1 questions addressed what are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to lake tahoe? pollutant...
Post on 16-Jan-2016
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1Questions Addressed
What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Pollutant Reduction Opportunities
2
Review Pollutant Reduction Opportunity analysis approach
Highlight PRO project findings
Discuss planning level implementation recommendations and overall recommended strategy
What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
3What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Pollution Reduction Opportunity Project
Primary Objective: Quantify potential pollutant load reduction opportunities
4What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Analysis Opportunities
Quantify potential basin wide solutions
Assess cumulative benefits and relative costs
Establish basin wide assessment methods
Provide foundation for implementation planning
5What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Analysis Limitations
Analysis not applicable to project scale
Limited to quantifiable actions
Emphasis on water quality
Limited time, resources, and effectiveness data
6What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Project Team
Source Category GroupsAtmospheric DepositionUrban Runoff and GroundwaterForest RunoffStream Channel Erosion
Source Category Integration Committee
Technical Reviewers
Focus Team
7What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Pollutant Reduction Opportunity Development Process
Step 1: Pollutant control option selection and screening
Step 2: Site scale analysis Treatment Tiers
Step 3: Basin-wide extrapolation Pollutant reduction estimates Cost
8What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Atmospheric Deposition Primary Pollutant Sources
Mobile Emissions (Nitrogen)
Dust (Fine Sediment)
9What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Atmospheric Deposition Pollutant Control Opportunities
Emissions – control NitrogenReduce VMT:
incentives and transit
Dust control – reduce Fine SedimentEfficient roadway sweepingSwitch to deicersPave or gravel unpaved
surfaces
10What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Forest Upland Primary Pollutant Sources
Unpaved roads
Disturbed areas
Forest management
11What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Forest Upland Pollutant Control Opportunities
Unpaved roadway BMPs
Mulch/till recreation areas
Restore legacy roads and trails
Advance BMPs for forest management work
12What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Urban & Groundwater Primary Pollutant Sources
Impervious surface runoff
Erosion
Traction abrasives
FertilizersFine Sediment Particle Number Estimates
(particles less than 20 micrometers): Percent Contribution per Source Category
Atmospheric Deposition
15%
Non-urban Upland
9%
Urban Upland 72%
Stream Channel Erosion
4% Shoreline Erosion < 1%
13What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Urban & Groundwater Pollutant Control Opportunities
Source control methods
Remove impervious cover
Runoff infiltration
Storm water treatment
Fertilizer management
14What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Stream Channel Erosion Primary Sources
Emphasis on bank erosion only
Upper Truckee River
Ward Creek
Blackwood Creek
15What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Stream Channel Erosion Pollutant Control Opportunities
Full unconstrained restoration
Targeted bank and bed protection
A mix to restoration and bank protection
16What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Pollutant Reduction Opportunity Project Summary
Analysis represents average load reductions and costs
Basin wide estimates offer relative benefit comparisons
Urban Uplands and Atmospheric controls appear to be largest opportunity
Forest practices and stream restoration efforts remainimportant treatments
17
Implementation Scenarios
Source Category Group load and cost estimates are the foundation of basin-wide implementation options
Three different implementation “scenarios” were developed and presented to Focus Teams and the Pathway Forum
Focus Team and Forum feedback helped narrow the options to a single basin- wide recommended strategy
18
Forest Upland Implementation
Load reduction opportunities are relatively limited
Additional reduction efforts do not appear cost effective
Current practices effectively reduce loads
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
19
Forest Upland Implementation Recommendation
Restore/maintain roads as planned
Revegetate/treat disturbed lands
Treat forest soils
Achieve ~1% reduction in total fine particle budget
Estimated Cost: $120M Capital, $4.5M Annual O&M
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
20
Stream Channel Restoration
In-channel sources are small
Restoration is cost effective
Restoration offers multiple benefits
Restoration likely provides additional water quality benefits
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
21
Stream Channel Restoration Recommendation
Continue current restoration activities
Support monitoring and research
Achieve ~2% reduction in total fine particle budget
Estimated Cost: $40M Capital
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
22
Atmospheric Deposition Implementation
What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Addressing mobile sources does not significantly reduce particle loads
Mobile source controls are expensive
Good opportunity to reduce particle loads by targeting dust sources
23
Atmospheric Deposition Recommendation
Focus on dust control measures
Continue VMT reduction efforts
Achieve ~5% reduction in total fine particle budget
Estimated Cost: $45M Capital, $0.4M Annual O&M
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
24
Urban Runoff and Groundwater Implementation
Significant particle reductions can be achieved through innovative practices
Pump and treat technologies hold promise
Finer scale planning is needed to refine implementation approach
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
25
Urban Runoff and Groundwater Recommendation
Continue to implement known technologies
Move toward more innovative practices and intensive operations and maintenance
Achieve ~25% reduction in total fine particle budget
Estimated Cost: $1.3B Capital, $6M Annual O&M
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
26
Recommended Strategy Summary
Options to meet clarity challenge are few
Implementation approach emphasizes cost effective measures to reduce atmospheric dust sources
Innovative measures will be needed to achieve necessary particle load reductions from urban areas
Finer scale jurisdiction and/or subwatershed planning is needed to refine actual implementation options and expected load reductions
27
Charting a course to
Clarity
28
Time Sequence - Move Forward & Innovate
28What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
29
The Clarity Challenge: Reverse clarity decline and measurably improve clarity
1968 1988 2008 2028 20XX
ME
TE
RS
ME
TE
RS
FE
ET
FE
ET
20
30
40
60
80
100
120
standard
ExistingCondition
1st Clarity
Challenge
YearYear
30
Treatment Tiers
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Represent different levels of effort and cost
3 tiers for each source category
Each tier is unique
Several exceptions
31
Tiers : Atmospheric Deposition
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
Tier 1: baseline – no reduction calculated
Tier 2: reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by 10%
Tier 3: reduce VMT by 25% and increase stationary source controls
Cost offsets
32
Tiers : Urban runoff and groundwater
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Tier 1: enhanced version of the EIP
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Total Tie
r C
ost (M
illion $
)
Reductio
n a
s P
ercent o
f E
ntir
e P
ollutant B
udget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
Tier 2: advanced practices, applied more aggressively in a project area
Tier 3: Pump and treat system complemented by advanced practices
33
Tiers : Forest runoff
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
Tier 1: surface treatments and (currently) required management practices
Tier 2: mulch treatments and full management practices
Tier 3: tilling and full restoration to “native” conditions
34
Tiers : Stream channel erosion
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
Tier 1: full restoration unconstrained
Tier 2: mix of restoration and stabilization, constraints considered
Tier 3: bank stabilization, no floodplain reconnection $-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 P&T Tier Tier 2* Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Tota
l Tie
r Cost
(M
illion $
)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric* Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
20-Y
ear Cost
(M
illions)
Reduct
ion a
s Perc
ent of Enti
re P
olluta
nt Budget
< 20 micron sediment particle reductions Phosphorus reductions Nitrogen reductions Total 20 year cost (Million $)
Urban & Groundwater Atmospheric Forested Uplands Stream Channel
* Atmospheric pollutant controls included revenue generating transit programs. The cost shown for Tier 3 includes the net of costs and revenues. Tier 2 analysis projected a net income from these programs, however, for the overall analysis these revenues are assumed to offset the cost of controls.
3535
What about impervious coverage?
Approx. 2% increase in particle loading at full build out under current rules
Development under current regulations helps control pollutants
3636
What about impervious coverage? An increase or decrease in allowable coverage
Changing impervious cover significantly affects fine particle loading
Reducing coverage presents load reduction opportunity
36What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
37
Estimated Potential Load Reductions
37
38
Estimated Potential Costs
38
39
Combined Load Reductions and Costs
39
40
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
Screened PCOs
PCO Grouping Process
TreatmentTiers
A
A
BC
A
BC
Settings
Extrapolation Process•GIS•Models
Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis
Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis
Nitrogen Reduction
Table
Sediment Reduction
Table
Phosphorus Reduction
Table
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Load Tables
CostTables
Co
mb
ine
d R
es
ult
s
Ta
ble
s
Total 20 Year Cost Table
Capital Cost Table
O & M Cost Table
Cost-Effectiveness
Table
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
41
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
PCO Grouping Process
TreatmentTiers
A
A
BC
A
BC
Settings
Extrapolation Process•GIS•Models
Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis
Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis
Nitrogen Reduction
Table
Sediment Reduction
Table
Phosphorus Reduction
Table
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Load Tables
CostTables
Co
mb
ine
d R
es
ult
s
Ta
ble
s
Total 20 Year Cost Table
Capital Cost Table
O & M Cost Table
Cost-Effectiveness
Table
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
Screened PCOs
42
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
PCO Grouping Process
TreatmentTiers
A
A
BC
A
BC
Settings
Extrapolation Process•GIS•Models
Step 1: PCO Evaluation Step 2: Site-Scale Analysis
Step 3: Basin-Wide Analysis
Nitrogen Reduction
Table
Sediment Reduction
Table
Phosphorus Reduction
Table
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Load Tables
CostTables
Co
mb
ine
d R
es
ult
s
Ta
ble
s
Total 20 Year Cost Table
Capital Cost Table
O & M Cost Table
Cost-Effectiveness
Table
PCO Concepts
Screening Process
Screened PCOs
4343
Implementation Scenario Summary
What strategy should we implement to reduce pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe?
top related