master deck 052317€¦ · water resources compact (2008) great lakes water quality agreement...

Welcome & Introductions

Nicole Zacharda, Program ManagerGreat Lakes Commission

Overview of our Kick‐off Event

•Meeting packets

•Meeting objectives for Day One & Day Two

•Our plan for this afternoon

• Facility logistics

Introductions

1. Who are you and how does your work intersect with Source Water concerns?

2. What do you hope to learn and/or gain from participating in this Initiative?*

(*We will revisit this at the end of Day Two to see whether expectations change.)

Overview of the Blue Accounting Program

Victoria Pebbles, Program DirectorGreat Lakes Commission

We’re investing $Billions in improving and sustaining the Great Lakes

What do we expect from these investments?

How do we measure our results?

How Is It Going?

??

Report to the Governors and Premiers

A strategic approach to measuring progress towards our collective desired outcomes

Building on Extensive Prior Work

Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Water Resources Compact (2008)

Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Water Resources Compact (2008)

Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

(2012)

Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

(2012)

Great Lakes Regional

Collaboration Strategy (2005)

Great Lakes Regional

Collaboration Strategy (2005)

Canada‐Ontario Agreement (2007)Canada‐Ontario Agreement (2007)

U.S. Clean Water Act (1972, as amended)

U.S. Clean Water Act (1972, as amended)

Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries (1997)

Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries (1997)

Ontario Great Lakes Strategy

(2012)

Ontario Great Lakes Strategy

(2012)

Michigan Water Strategy (2014)Michigan Water Strategy (2014)

Great Lakes Vision 100‐year Plan

(Skidmore, Owings & Merrill)

Great Lakes Vision 100‐year Plan

(Skidmore, Owings & Merrill)

Other Council of Great Lakes Governors Resolutions

Other Council of Great Lakes Governors Resolutions

Blue Accounting Framework

Collaboration

Goals

Metrics

Data

Information Delivery

Supporting Services from Blue Accounting

• Convening, managing and supporting workgroups

• Technical support for goals, metrics and data

• Information management and delivery services





Activity Centered in Workgroups and Collaboratives

Desired Outcome

Shared Goals

Agreed Metrics

Curated and Aggregated Data (many sources)





Blue Accounting Information Management Strategy

Additional Blue Accounting capabilities

Great Lakes Inform

Great Lakes Information

Network

Nine Desired Outcomes

Social Values and Quality of LifeSocial Values and Quality of Life• Awareness of water value• Stewardship of, and investment in, water resources

Sustainable Human UsesSustainable Human Uses• Safe and sustainable domestic water supply• Flourishing and sustainable natural resource‐based economies• Flourishing and sustainable water‐withdrawing economies• Flourishing and sustainable non‐consuming, water‐based economies

Healthy Aquatic EcosystemsHealthy Aquatic Ecosystems• Functional nearshore and coastal processes• Healthy, diverse and connected habitats• Healthy and abundant wildlife

Blue Accounting Pilot Projects

1. ErieStat2. Source Water Initiative3. Maritime4. Connectivity5. Aquatic Invasive Species6. Coastal Wetlands

Blue Accounting Approach is Built Around Collaborative Workgroups

Establish shared goals

Agree upon metrics to measure progress for each goal

Curated data sources for each metric

Delivery of Information

Blue Accounting In A Nutshell

Strategic approach to measuring progress towards our collective desired outcomesSupports desired outcomes for the Great Lakes 2014 Blue Accounting report

Collaborative workgroups set goals and metricsMetrics used to track progressInformation on investments and progress delivered through Blue AccountingInformation enables strategic decision making

Investments Outcomes

Thank You!

Victoria PebblesProgram Director

Great Lakes [email protected]

http://bit.ly/BlueAccounting

Great Lakes Source Water Initiative: Project Overview

Nicole Zacharda, Program Manager

2017 2018

Today

Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov 2018 Mar

Kick‐off Mtg 5/24/2017

Webinar (tent.)6/28/2017

Pilot Team Mtg (tent.)9/1/2017



Webinar or In Person Mtg3/14/2018

Initial Project Concludes4/30/2018

1/1/2017 ‐ 3/31/2017Form Work Group

4/1/2017 ‐4/30/2018Maintain Work Group

5/1/2017 ‐ 7/1/2017Establish Basin‐wide Goals

5/1/2017 ‐ 7/1/2017Identify Metrics & Pilot Locations

7/1/2017 ‐ 8/1/2017Recruit Pilot (Metrics) Team

7/1/2017 ‐ 10/1/2017Identify & Define Pilot Metrics

10/1/2017 ‐ 11/1/2017Collect & Aggregate Data

6/1/2017 ‐ 12/1/2017Build Website

12/1/2017 ‐ 2/1/2018Work Group Reviews & Tests Website

1/1/2018 ‐ 3/1/2018Discuss Website Refinements & Future Services

3/1/2018 ‐4/30/2018Update Website

Project Timeline

Revised, 5/17/17

Goals

Metrics

Data


Goals Metrics Data

Main Work GroupMay (tomorrow!) & June

Pilot Work GroupSummer & Fall 2017

Goals Metrics Data




Goals Metrics Data



Website

Who is the “Pilot Work Group?”

• Representatives of community systems or watershed organizations

• Nominated by this group (June webinar)

• Will work to demonstrate how progress toward goals may be tracked (i.e. metrics & data)

What’s a “Goal?”Social Values and Quality of Life• Awareness of water value• Stewardship of, and investment in, water resources

Sustainable Human Uses• Safe and sustainable domestic water supply• Flourishing and sustainable natural resource‐based economies• Flourishing and sustainable water‐withdrawing economies• Flourishing and sustainable non‐consuming, water‐based economies

Healthy Aquatic Ecosystems• Functional nearshore and coastal processes• Healthy, diverse and connected habitats• Healthy and abundant wildlife

What’s a “Goal?” OutcomeSocial Values and Quality of Life• Awareness of water value• Stewardship of, and investment in, water resources

Sustainable Human Uses• Safe and sustainable domestic water supply• Flourishing and sustainable natural resource‐based economies• Flourishing and sustainable water‐withdrawing economies• Flourishing and sustainable non‐consuming, water‐based economies

Healthy Aquatic Ecosystems• Functional nearshore and coastal processes• Healthy, diverse and connected habitats• Healthy and abundant wildlife

What’s a “Goal?”

Observable

Measurable

Understandable…

to Great Lakes

decision makers

What’s a “Goal?”Homework item: Identification of the 3 risks or issues that (maybe) keep you up at night.

Tomorrow: Discussion of identified risks/issues, ranking, and then…

We will work together to form goals consistent with identified priorities.

The Website… now

… and later.

The Blue Accounting program team is already building the new site.

• Overview• Strategies• Investments• Results• Library Resources

Ready for testing late this year.

Questions?Ideas?

Who Is Doing What With Source Water in the Great Lakes Basin?

Regional Overview of CurrentSource Water Use and Protection Efforts

Dan GoldSenior Program SpecialistGreat Lakes Commission

[email protected]

1. Explanation of Pre‐Read Materials: Compendium on Source Water Protection in the Great Lakes Basin

2. Global to Local: What are our Sources of Water?

3. Regional Source Water Risks

4. Current Source Water Protection Policies & Programs

5. Work Group Feedback on the Compendium


Compendium on Source Water Protection in the Great Lakes Basin

• A high‐level overview of source water protection policies and programs in the Great Lakes Basin

• Product of extensive internet research that needs ground truthing

• The Work Group’s first deliverable

The Global Water Supply

1. Retrieved From: https://water.usgs.gov/edu/gallery/global-water-volume.html (USGS, 2016)

All of Earth’s Water

All of Earth’s Liquid Fresh Water

All of Earth’s Surface Fresh Water

National Fresh Water Withdrawals: USA

GROUNDWATER42%SURFACE

WATER58%

Freshwater Withdrawals by Source 2

Public Supply & Self-Supply Domestic

1. Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas: Impacts from the Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle on Drinking Water Resources in the United States, Office of Research and Development-US EPA (December, 2016)

2. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2010 (USGS, 2016)

1

National Fresh Water Withdrawals: Canada

1. Retrieved from https://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=300688DC-1 on 5/18/17 (Environment and Climate Change Canada, September 2013)

2. 2011 Municipal Water Use Report – Municipal Water Use 2009 Statistics (Environment Canada, 2011)

SURFACE WATER 90%

GROUNDWATER 10%

All of CanadaSources of Municipal Supply

1Sources of Municipal, Domestic, & Rural Supply 2

Fresh Water Withdrawals: Great Lakes States & Provinces

1. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2010, (USGS, 2016)2. 2011 Municipal Water Use Report – Municipal Water Use 2009 Statistics (Environment Canada, 2011)

GROUNDWATER36%

SURFACE WATER64%

8 Great Lakes StatesPublic Supply & Self-Supply Domestic

1Municipal Supplies

2 Great Lakes Provinces

2

Fresh Water Withdrawals: Just the Great Lakes BasinPublic Supply & Self-Supply Domestic Water Sources for the portion of the

8 States and 2 Provinces located within the watershed

Fresh Water Withdrawals: Just the Great Lakes Basin

Great Lakes Surface Water66%

Non-Great Lakes Surface Water21%

Public Supply & Self-Supply Domestic Water Sources for the portion of the 8 States and 2 Provinces located within the watershed

Groundwater13%

87% = Surface Water 13% = Groundwater

Freshwater Withdrawals: Conclusions

• USA Residents of the Great Lakes basin are significantly more dependent on surface water in comparison to the totality of water users in the Great Lakes states and the entire USA

58% 64%87%

42% 36%13%

Entire USA 8 Great Lakes States Entire Area Within theGreat Lakes Basin

Potable Supply Sources: USA vs. GLB

90% 92% 87%

10% 8% 13%

All of Canada 2 Great Lakes Provinces Entire Area Within theGreat Lakes Basin

Potable Supply Sources: Canada vs. GLB• Canadian residents within and

outside of the Great Lakes basin are approximately equally dependent on surface water and are slightly more dependent on surface water than their USA counterparts within the basin

Groundwater

Surface Water

Question for the Work Group:

Where should we focus our efforts during this Initiative’s pilot phase?Surface water sourcesGroundwater sourcesBoth

Regional Source Water Risks

• Main Risks from 2014 US GAO Report• Population Growth & Urbanization• Climate Change• Lack of Information on Water Availability and Use• Groundwater/Surface Water Interaction

• Additional Risks From Various Sources:• E. coli and other waterborne pathogens• HABS & Microcystin• Fracking• Increased area of access for Great Lakes water usage• Road salt

Regional Source Water Risks

1. Report to Congress: Freshwater Supply Concerns Continue, and Uncertainties Complicate Planning, US Government Accountability Office, May 2014

State Water Managers Survey Results:Anticipated Fresh Water Shortages under average conditions 2013- 2023

• At least 6 out of 8 Great Lakes States Expect to Face Regional or Local Shortages of Freshwater in the Next Decade

Regional Source Water Risks: Population Growth

1. Report to Congress: Freshwater Supply Concerns Continue, and Uncertainties Complicate Planning, US Government Accountability Office, May 2014

2. Population Projections for Ontario 2016-2041, Ontario Ministry of Finance, Retrieved from http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/economy/demographics/projections/table10.html 5/18/17

Projected USA Population Growth by Region, 2000-2030 Projected Population in Ontario, 2016-2041

13,500,000

14,000,000

14,500,000

15,000,000

15,500,000

16,000,000

16,500,000

17,000,000

17,500,000

18,000,000

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

1 2

7.6% to 9.5% Projected Growth in the

Great Lakes States

15% to 43% Projected Growth in Ontario

Regional Source Water Risks: Increased Access

1. Approximation Total Population of Municipalities Located Outside of the Basin but inside of Counties that Straddle the Basin (Great Lakes Commission, 2016)

• 2016 decision grants Waukesha access to Great Lakes Water

• 10.1 Million People (>25% of current population utilizing Great Lakes Water) live in municipalities with equivalent geographies

Regional Source Water Risks: Fracking

1. Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas: Impacts from the Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle on Drinking Water Resources in the United States, Office of Research and Development-US EPA (December, 2016)

Quality:• Surface spills during

staging, mixing, and transport

• Compromised well casings

Quantity:• Water usage for a

single fracking well is estimated between .5 million to over 10 million gallons

Question for the Work Group:

Where should we focus our efforts during this Initiative’s pilot phase?Water qualityWater quantityBoth

Regulatory Policy for Source Water Protection

FEDERALUSA CANADA

Safe Drinking Water Act• Enacted in 1974• 1986 amendment creates the

wellhead protection program• 1996 amendment creates

SWAP program

STATE & PROVINCIAL

Canada Water Act• Passed in 1970

• Assessments have been completed for nearly all PWS

• Voluntary implementation of protection plans for surface intakes

Ontario• Clean Water Act (2006) mandates

the assessment of threats to sources of drinking water and the implementation of protection plans

Quebec• 2002 Water Policy• Quebec Water Act (2009) enabled

the creation of 40 watershed organizations that are tasked with creating and implementing integrated watershed management plans

State or ProvinceAgency responsible for

administering Source Water Program(s)

EndorsedSurface

Protection Plans?

Notes on Source Water Protection Plans(or equivalent) and additional resources

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Yes Surface Water Intake Protection Programs (SWIPPs) have been approved for the cities of Grand Haven and Holland

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Yes The OEPA provides lists of Public Systems with OEPA Endorsed SWPPs and Non‐Municipal Systems w/ Approved SWPPs

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

Yes SWPPS have been approved for several municipal agencies in Potter County in relation to the Triple Divide Watershed Coalition which includes the headwaters of the Genesee River

Quebec Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment and the Fight Against Climate Change

Yes The MSDEFACC has subdivided the province into 40 management zones and provides extensive resources regarding source water protection efforts and guidelines for assessment.

Ontario Ministry of the Env. and Climate Change Yes The OMECC has approved 22 SWPPs, the majority of which are located within the Great Lakes Basin

Minnesota Department of Health&Department of Agriculture

No No SWPPs have been approved; however, the MDH has developed Recommendations and Guidance for SWPP Development for interested communities who rely on surface water intakes

New York State Department of Health No No SWPPs have been approved by the NYSDH for surface water intakes within the Great Lakes basin

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources No The WDNR SWPP program is largely focused on wellhead protection, but does provide Recommendations for surface water system source water area delineations that could be used to develop and implement SWPPs

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency No No SWPPs have been approved; however, the IEPA offers a Guide to Developing SWPPs for interested communities who rely on surface water intakes

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

No No SWPPs have been approved; however, IDEM provides resources via their Watershed and Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Planning

Regulatory Policy for Source Water Protection: States & Provinces

Work Group Feedback on the Compendium

• Accurate representation of the state of source water protection in the Great Lakes basin?

• Additional policies & programs from the federal to local level?

• Other programs or initiatives to look into?

• Other people or entities that would make good additions to this collaborative?

Thank You!

Dan GoldSenior Program SpecialistGreat Lakes Commission

[email protected]

Break time…Please enjoy coffee and snacks.

60

Ontario: A Source Protection Program Overview

Heather Malcolmson, Director, Source Protection Programs BranchMinistry of the Environment and Climate Change

May 2017

61

Source Protection Program Context

• After the Walkerton water supply contamination incident in May 2000, Justice Dennis O’Connor lead an inquiry into the incident and more broadly, the safety of Ontario’s drinking water

• Walkerton Inquiry Report made 121 recommendations

• Clean Water Act, 2006 (CWA) came into force July 3rd, 2007; it fulfills 12 of Justice O’Connor’s recommendations

• First Principle - concept of prevention in the safeguarding of our drinking water for our communities and our health.

62

Clean Water Act, 2006

Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002

Multi-barrier Approach – Clean Water Act

Source water protection: the first barrier to protecting drinking water sources from Ontario's lakes, rivers and groundwater.

How the Clean Water Act Applies

• Mandatory for all municipal residential drinking water systemswithin source protection areas/regions.

• This captures approximately 90% of the population in Ontario (i.e. areas of Conservation Authority jurisdiction)

• First Nations drinking water systems may be included through brand council resolution and a special regulation if

• Decision to include other systems (private, non-residential) rests with municipalities.

R. C. Harris Water Treatment Plant, Toronto

63

Regulation 284/07

64

Source Protection: Scope

19 Source Protection Regions and Committees38 Source Protection Areas

65

Key Players

Source Protection Committee (SPC)

• Multi-stakeholder committee, 1/3 municipal representation

• Were responsible for initial terms of reference, (2) assessment report, and (3) source protection plan

• Ongoing role in any revisions of these documents and in review of annual progress on implementation

MunicipalOther:

Environment Health / Public

Agricultural, Commercial /

Industrial / Small Business

Source Protection Authority (Conservation Authority)• Appoints the SPC and provides administrative and technical support to the

Committee • Supports implementation and tracks and reports on progress• Responsible for plan revisions (s.34, 35, 36) and engaging the SPC,

municipalities and others in these revisions

Other Key Players

66

Municipalities

• Participated in the initial development of the terms of reference (ToR), assessment report (AR) and source protection plan (SPP)

• Implementers and enforcers of local measures and actions to address drinking water threats

• Lead implementer for Part IV policies (including enforcement)• Ongoing role in plan updates and ensuring new drinking water systems are included

in plans

Province

• Develop, update and provide guidance on CWA, Regulations and technical rules• Provide funding • Approvals (ToR, AR, SPP and revisions to plans)• Enforcement in unorganized territories• Implement policies including legally binding decisions on prescribed instruments (e.g.

permits, approvals, licences etc.) and other non-legally binding policies (e.g. funding, research, education and outreach etc.)

• Reporting on implementation progress

67

AssessmentReport

Source Protection Plan

• Identify municipal water systems

• Delineate vulnerable areas associated with those systems

• Identifies threat activities that may pose a risk to drinking water

• Develop policies to address drinking water threat activities

• Multiple policy tools available to SPCs, eg. prescribed instrument, specify action , research

Source Protection Committees (SPC)

Implementation

Implementing policies, monitoring, reporting

Source Protection Process 2006-2015

Review and Approval of

SPPs

Implementing Bodies

MOECC

All plans approved

by 2015; all plans in

effect as of July 2016.

68

• 22 source protection plans protect the sources of over 450 municipal drinking water systems across Ontario.

• All source protection plans are now in effect. Implementation of the plans is underway across Ontario.

Source Protection Plan Implementation

Prescribed Drinking Water Threats – Activities(General Regulation 287/07)

The establishment, operation or maintenance of a waste disposal site within the meaning of Part V of the Environmental Protection Act.

The establishment, operation or maintenance of a system that collects, stores, transmits, treats or disposes of sewage.

The application of agricultural source material to land. The storage of agricultural source material. The management of agricultural source material.

The handling and storage of non-agricultural source material.

The application of non agricultural source material to land

The application of commercial fertilizer to land. The handling and storage of commercial fertilizer.

The application of pesticide to land. The handling and storage of pesticide.

The application of road salt. The handling and storage of road salt.

The storage of snow.

The handling and storage of fuel.

The handling and storage of a dense non-aqueous phase liquid.

The handling and storage of an organic solvent

The management of runoff that contains chemicals used in the de-icing of aircraft.

An activity that takes water from an aquifer or a surface water body without returning the water taken to the same aquifer or surface water body.

An activity that reduces the recharge of an aquifer.

The use of land as livestock grazing or pasturing land, an outdoor confinement area or a farm-animal yard

70

Source Protection Plan – Addressing Risks• SPPs contain policies to protect existing and future sources of drinking water

• The source protection plan is the document that sets out how local communities will address each of the threats identified in Assessment Reports and protect their sources of drinking water

• Plans must include policies to address both existing and future threat activities

• Mandatory to include policies to either manage or prohibit significant drinking water threats

• Optional to write policies to manage moderate/low drinking water threats.

• SPCs are also required to write monitoring policies to ensure we track the implementation of each significant drinking water threat policy.

Objective of significant threat policies: Ceases to be / does not become significant (i.e., sufficiently managed)

• Section 57 Prohibition (prohibit)• S. 58 Risk Management Plans (manage)• S. 59 Restricted Land Uses (screening tool only)• Prescribed Instruments (manage or prohibit)• Land Use Planning Approaches (usually only prohibit)• Other (including ‘specified actions’, as per s. 26 p. 1 of

O. Reg. 287/07) (manage or prohibit)• Incentive Programs (manage)• Education and Outreach (manage)

CWAPart IV Powers

Mor

e re

stric

tive

Less

rest

rictiv

e

Source Protection Plan ToolsCommittees first decided desired outcome: manage or prohibit, then chose the specific tool(s) to achieve this

71

Source Protection Plan Policies and Implementing Bodies: An Overview

72

SPP policies are implemented by various bodies including the province, municipalities, conservation authorities, and others such as the federal government departments

In terms of the distribution of implementation responsibilities, the vast majority of the policies are implemented by the province, the RMOs and municipalities

73

Source Protection Changes in Ontario’s Public Sector

• Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: ensuring municipal official plans incorporate provisions that protect municipal drinking water sources from significant land use risks

• Ministry of Government and Consumer Services: implemented changes to the Fuel Oil Code and Liquid Fuel Handling Code to enhance environmental protection.

• MOECC: implementing changes to the environmental compliance approvals (ECAs), spills response program, compliance inspections, etc.

• Ministry of Transportation: installing signs along major highways to raise awareness of drinking water protection zones.

• Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry: proposed amendments to the Aggregates Resources Act to ensure risks to drinking water can be effectively managed

74

Risk Management

Part IV of the CWA provides municipalities with a new authority to regulate threat activities that may pose a significant risk to drinking water by establishing risk management plans with the support of appointed Risk Management Officials and Risk Management Inspectors.

Risk Management Official

Responsible for making decisions about risk management plans and risk assessments.

Risk Management Inspector

Responsible for enforcing Part IV of the CWA.

Over 200 ministry-trained to-date

RMO Forum – to share ideas

Risk management measures catalogue:http://www.trcagauging.ca/RmmCatalogue/

Resources for official / inspectors

75

• Housed on Ontario.ca. (https://www.gisapplication.lrc.gov.on.ca/SourceWaterProtection/Index.html?site=SourceWaterProtection&viewer=SWPViewer&locale=en-US).

• User friendly and interactive with a search results box that provides property details and maps.

• Hyperlinks to partner websites and tools (a one stop shop for source protection).

Source Protection Information Atlas

76

More Information

Website:https://www.ontario.ca/page/source-protection

E-Mail: [email protected]

Implementing Source Protection Plans: The Road Ahead

Chitra Gowda, M.A.Sc. (Env. Eng.)Source Water Protection Lead

Conservation Ontario

Source Water InitiativeMay 2017Ann Arbor

78

The Road Ahead: ImplementationPaving the Road to Success!• Municipalities: about 60% policies

implementation across Ontario: risk management services, education, septic system inspections, etc.

• Province of Ontario: about 30% policies implementation: compliance approvals, permits to take water, monitoring, etc.; municipal implementation funding; provincial scale mapping tool.

• Businesses, farmers, other landowners: best management measures to protect drinking water sources.

• Conservation authorities: continue

79

Implementing Bodies:• Policy Interpretation• Business Process Changes• Risk Management Services

and negotiations• Septic System Inspections• Negative media attention

Landowners:• Understanding

Rights and Responsibilities

• Financial impacts• Community

attention

The Road Ahead: Implementation

Other Legislation/Processes:

• Environmental Assessments

• Permit To Take Water

80

Business Process Changes• New! Land use planning policies for municipal planners• New! Risk Management Official (RMO) offices

established• New! Risk Management Plans negotiated across

Ontario• New! Prohibition in limited areas• New! Orders issued in rare situations• Mandatory annual progress reporting and data retention

• Municipal Salt Management Plan updates


Media and Community Attention• Few negative articles thus far• As we move forward, there could be

more media articles and community responses via social media.

81

A Salt Reduced Diet for Ontario…Ideas: • Salt spreader calibration workshops • Sharing winter maintenance specialist

amongst municipalities• Trucks equipped with advanced

technology to be used in prioritized Salt Vulnerable Areas

• Road Weather Information System (RWIS) partnerships

• Training for private sector contractors to reduce salt applied to parking lots and better salt storage

• Address runoff through parking lot design

• A guidance document for

82

Landowner Rights and Responsibilities• Owners/operators want to know

“why me but not my neighbor?” e.g.: septic tank inspections

• Understanding rights(Environmental Review Tribunal, Risk Assessment, existing regulatory instruments)

• Understanding responsibilities(Risk Management Plans as public documents, existing activities vs. new development)

• Understanding water quantity threats


83

Implementation Solutions and Resources 300+ educational

materials! • Conservation

Authorities • Conservation Ontario • Province of Ontario • Municipalities

Implementation Guides Mapping tools by: Province of Ontario Conservation

Authorities Road Signs Annual Progress Reporting P i i l W ki G

Thank you.

84

Chitra GowdaSource Water Protection LeadConservation OntarioT: 905-895-0716 ext. 225E: [email protected]: www.conservationontario.ca

85

EPA Source Water Protection Program

Karen Wirth, Team LeaderSource Water Protection, Office of Ground Water & Drinking Water

Great Lakes Commission’s Blue Accounting Program Source Water Initiative Kick‐offMay 24, 2017

EPA Structure

86

EPA Office of Water The Office of Water (OW) ensures drinking water is safe, and restores and maintains oceans, watersheds, and their aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support economic and recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat for fish, plants and wildlife.

Among other things, OW is responsible for implementing the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act

87

88

Source Water Protection

Ground Water ‐ SDWA Surface Water ‐ CWA

• Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program

• Sole Source Aquifer Program• Wellhead Protection Program• Source Water Protection Program

• “Point” sources or “non‐point” sources • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

• Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) • Water quality standards • Nonpoint Source Control Program (Section 319)

EPA Source Water Protection

The Source Water Protection Program:

Seeks and facilitates collaboration with partners at all levels

Offers tools and resources to stakeholders

Funds and supports SWP at regional, state, and watershed levels

Facilitates application of Clean Water Act and other U.S. environmental programs

89

Source Water Protection Measures are Diverse & Complex

Agricultural best management practices: manure management, cover crops

Preservation of lands with high watershed service value Storm water runoff reduction: Low impact development, Green infrastructure

Forest and land management Agroforestry Emergency spill preparation/planning Septic system care Water conservation and efficiency Wastewater discharge reduction

90

National PartnershipsLeveraging partner support and resources for source water protection

National Source Water Collaborative Formed 2006 27 National Organizations

Federal Agencies, State Associations, National Associations and NGOs

Goal to combine the strengths and tools of a diverse set of member organizations to protect drinking water sources for generations to come.

Leverage resources, identify synergy, sharing tools and information, creating local Collaboratives

91

Celebrating 10 Years!

www.sourcewatercollaborative.org92

Maintaining the Source Water Collaborative(as outlined in the How‐to Collaborate)

Keeping Partners Motivated and Engaged Actions and Projects (tools, brochures, and outreach) Regularly Scheduled Meetings Presentations at Conferences Webinars and Resource Sharing (Learning Exchange!)

Measure Progress Set Yearly Goals Annual Accomplishments Report

Secure Sustainable Funding EPA’s contract support and “in‐kind” contributions from members.

Engage New Partners (from 13 to 26 in ten years) NACD, NRCS, US Forest Service, plus a few more coming!

93

Call To ActionHow it started

• Collaborative response to MCHM spill in Charleston, WV

• Led by AWWA and Collaborative sub‐group• Officially launched by EPA Administrator McCarthy on Dec. 14, 2014

• What is it? Collection of commitments by members List of specific steps (listed by stakeholder type) to advance SWP

Index of resources to support local SWPwww.sourcewatercollaborative.org

94

95

DWMAPS: Drinking Water Mapping Application to Protect Source Waters

Project Goals: Provide a nationwide online mapping tool for data critical to drinking water source protection.With DWMAPS you can:

• Identify potential sources of contamination

• Find data to support source water assessments

• Prepare utilities for accidental spills and releases

• Promote integration of drinking water protection activities with other environmental program

• Identify watershed stakeholders/partners and projects

96

Project Goal: Provide a nationwide online mapping tool for data critical to drinking water source protection.

• DWMAPS: • Public information• Data viewing and access

• ESRI ArcGIS• Data and map sharing• Free public online ArcGIS account

USGSSDWISFacili

ty Regis

try Service

(FRS)WATERS & ATTAI

NS

Key Data SourcesDWMAPS & ESRI Online Platform

Links DWMAPS: https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection/dwmaps

Esri ArcGIS online: http://www.arcgis.com/home/index.html

Source Water Collaborative: http://sourcewatercollaborative.org/

CWA-SDWA Integration Toolkit:

http://www.gwpc.org/sites/default/files/files/CWA-SDWA_11_10.pdf

Source to Tap: http://sourcewatercollaborative.org/infographic/

EPA Source Water Protection: https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection

97

Day One Wrap‐up

• Have we made progress in building our common understanding of source water protection efforts?

• Please join us in the Habitat lounge for a Networking Hour to continue sharing information & ideas.

• Day Two content will start at 9:00 a.m.

Good morning!We will begin at 9:00 a.m.

Day Two… welcome back

Our objective today:

1. Discuss identified risks*

2. Rank them in order of importance

3. Shape priority risks into recommended goals for Great Lakes source water

Risks, key issues, and worries

• Law & Policy• Contaminants• Planning• Public Outreach

• Climate change• Urbanization• Binational consistency• Allocation of limited funds• Effective enforcement when spills

occur

• Mechanism (and ratios) of groundwater and surface water contributions

• Emerging contaminants, including pathogens (aka “unknown unknowns”)

• Legacy contaminants in sediment• Nitrates (in groundwater)

• Lack of funding/uncertainty for existing funding

• Deregulation• Anti-science mentality• Duplicative or conflicting policies among

wastewater and drinking water regulations

• Nutrients/cyanobacteria/algal blooms• Ag chemicals (including lawn care)• Spills (transport, pipelines, shipping,

industrial)• Disinfection byproducts (increased

organic matter arising from nutrient pollution)

• Lack of comprehensive source water quality assessment

• Inconsistent use of forecast models predicting source water impairments & informing water treatment

• Lack of plans and cycles for updates at local, state, and/or regional scales

• Erratic water quality and responding to changes while treating water

• One-size-fits-all approaches may be infeasible

• Notification of industrial spills• Meeting customer demand under

emergency conditions

PublicOutreach

Planning

Contaminants

Law & Policy

• Awareness of well owners of testing resources & risks (Ex. arsenic, bacteria, or introduced contaminant)

• Lack of public trust in ability of municipalities to maintain water quality to a suitable degree for recreation and drinking water

Risk Ranking Exercise… and coffee break

• Climate change• Urbanization• Binational consistency• Allocation of limited funds• Effective enforcement when spills

occur

• Mechanism (and ratios) of groundwater and surface water contributions

• Emerging contaminants, including pathogens (aka “unknown unknowns”)

• Legacy contaminants in sediment• Nitrates (in groundwater)

• Lack of funding/uncertainty for existing funding

• Deregulation• Anti-science mentality• Duplicative or conflicting policies among

wastewater and drinking water regulations

• Nutrients/cyanobacteria/algal blooms• Ag chemicals (including lawn care)• Spills (transport, pipelines, shipping,

industrial)• Disinfection byproducts (increased

organic matter arising from nutrient pollution)

• Lack of comprehensive source water quality assessment

• Inconsistent use of forecast models predicting source water impairments & informing water treatment

• Lack of plans and cycles for updates at local, state, and/or regional scales

• Erratic water quality and responding to changes while treating water

• One-size-fits-all approaches may be infeasible

• Notification of industrial spills• Meeting customer demand under

emergency conditions

PublicOutreach

Planning

Contaminants

Law & Policy

• Awareness of well owners of testing resources & risks (Ex. arsenic, bacteria, or introduced contaminant)

• Lack of public trust in ability of municipalities to maintain water quality to a suitable degree for recreation and drinking water

Switch to second slide deck of goals

master deck 052317€¦ · water resources compact (2008) great lakes water quality agreement...

Documents