxahatchee
Jupiter country Club Outfall
24
BB
Monthly
River District
NORTH
Loxahatchee
25
95
Canal 1 Jupiter Farms
Monthly
River District
Loxahatchee
�6
CALC
Cai.00sahatchee Culvert
Bimonthly
River District
Loxahatchee
27
TPJ
Toney Penn@ - Jones Creek
Bimonthly
River District
Loxahatchee
?»
NC92
SIRWCD N 2
quarterly
River District
Town of
846-US
Upstream of S46 structure
Monthly
Jupiter
Ju
Page 43 of 50
Page 56 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Big Hap
Sailing
Station Number
Station Descrip#ion
Sampling Frequency
Number
Entity
or Name
Town of
30
S4e-DS
Downstream of S46 Structure
Monthly
Jupiter
Tour of
�1
SWC�
400-m west of Outfall
Monthly
Jupiter
�~
SWD-3
400-m east of Outfall
I4]'lk°Ilu
J,�oiter
Town of
swri-H
east of Outfall
pi,y.°+�•1_
Jupiter500-rn
Totn of
j4
SWD-2
Loxahatchee River Road Bridge
semi-annually
Jupiter
500-m east ❑f Lnxahatchee River
Town of
j
SNF-CH
Road Bridge in open water of
Monthly
Jupiter
Southwest Fork
5.1.2.2Honitoring for Bacteria
The parameters for bacteria are listed below in Table 10. The core
parameters are directly related to the bacteriological concerns in the
Loxahatchee River. Supplemental parameters and field parameters .are monitored
primarily to support the interpretation of core crater quality parameters. At a
minimum, the core parameters will be tracked to determine changes in the
bacteriological results. LRD collects and tests crater quality samples for
fecal coliform and enterococcus bacteria each week at sites in the Loxahatchee
River estuary in popular recrea-ional areas. In order to represent the "worst
case" conditions with regard to h-iunan health exposure, staff try their best to
sample during ou-going (ebb) tide.
Table 10. Hater Quality Monitoring Parameters for Bacteria
Core Parwreters
Supplemental Parameters
Field Parwneters
F. cali (freshuiatri-'
Alkalinity
Water Temperature
Enteroffoccu�
Color
pH
(estuarine',
3ucralo5e
Specific Conductance
Fecal 1Dlifr11
Acetaminophen
Salinity
Turbidity
Dissolved oxygen
Total Suspended Solids
Sample Depth
Tide Stage
Secchi Depth
Errorl Reference Source not found. shows the cuter quality monitoring stations
for bacteria within the Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan boundary.
At a minimum, the sites will be monitored for the core parameters. However, it
'age 44 of 50
Page 57 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Follutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 26151
should be noted that not all parameters are measured at each of the sites. The
monitoring network for this plan builds on existing efforts in the basin.
Page 45 of 50
Page 58 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Sopkwnbes 24. 2D19 13&112
4 GIs 9.55 4-1 ii
Loxahah 8acws Momorirg Stabons
4 A42 6i5 73 bm
i Mo7t11 y
T
Lcixahatchee Rrver Polutant Reduction Plan Boun ry
Figure 11. Hater Quality Stations Hithin the Loxahatchee River Pollutant
Reduction Plan Boundary for Bacteria
'age 46 of 50
Page 59 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan — Septeffber eel
Table 11. Hater quality Honitoring Stations Hithin the Loxahatchee River
Pollutant Reduction Plan Boundary for Bacteria
Station
GIB Map
Number
Sampling
Number
Sampling Eniiiy
or Name
Station DescriM ion
Frequency
Loxahatchee River
I
District
51
North Fork - TegUeSta Drive
quarterly
Loxahatchee River
District
62
Northwest Fork - Islandway
Monthly
Loxahatchee River
Sim's Creek midway between 73 and
3
District
735
74
bimonthly
Loxahatchee River
4
District
74
SR 706 - Sim's Creek
Bimonthly
Loxahatchee River
Sim's Creek Downstream of ujeir at
5
District
74DH
Indiantown Road
Bimonthly
Loxahatchee River
6
District
75
SR 706 - Jones Creek
Bimonthly
Loxahatchee River
7
District
CALC
Caioosahatchee Culvert
Bimonthly
Loxahatchee River
D
District
TPJ
Toney renna - Jones Creek
oimanthly
5.2 Data Hanagement and Assessment
As of Tune 30, 3017, water quality data in Florida are entered by the entity
collecting the data into the Florida Watershed Information Network (WIN)
Database, which has replaced the Florida Storage and Retrieval (STORET)
System. WIN serves as the primary repository of ambient water quality data for
the state. DEP pulls water quality data used for impaired waters evaluations
and TMDL development directly from this database. Ambient Liater quality data
collected as part of the pollutant reduction plan will be uploaded into WIN
for long-term storage and availability. Hater quality data will be uploaded to
WIN at least once every six months, upon completion of the appropriate quality
assurance/quality control (QA/(Z1C) checks.
The water quality date will be analyzed during the pollutant reduction plan
implementation to determine changes in water quality. At a minimum the data
will be assessed applying the data sufficiency requirements and assessment
methods contained in the Impaired Water Rule. For FIE, progress will be
measured based on the FIB water quality standards which reference the number
of exceedances. Also, evidence of nonanthropogenic sources will be considered.
Other methods may be applied, as appropriate, but the goal of the plan is to
achieve attainment of water quality standards and no longer be impaired.
Page 47 of 50
Page 60 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
5.3 QA/QC
Stakeholders participating in the monitoring and reporting plan will collect
inter quality data in a manner consistent with the DEP standard operating
procedures (SOPS) for QA/QC. The most current version of these procedures is
available on the DEP website. Consistent with the SOPS, waters quality samples
shoutd be analyzed by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation
Conference (NELAC), National Environmental Labora-ory Accredi-at=on Program
(NELAP) certified laboratories or other labs that meet -he cer-ti=ication and
other requirements outline-d in the SOPS. The LRD, as the responsible
laboratory and reporting entity, is certified through NELRP and compliant in
the examination of samples for microbiology and general chemistry analyses.
The laboratory certification number is E'S666 .
5.4 Frequency and Reporting Format for Implementation of
Management Actions
Hrlid-.ur-arig and reporting on the proposed management activities will provide an
opportunity for adaptive management of restoration activities.. Reporting will
be utilized to assess improvements in outer quality, progress on achieving
target loading, and compliance with the plan. Individual Stakeholders will
report on their implementation of management activities annually. R project
update will be prepared periodically that will outline the progress of the
pollutant reduction plan. The project update may also include results of any
outer quality data analysis, any shortfalls in achieving anticipated
reductions or milestones, any changes in the monitoring network, updates on
project implementation, and estimates of the load reductions made to date.
Periodic stakeholder meetings will be held to support the collaborative nature
of the plan and provide updates on needs and accomplishments.
Every five years, a pollutant reduction plan update will be completed. The
update will include results of Loater quality data assessments, updated annual
pollutant loads, any Shortfalls in achieving reductions, any monitoring
changes, the status of project implementation, estimated load reductions,
percentage of load reduction targets achieved, and additional management
activities needed to meet the target loading.
5.5 Adaptive Management Actions
Adaptive management involves setting rip a mechanism for making course
correction.-s in the pollutant load reduction plan when circumstances grange, or
'age 48 of 50
Page 61 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee Riven Follutarri Reduction Plan - Septeffber 2e151
feedback mechanisms indicate that a more effective strategy is needed. The
pollutant reduction plan will be reviewed every five years and mill include an
analysis of the data and progress, as well as any additional management
activities that may be needed to meet the target loading. At the five-year
upda-e, if water quality trends indicate that the target loading will not be
met by the deadline set in Section 3.3, stakeholders will work with DEP to
determine the appropriate action, which may include assessing any new sources
and identifying potential further actions needed to achieve the target
loading, determining if more time: is needed to implement the plan, or
development of a TMDL. The five-year review will be considered the DEP
notification process for adaptive nanagenen- and implementation.
'age 49 of 50
Page 62 of 97
Agenda Item #1.
Loxahatchee River Pollutant Reduction Plan - Septeffber 261
Section 6. References
Schueler, T., 1987, Controlling urban Runoff' A Practical Manual for Planning
and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
Washington, DC.
Soil and Water Engineering Technology, 2008, Final Report, Tasks 1, 2, and 3,
For the Project Entitled Nutrient Loading Rates, Reduction Factors and
Implementation Costs Associated with BMPs and Technologies, Prepared for the
South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida.
Page 50 o f 50
Page 63 of 97