Santa Margarita River WQIP

Consultation Committee Meeting

October 17, 2017

1

Welcome and Introductions

2

City of Menifee

City of Murrieta

City of Temecula

City of Wildomar

County of Riverside

County of San Diego

Riverside County Flood

Control

Responsible Agencies

Welcome and IntroductionsConsultation Committee MembersRequired Members

• Erica Ryan, San Diego RWQCB

• Terri Biancardi, Environmental Community

• Clint Lorimore/Mark Grey, Development Community

At Large Members

• Ben Drake/Robert Renzoni, Temecula Winegrowers Association

• Andy Domenigoni, Riverside County Farm Bureau

• Kyle Cook, Camp Pendleton Marine Base

• Pablo Bryant, Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve

• Laurie Correa, Regional Conservation Authority

• Rick Neugebauer, Temecula, Elsinore, Anza, Murrieta (TEAM-RCD)

3

Purpose & StructureDave Ceppos, Associate Director

Center for Collaborative Policy

4

Process and Purpose

Provide transparency

Receive recommendations

Answer questions

Build working relationships

5

Consultation Committee

Review draft submittals of WQIP

Provide written recommendations and comments

Represent service area category & expertise

All recommendations will be considered

6

Meeting Guidelines

Listen to understand

Everyone’s perspective is valued

Everyone has an equal opportunity to participate

Keep the conversation focused

7

Meeting Objectives

WQIP Process Overview and Update

B2/B3 Comments

Watershed Management Area Analysis (WMAA) Updates

Monitoring and Assessment Program

Questions/Discussion

8

Water Quality Improvement Plan Overview

Stuart McKibbin

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

9

Santa Margarita RiverWatershed Management Area

10

Water Quality Improvement PlansFocus planning & future implementation

on watershed priority conditions

Establish numeric goals, strategies & schedules

Incorporate monitoring, assessment & adaptive management programs

11

Watershed Planning - Overview

2 year development process

Public participation requirement

Collaborative process

Consultation Committee

Mandated interim deliverables

Phased approach

12

Watershed Planning

13

Phase I

• Water Quality Assessment

• Prioritization

• Sources

• Potential Strategies

Phase II

• Goals

• Strategies

• Schedules

• Sources

• WMAA

Phase III

• Monitoring

• Assessment

• Adaptive Management

Progress to Date

14

B2

• Prioritization, Potential Strategies

• Consultation Committee – September 2016

• Revisions and Draft Submittal to Regional Board – Jan 2017

• Regional Board Comments – March 30 and October 11, 2017

B3

• Goals, Strategies, Schedules

• Consultation Committee – May 2017

• B2 Revisions and Draft B3 Submittal to Regional Board – July 7, 2017

• Regional Board Comments – October 11, 2017

WQIP

• Monitoring and Assessment

• Adaptive Management

• Consultation Committee – TODAY

WQIP –Overview of Elements

Water Quality Improvement Plans include:

Priority Water Quality Conditions

Goals and Schedules

Strategies and Schedules

Monitoring

Assessment

15

Today’s Focus

B2/B3 Comments from Regional Water Board

Received October 11, 2017Richard Boon

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

16

General Comments

• Format and Terminology – improve readability

• Technical Studies – incorporate additional studies

• Agriculture Lands – include control strategy

17

B2 CommentsPriority Water Quality Conditions

• HPWQC – need better linkage to sources

• Geographic Extent – consideration of intermittent streams

• RFCWCD Areas and Activities

18

B3 CommentsGoals, Strategies, Schedules

• Goals – attaining numeric goals is uncertain

• Strategies – agricultural land

• WMAA – need for further evaluation

19

Questions?

20

Watershed Management Area Analysis Update

Stuart McKibbin

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

21

Background

• New Development Projects

• Stormwater quality retention requirements

• Hydromodification requirements (Larger BMPs)

An Alternative Compliance Option is available

42

Watershed Management Area Analysis

• How data will be used

• Land Use – Evaluate potential impacts resulting from land development

• Hydrologic Processes – Identify opportunities for enhanced infiltration

• Streams and Channels – Assess stream stability

• Coarse sediment areas – Identify areas of sediment supply which contributes to stream stability

23

Watershed Management Area Analysis

48

Hydromodification Management

Reaches selected for exemption analysis

Exempt in June 2013 Santa Margarita Region Hydromodification Management Plan

River Downstream Limit Upstream Limit

Santa Margarita River Outfall to Pacific OceanAt Origin: Confluence with Temecula

Creek and Murrieta Creek

Temecula CreekConfluence with Santa

Margarita RiverOutflow of Vail Lake

Murrieta CreekConfluence with Santa

Margarita River850 feet upstream of Hawthorn Street

61

Exemption Analysis: Results

River Ep Sp Recommendation

Santa Margarita River 1.03 0.83 Analysis supports Exemption

Temecula Creek Analysis In Progress

Murrieta Creek Analysis In Progress

64

Questions?

27

Introduction to Monitoring and Assessment

Paul Hartman

Larry Walker Associates

28

Monitoring and Assessment Program Purpose

29

• Support assessment of:

• Progress toward numeric goals and schedules

• Progress addressing eutrophication and nutrient loading

• Each Copermittee’s overall efforts to implement the WQIP

Monitoring OverviewReceiving Waters

30

Monitoring OverviewMS4 Outfalls

31

MS4 Outfall Dry Weather Monitoring

32

Monitoring (5 sites)

Field Screening

Target Areas

Monitoring OverviewSpecial Studies

33

Assessment Overview

34

Receiving Waters

• Condition Assessments

• Status and Trends

Storm Drain Outfalls

• Pollutant Reduction

• Strategy Assessments

Special Studies

• Receiving Waters

• Sources/Strategies

BREAK

35

Provision B. 4Monitoring and Assessment Program (MAP)

Paul Hartman

Larry Walker Associates

36

Receiving Water Monitoring Provision D.1

37

Receiving Water

Monitoring

Long Term Monitoring

Stations

Regional

Sediment Quality

Objectives

Long Term Monitoring Stations

What is necessary?• Minimum of one station

• Representative of Receiving Water Conditions

What is the purpose?• Status and Trends – short/long term

improvements

• Progress to Goals

• Are strategies working?

• Are Beneficial Uses Protected?

34

39

Long Term Monitoring StationsDry Weather

• 3 Events

• Chemistry, Toxicity

Wet Weather

• 3 Events

• Chemistry, Toxicity

Bioassessment

• Benthic Macroinvertebrates

• Benthic Algae

Hydromodification

• Bed and Bank Condition

36

Regional Receiving Water Monitoring

Stormwater Monitoring Coalition• Long Term, Well Established Program

• Bioassessment Focused

• Reference Conditions

Southern California Bight Program• Every 5 Years

• Multiple Stakeholders and Interests

• Marine, Estuarine, Watersheds 37

Sediment Quality Monitoring

Sediment Quality in Estuaries• Condition Assessments

– multiple sites

• Triad Approach

Chemistry

Benthic Ecology

ToxicityUnimpacted

Likely Unimpacted

Possibly Impacted

Likely Impacted

Clearly Impacted

Inconclusive

38

Receiving Water Monitoring Question and Relationship to SMR Goals (example)

39

Monitoring Question:

What are the Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus loadings in the SMR at the base of the Upper Watershed? How are they changing over time?

Goal:

Reduce dry weather loads in receiving waters by 10%.

Questions?

44

MS4 Outfall MonitoringProvision D.2

MS4 Outfall

Monitoring

Dry Weather Field Screening

Non-Stormwater

Persistent Flow Monitoring

Wet Weather Monitoring

41

Dry Weather Field Screening

What is necessary?• Inspect 80% of Major Outfalls• 2x/Year• Visual Observations focused on FLOW

What is the purpose?• Source identification and elimination

• Prioritization of outfalls – persistent flow

• Calculate/estimate non-storm water volumes and pollutant loads

• Identify reductions in non-storm water flows and illicit

• Evaluate strategies

42

Dry Weather Field Screening Monitoring Approach

47

CopermitteeMajor Outfalls

(Total)80% of Total

Visual Inspections Per

Year

RCFCWCD 83 67 134

County of Riverside 6 5 10

Menifee 0 0 0

Murrieta 39 32 64

Temecula 117 94 188

Wildomar 13 11 22

County of San Diego 13 10 20

Total 271 219 438

Non-stormwater Persistent Flow MonitoringWhat is necessary?• Monitor top 5 sites (per jurisdiction)• 2x/Year• Visual Observations + Chemistry

What is the purpose?• Source identification and elimination• Calculate/estimate non-storm water volumes and

pollutant loads• Identify reductions in non-storm water flows and

illicit• Evaluate strategies

44

Non-stormwater Persistent Flow Monitoring Approach

49

• Persistent Flow

• Contribute to HPWQC

• Sources

• Target Areas

Prioritize

• Elimination

• Not a source of pollutants

• Authorized

Monitor• Eliminate one

• Select next highest

Reprioritize

Non-stormwater Persistent Flow Monitoring Example

46

Wet Weather Outfall Monitoring

What is necessary?• 5 Sites per WMA• 1 Site per Permittee• 1 Storm Event per Year – HPWQC, Impairments

What is the purpose?• Calculate/estimate stormwater volumes and

pollutant loads and changes over time

• Validate WQIP assumptions (e.g., land use estimates)

• Evaluate strategies

47

52

MS4 Outfall Monitoring Questions and Relationship to SMR Goals

29

Goal (examples) Monitoring Question D

ryW

eat

he

r Fi

eld

Sc

ree

nin

g

No

n-s

torm

wat

er

Pe

rsis

ten

t Fl

ow

M

on

ito

rin

g

10% Reduction in Non-stormwaterFlow

How much NSW flow is being discharged by each Copermittee (as compared to the baseline)?

10% Reduction in Dry Weather Loading

How much has TN and TP loadingbeen reduced at Copermitteeoutfalls?

X X

X

Questions?

54

Special StudiesProvision D.3

What is necessary?• 2 Studies per WMA

• 1 Regional Study (can substitute for WMA study)

What is the purpose?• Relate to the HPWQC

• Identify sources of pollutants and/or stressors 51

Special Studies

56

Special Studies

Nutrient Initiative Studies

Regional Reference Streams

Special Studies Monitoring Question and Relationship to SMR Goals (example)

53

Monitoring Question:

Are there sources of pollutants causing exceedances of targets that are outside of Copermittee control?

If an Estuary related Goal is not met (e.g., interim targets for eutrophic indicators):

Rainbow CreekTotal Maximum Daily Load for Total Nitrogen and Total PhosphorusAttachment E

• Incorporate the Sampling and Analysis Plan for Rainbow Creek

• Perform monitoring to demonstrate progress towards TMDL compliance targets

58

Questions?

59

Adaptive Management Approach

60

Questions?

61

Closing Comments, Discussion, Next Steps

Dave Ceppos, Associate Director

Center for Collaborative Policy

62

Next Steps

Comments and Feedback on Today’s Material

WMAA Updates

Monitoring and Assessment

Final Draft WQIP

Submittal to Regional Board January 5, 2018 63

Questions?

64

Comments/Feedback

To Darcy Kuenzi, Government Affairs Officer

Riverside County Flood Control and

Water Conservation District

1995 Market Street

Riverside, CA 92501

DarcyK@rcflood.org

65