Proposed

TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL)

For

Nutrients In Escambia Bay

WBID 548A

Prepared by:

US EPA Region 4 61 Forsyth Street SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303

September 2007

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Acknowledgments EPA would like to acknowledge that the contents of this report and the total maximum daily load (TMDL) contained herein were developed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Many of the text and figures may not read as though EPA is the primary author for this reason, but EPA is officially proposing the TMDL for fecal coliform for Bayou Chico and soliciting comment. EPA is proposing this TMDL in order to meet consent decree requirements pursuant to the Consent Decree entered in the case of Florida Wildlife Federation, et al. v. Carol Browner, et al., Case No. 98-356-CIV-Stafford. EPA will accept comments on this proposed TMDL for 60 days in accordance with the public notice issued on September 30, 2007. Should EPA be unable to approve a TMDL established by FDEP for the 303(d) listed impairment addressed by this report, EPA will establish this TMDL in lieu of FDEP, after full review of public comment.

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Contents 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT...... 1 1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF WATERBODY ...... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND...... 7 2 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY PROBLEM...... 8 2.1 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND RULE-MAKING HISTORY...... 8 2.2 INFORMATION ON VERIFIED IMPAIRMENT...... 8 3 DESCRIPTION OF APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND TARGETS ...... 11 3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF THE WATERBODY AND CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE TMDL ...... 11 4 ASSESSMENT OF SOURCES...... 12 4.1 TYPES OF SOURCES ...... 12 4.1.1 Potential Sources of Nutrients in the Pensacola Bay Basin and Escambia Bay Watershed...... 12 4.1.2 Land Uses and Nonpoint Sources...... 18 4.1.3 Population Density ...... 22 4.1.4 Nonpoint Source Runoff...... 24 4.1.5 Sediment Nutrient Release...... 31 4.1.6 Denitrification...... 31 4.1.7 Maintenance Dredging ...... 31 4.1.8 Tidal Prism Inputs ...... 31 4.1.9 Storm Surge ...... 32 4.1.10 Spills...... 32 4.2 SOURCE SUMMARY...... 32 4.2.1 Summary of the Nutrient Loadings into Escambia Bay from the Various Sources...... 32 5 DETERMINATION OF ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY...... 37 5.1 DETERMINATION OF LOADING CAPACITY...... 37 5.1.1 Data Used in the Determination of the TMDL ...... 37 5.1.2 Temporal Trends...... 39 5.1.3 Spatial Trends...... 39 5.2 TMDL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ...... 45 5.2.1 Develop reference bay nutrient concentrations ...... 46 5.3 CRITICAL CONDITIONS/SEASONALITY ...... 48 6 DETERMINATION OF THE TMDL...... 49 6.1 EXPRESSION AND ALLOCATION OF THE TMDL ...... 49 6.1.1 Load Allocation (LA) ...... 50 6.1.2 Wasteload Allocation (WLA) ...... 50 6.1.3 NPDES Wastewater Discharges...... 50 6.2 MARGIN OF SAFETY (MOS)...... 51 7 NEXT STEPS: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND BEYOND ...... 52 7.1 BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN ...... 52 8 REFERENCES...... 53

APPENDIX A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FEDERAL AND STATE STORMWATER PROGRAMS-NPDES MS4 DATA ...... 60

APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF LAND USE LOADS AND TRENDS BY CATEGORY...... 65

2

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF PERMITTED POINT SOURCE LOADS...... 75

APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF MEASURED USGS LOADS AND DECAY RATES ...... 78

APPENDIX E: SUMMARY OF ESCAMBIA RIVER WATER QUALITY SPATIAL TREND DATA....106

APPENDIX F: SUMMARY OF ESCAMBIA RIVER WATER QUALITY TIME TREND DATA ...... 109

APPENDIX G: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF ESCAMBIA BAY TREND DATA ...... 112

APPENDIX H: USGS GAGE AND FLOW DATA...... 115

APPENDIX I: GROUND WATER DATA IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN ...... 120

APPENDIX J: MODELING STUDIES IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN...... 126

List of Tables TABLE 2-1 VERIFIED IMPAIRED SEGMENTS IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN ...... 8 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF CHL A DATA FOR 548A ...... 9 TABLE 2-3 SUMMARY OF CHL A DATA FOR 548A ...... 10 TABLE 4-1 POINT SOURCES IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN ...... 13 TABLE 4-2 CLASSIFICATION OF LAND USE CATEGORIES IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN...... 18 TABLE 4-3 SUMMARY OF TN LOADS TO ESCAMBIA RIVER AND BAY, 1974-2006 ...... 32 TABLE 4-4 SUMMARY OF TP LOADS TO ESCAMBIA RIVER AND BAY, 1974-2006 ...... 34 TABLE 5-1 ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SAMPLING WBID 548A, 10C, & 10D...... 43 TABLE 5-2 STATISTICAL TABLE OF OBSERVED HISTORICAL DATA FOR ESCAMBIA BAY WBID 548A ...... 43 TABLE 6-1 TMDL COMPONENTS FOR THE ESCAMBIA BAY N WATERSHED...... 50 TABLE 6-2 MAXIMUM TOTAL NITROGEN AND TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING FROM PERMITTED FACILITIES... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

List of Figures FIGURE 1-1 PENSACOLA BASIN IN ALABAMA AND FLORIDA, AND MAJOR GEOPOLITICAL FEATURES-COUNTIES...... 2 FIGURE 1-2 PENSACOLA BASIN IN ALABAMA AND FLORIDA, AND MAJOR GEOPOLITICAL FEATURES-TRIBUTARIES .....3 FIGURE 1-3 ESCAMBIA BAY WATERSHED, AND MAJOR GEOPOLITICAL FEATURES...... 4 FIGURE 1-4 WBIDS IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN, INCLUDING ESCAMBIA RIVER...... 5 FIGURE 1-5 WBIDS IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN, INCLUDING ESCAMBIA BAY...... 6 FIGURE 4-1 WASTEWATER FACILITIES IN THE PENSACOLA BAY BASIN ...... 16 FIGURE 4-2 WASTEWATER FACILITIES IN THE ESCAMBIA BAY WATERSHED ...... 17 FIGURE 4-3 PRINCIPAL LAND USES IN THE PENSACOLA BASIN ...... 20 FIGURE 4-4 PRINCIPAL LAND USES IN THE ESCAMBIA BAY WATERSHED ...... 21 FIGURE 4-5 POPULATION DENSITY IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA ...... 23 FIGURE 4-6 POPULATION DENSITY IN SANTA ROSA COUNTY, FLORIDA...... 23 FIGURE 5-1 MONITORING SITES IN ESCAMBIA BAY N (WBID 548A) ...... 40 FIGURE 5-2 MONITORING SITES IN ESCAMBIA RIVER (WBID 10C) ...... 41 FIGURE 5-3 MONITORING SITES IN ESCAMBIA RIVER (WBID 10D)...... 42 FIGURE 5-4 CHART OF HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS FOR CHL A FOR ESCAMBIA BAY N WATERSHED, 548A...... 44 FIGURE 5-5 CHART OF HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS FOR TN FOR ESCAMBIA BAY N WATERSHED, 548A ...... 45 FIGURE 5-6 CHART OF HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS FOR TP FOR ESCAMBIA BAY N WATERSHED, 548A...... 45

3

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

1 Purpose of Report

This report is a proposed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for nutrients for the Escambia Bay watershed in the Pensacola Bay Basin. Upper Escambia Bay (North) was verified as impaired for chlorophyll a (chl a) and historical chlorophyll a and was included on the Verified List of impaired waters for the Pensacola Basin that was adopted by Secretarial Order in June, 2005. The TMDL establishes the allowable loadings to the Escambia Bay that would restore the waterbody so that it meets historical chlorophyll a concentration of 7.5 µg/l .

1.1 Identification of Waterbody

The Escambia Bay watershed is located in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida with a 4223 square-mile (mi2) drainage area reaching into Alabama (Figure 1-1). The Escambia River (Conecuh River in Alabama) is about 240 miles long (Thorpe, 1997). Within Florida, the Escambia River from the state line to the mouth in Escambia Bay is about 57.9 miles long (ACOE, 1985). Major centers of population within the basin include Troy, Luverne, Greenville, Evergreen, Andalusia, and Brewton, Alabama and Century, Pensacola, Milton, and Crestview, Florida. The Escambia River is a fifth-order river fed by the sand and gravel aquifer. Additional information about the river’s hydrology and geology are available in the Basin Status Report for the Pensacola Basin (Florida Department of Environmental Protection [FDEP], 2006).

For assessment purposes, the Department has divided the Pensacola Bay Basin into water assessment polygons with a unique waterbody identification (WBID) number for each watershed or stream reach. The Pensacola Bay Basin has been divided into numerous segments, as shown in Figure 1-2, and this TMDL addresses primarily the Escambia Bay Watershed WBID 548A. However, Escambia River WBIDs (10A-10F), tributary WBIDs along the Escambia River, lower Escambia Bay (WBID 548B), Blackwater Bay, East Bay, and Pensacola Bay proper can all contribute loading on an incoming tide and will be addressed in the analysis.

1

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 1-1 Pensacola Basin in Alabama and Florida, and Major Geopolitical Features-Counties

2

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 1-2 Pensacola Basin in Alabama and Florida, and Major Geopolitical Features-Tributaries

3

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 1-3 Escambia Bay Watershed, and Major Geopolitical Features

4

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 1-4 WBIDs in the Pensacola Basin, Including Escambia River

5

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 1-5 WBIDs in the Pensacola Basin, Including Escambia Bay

6

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

1.2 Background

This report was developed as part of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (Department) watershed management approach for restoring and protecting state waters and addressing TMDL Program requirements. The watershed approach, which is implemented using a cyclical management process that rotates through the state’s fifty-two river basins over a five- year cycle, provides a framework for implementing the TMDL Program–related requirements of the 1972 federal Clean Water Act and the 1999 Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA, Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida).

A TMDL represents the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate and still meet water quality standards, including its applicable water quality criteria and its designated uses. TMDLs are developed for waterbodies that are verified as not meeting their water quality standards. TMDLs provide important water quality restoration goals that will guide restoration activities.

This TMDL Report will be followed by the development and implementation of a Basin Management Action Plan, or BMAP, to reduce the amount of nutrients that caused the verified impairment of Escambia Bay. These activities will depend heavily on the active participation of the Northwest Florida Water Management District, local governments, businesses, and other stakeholders. The Department will work with these organizations and individuals to undertake or continue reductions in the discharge of pollutants and achieve the established TMDLs for impaired waterbodies.

7

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

2 Description of Water Quality Problem

2.1 Statutory Requirements and Rule-Making History

Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act requires states to submit to the EPA a list of surface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards (impaired waters) and establish a TMDL for each pollutant causing impairment of listed waters on a schedule. The Department has developed such lists, commonly referred to as 303(d) lists, since 1992. The list of impaired waters in each basin, referred to as the Verified List, is also required by the FWRA (Subsection 403.067[4)] Florida Statutes [F.S.])., and the state’s 303(d) list is amended annually to include basin updates.

Florida’s 1998 303(d) list included (19) waterbodies in the Pensacola Basin. However, the FWRA (Section 403.067, F.S.) stated that all previous Florida 303(d) lists were for planning purposes only and directed the Department to develop, and adopt by rule, a new science-based methodology to identify impaired waters. After a long rulemaking process, the Environmental Regulation Commission adopted the new methodology as Chapter 62-303, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) (Identification of Impaired Surface Waters Rule, or IWR), in April 2001.

2.2 Information on Verified Impairment

The Department used the IWR to assess water quality impairments in the Pensacola Basin and has verified the impairments listed in Table 2-1. Table 2-2 provides assessment results for chl a for the verification period for each waterbody segment. Table 2-1 Verified Impaired Segments in the Pensacola Basin Projected Year for Parameters Identified Priority for TMDL WBID Waterbody Segment TMDL Using the IWR Development Development 676 CARPENTER CREEK Fecal Coliform Low 2011 738 TEXAR BAYOU Fecal Coliform Low 2011 846 BAYOU CHICO Fecal Coliform High 2006 Fecal Coliform (Shellfish 915 SANTA ROSA SOUND Medium 2012 Harvesting) Nutrients (Historic 548A ESCAMBIA BAY (N) High 2006 Chlorophyll) 548AB FLORIDATOWN PARK Nutrients (Chlorophyll) Medium 2012 548BB BAY BLUFFS PARK Bacteria Medium 2012 548FB NAVY POINT Bacteria and Fecal Coliform Medium 2012 Nutrients (Historic 548H EAST BAY Medium 2012 Chlorophyll) 738AB BAYVIEW PARK PIER Bacteria and Fecal Coliform Medium 2012 846A JONES CREEK Fecal Coliform Low 2011 Dissolved Oxygen, and Fecal 846B JACKSON CREEK Low 2011 Coliform Bacteria, Nutrients 846CB BAYOU CHICO BEACH (Chlorophyll), and Fecal Medium 2012 Coliform 848DA SANDERS BEACH Bacteria and Fecal Coliform Medium 2012 915A WOODLAWN BEACH Bacteria Medium 2012 915B NAVARRE PARK HWY 98 Bacteria Medium 2012 915C LIZA JACKSON PARK Bacteria Medium 2012 915D MARLER PARK Bacteria Medium 2012 8999 GULF COAST Mercury (in fish tissue) Low 2011

8

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Note: The parameters listed in Table 2-1 provide a complete picture of the impairment in the river, but this TMDL only addresses non-nutrient impairment.

Table 2-2 Summary of Chl a Data for 548A Annual WBID Year Parameter Average 548A 1998 CHLAC (UG/L) 8.9143 548A 1999 CHLAC (UG/L) 10.4895 548A 2000 CHLAC (UG/L) 6.6899 548A 2001 CHLAC (UG/L) 9.3046 548A 2002 CHLAC (UG/L) 11.2433 548A 2003 CHLAC (UG/L) 9.1511 548A 2004 CHLAC (UG/L) 9.5000 548A 2005 CHLAC (UG/L) 9.4608 548A 2006 CHLAC (UG/L) 7.3637 548A 1976 CHLA (UG/L) 2.1700 548A 1977 CHLA (UG/L) 3.0186 548A 1978 CHLA (UG/L) 6.3625 548A 1979 CHLA (UG/L) 5.4833 548A 1980 CHLA (UG/L) 11.5429 548A 1981 CHLA (UG/L) 8.0940 548A 1982 CHLA (UG/L) 9.5280 548A 1983 CHLA (UG/L) 8.6429 548A 1984 CHLA (UG/L) 9.9500 548A 1985 CHLA (UG/L) 7.4600 548A 1986 CHLA (UG/L) 6.5833 548A 1987 CHLA (UG/L) 17.6450 548A 1988 CHLA (UG/L) 8.4167 548A 1989 CHLA (UG/L) 8.0857 548A 1990 CHLA (UG/L) 23.0143 548A 1991 CHLA (UG/L) 10.0600 548A 1992 CHLA (UG/L) 8.5600 548A 1993 CHLA (UG/L) 14.9250 548A 1994 CHLA (UG/L) 8.3000 548A 1997 CHLA (UG/L) 5.0000 548A 1998 CHLA (UG/L) 12.1657 548A 1999 CHLA (UG/L) 11.3663 548A 2000 CHLA (UG/L) 7.5461 548A 2001 CHLA (UG/L) 9.8231 548A 2002 CHLA (UG/L) 12.0192 548A 2003 CHLA (UG/L) 14.3192 548A 2004 CHLA (UG/L) 10.6262 548A 2005 CHLA (UG/L) 10.2473 548A 2006 CHLA (UG/L) 7.9854

9

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Table 2-3 Summary of Chl a Data for 548A

Percent Total CHLA Number of samples Minimum Maximum Parameter Samples > 11 Concentration Concentration Wbid Name (1976-2006) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) 548A CHLAC (UG/L) 338 22 1 40.1 548A CHLA (UG/L) 414 19 1 135.2

10

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

3 Description of Applicable Water Quality Standards and Targets

3.1 Classification of the Waterbody and Criteria Applicable to the TMDL Florida’s surface waters are protected for five designated use classifications, as follows:

Class I Potable water supplies Class II Shellfish propagation or harvesting Class III Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well- balanced population of fish and wildlife Class IV Agricultural water supplies Class V Navigation, utility, and industrial use (there are no state waters currently in this class) Escambia Bay North (WBID 548A) is a Class III marine waterbody (with a designated use of recreation, propagation and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife) from the mouth of the Escambia River to the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Trestle. The remainder of Escambia Bay North is Class II (with a designated use of shellfish propagation or harvesting. The Class II and III water quality criteria applicable to the impairment addressed by this TMDL is chl a.

3.2 Applicable Water Quality Standards and Numeric Water Quality Target

Numeric criteria for nutrients such as Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorus (TP) are not explicitly stated in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C. However, Rule 62-3-3.303 (Nutrients in Estuaries) states that “segments shall be included on the planning list for nutrients if their annual mean chl a for any year is greater than 11 ug/l or if data indicate annual mean chl a values have increased by more than 50% over historical values for at least two consecutive years”. The TMDL goal is to determine the appropriate combination of TN and TP concentrations for Escambia Bay to meet the chl a criterion. For the purpose of developing this TMDL the appropriate chl a end point where there is not an imbalanced system is an annual average chl a concentration of 7.5 µg/l (historical condition). The TN and TP concentrations are functions of the loading received from a variety of sources surrounding the bay as described in the next chapter. While the loadings are important, the in bay physical, chemical, and biological processes play an important role and will be described in following chapters.

11

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

4 Assessment of Sources

4.1 Types of Sources

An important part of the TMDL analysis is the identification of pollutant source categories, source subcategories, or individual sources of nutrients in the watershed and the amount of pollutant loading contributed by each of these sources. Sources are broadly classified as either “point sources” or “nonpoint sources.” Historically, the term point sources has meant discharges to surface waters that typically have a continuous flow via a discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance, such as a pipe. Domestic and industrial wastewater treatment facilities (WWTFs) are examples of traditional point sources. In contrast, the term “nonpoint sources” was used to describe intermittent, rainfall driven, diffuse sources of pollution associated with everyday human activities, including runoff from urban land uses, agriculture, silviculture, and mining; discharges from failing septic systems; and atmospheric deposition.

However, the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act redefined certain nonpoint sources of pollution as point sources subject to regulation under the EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Program (NPDES). These nonpoint sources included certain urban stormwater discharges, including those from local government master drainage systems, construction sites over five acres, and a wide variety of industries (see Appendix A for background information on the federal and state stormwater programs).

To be consistent with Clean Water Act definitions, the term “point source” will be used to describe traditional point sources (such as domestic and industrial wastewater discharges) and stormwater systems requiring an NPDES stormwater permit when allocating pollutant load reductions required by a TMDL (see Section 6.1). However, the methodologies used to estimate nonpoint source loads do not distinguish between NPDES stormwater discharges and non- NPDES stormwater discharges, and as such, this source assessment section does not make any distinction between the two types of stormwater.

4.1.1 Potential Sources of Nutrients in the Pensacola Bay Basin and Escambia Bay Watershed

4.1.1.1 Point Sources

In Florida, there are currently eight permitted wastewater treatment facilities that discharge nutrient loads either directly or indirectly into the Escambia River or Bay, consisting of three domestic wastewater facilities and five industrial wastewater facilities (Table 4-1). These facilities are permitted through the NPDES Program in Florida. Several treatment plants have become inactive and are now connected to other domestic Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP). However, when examining the long term trends of the Escambia Bay system, we have included (where possible) the loads from these facilities.

Within Alabama, there are currently 8 domestic and 3 industrial facilities discharging to the Conecuh/Escambia River or tributaries. We are primarily concerned with those facilities just upstream of the Alabama-Florida border in Brewton, AL. These include: Brewton WWTP, East Brewton WWTP, and JSC/CCA pulp mill.

12

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

The current and historical facilities permit data were obtained from WAFR and PCS databases (Table 4-1, Figure 4-1 Wastewater Facilities in the Pensacola Bay Basin). For each year, monthly averages were obtained and then summed to give annual flows and loads. Not all the facilities included nutrient monitoring or nutrient limits in their current permit. We have used FDEP bioassessment data to supplement the nutrient permit data. A brief description of the treatment processes at each facility is included in the bioassessments, DACS SEAS reports (Knight, 2003), and FDEP files. A summary of all the facilities discharging to the Pensacola Basin is included as Appendix C. Table 4-1 Point Sources in the Pensacola Basin

Design Permit Type of Facility Capacity Number Facility Name City Facility Status (mgd) Watershed WBID

Industrial AL0000779 T.R. Miller Brewton Waste Active - - - Industrial AL0002682 Jefferson Smurfit Brewton Waste - - - - Domestic AL0020532 Greenville WTP Greenville Waste - 1.534 - - Domestic AL0022608 East Brewton WTP Brewton Waste - 0.188 - - Domestic AL0022641 Brantley WTP Brantley Waste - 0.057 - - Domestic AL0023825 Brewton WTP Brewton Waste - 1.228 - - Fort Domestic AL0024155 Fort Deposit WTP Deposit Waste - 0.19 - - Domestic AL0032310 Troy WTP Troy Waste - - - - Domestic AL0047503 Evergreen Lagoon Evergreen Waste - 0.975 - - Domestic AL0060534 Luverne WTP Luverne Waste - 0.434 - - ALSI9937786 Andalusia Birmingham UIC - 1.555 - - Gulf Power Company - Crist Industrial FL0002275 Power Plant Pensacola Waste Active 300 Scenic Hills 10F Industrial FL0002313 Air Products & Chemicals Inc. Pace Waste Active 1.5 Judges Bayou 493 Solutia (Monsato Chemical Industrial Spanish Mill FL0002488 Company) Pensacola Waste Active 23 Creek 475

US Naval Air Station (Pensacola Domestic FL0002500 Naval Air Station (NAS)) Pensacola Waste Active 2.35 Bayou Grande 740 Domestic FL0002569 NAS Whiting Field WWTP Milton Waste -

Sterling Fibers, Inc. (American Industrial FL0002593 Cyanamid Company) Pace Waste Active 5.5 Judges Bayou 493 Hurlburt Domestic FL0003174 Hurlburt Field Air Force Base Field Waste Active 1 East River Bay 701 Main Street A W W T Domestic FL0021440 STP(ECUA) Pensacola Waste Active 20 Bayou Grande 740 Domestic FL0021903 City of Milton WWTF Milton Waste Active 2.5

13

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Not FL0023833 University Of West Florida Pensacola MS2 Active - Navarre Domestic Direct Runoff to FL0023981 Navarre Beach STP Beach Waste Active 0.9 Bay 925 Pensacola Domestic Direct Runoff to FL0024007 Pensacola Beach WWTP Beach Waste Active 2.4 Bay 925 Domestic FL0024511 JAY, TOWN OF - WWTP Jay Waste - Domestic FL0032468 Century, Town of - WWTF Century Waste Active - Industrial Spanish Mill FL0038318 Nitrous Oxide (Puritan - Bennett) Pensacola Waste Active N/A Creek 475

US EPA Laboratory–Sabine Industrial Direct Runoff to FL0044377 Island Gulf Breeze Waste Active 0.85 Bay 925 Westinghouse Electric Company Industrial Not FL0100501 LLC Pensacola Waste Active - Pace Water Systems, Inc., WWTP Domestic FL0102202 #1 Pace Waste 1.5 Domestic FLA010049 Moreno Courts Pensacola Waste Active 0.14 Jones Creek 846A Mary Domestic Direct Runoff to FLA010182 Russell F W Stephenson Esther Waste Active 1 Bay 870 Mary Domestic Direct Runoff to FLA010191 Mary Esther, Town of (STP) Esther Waste Active 1.1 Bay 870 Holley-Navarre Wastewater Domestic FLA010211 System Navarre Waste Active 1 Williams Creek 864

Gulf Breeze (South Santa Rosa Domestic Direct Runoff to FLA010212 Utilities System) Gulf Breeze Waste Active 2 Bay 893 Industrial Direct Runoff to FLA010215 Warsh-a-Mania, Inc. Gulf Breeze Waste Active - Bay 834 Domestic FLA010218 Avalon Utilities Milton Waste Active 0.1 Mulatto Bayou 539 Domestic Direct Runoff to FLA010219 Adrian Woods Subdivision WWTP Pensacola Waste Active 0.06 Bay 669 Industrial FLA016165 Mark Dunning Industries, Inc. Pensacola Waste Active 0.0011 Bayou Grande 740 Industrial FLA016231 Clark Site Contractors–Navarre Navarre Waste Active - East River Bay 825 Domestic Sandy Point FLA016779 Highway 191 WWTP Bagdad Waste Active 0.06 Bayou 534 Industrial FLA016808 Gulf Atlantic Constructors Pensacola Waste Active - Bayou Grande 740 Industrial FLA016989 Carpenters Campers Inc. Pensacola Waste Active - Carpenter Creek 676 Industrial FLA016996 Russell Sand Mine Milton Waste Active - Jakes Bayou 537

Florida Gas Transmission Co Industrial Not FLA271993 *Permit Exempt* Tampa Waste Active - Bayou Grande 740 Margaret Car Wash *Permit Industrial Not FLA272019 Exempt* Pensacola Waste Active - Jackson Creek 846B Industrial Bayou Chico FLA282812 Auto-Shred Recycling, L L C Pensacola Waste Active - Drain 846C

14

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Molino - Barrineau K - 8 Domestic FLA303755 School Molino Waste Concrete Batch FLG110210 WPR, Inc. Milton Plant Active - Jakes Bayou 537 Concrete Batch Direct Runoff to FLG110227 Pensacola Ready Mix–Midway Gulf Breeze Plant Active - Bay 893 Concrete Batch FLG110289 RMC Ewell–Pensacola Pensacola Plant Active - Bayou Grande 740 Concrete Pensacola Batch Direct Runoff to FLG110343 Pensacola Ready Mix–Portofino Beach Plant Active - Bay 925 Concrete Batch FLG110354 Cemex–Pensacola Pensacola Plant Active - Carpenter Creek 676 Concrete Batch FLG110376 Cemex–Navarre Navarre Plant Active - East River Bay 701 Concrete Fort Walton Concrete–Ft Walton Fort Walton Batch Not Direct Runoff to FLG110435 Beach Beach Plant Active - Bay 870 Concrete Pensacola Ready Mix–Sorrento Batch FLG110453 Rd. Pensacola Plant Active 0.216 Bayou Grande 740 Petroleum FLG830419 Escambia County Sheriffs Dept. Pensacola Cleanup Active - Bayou Grande 740 Petroleum Direct Runoff to FLG911201 Double G #1 Navarre Cleanup Active - Bay 870 Petroleum Direct Runoff to FLG911452 Navarre Beach Cabins Navarre Cleanup Active - Bay 870 Petroleum FLG911515 Grocery Supply Company Pensacola Cleanup Active - Jackson Creek 846B FLR05F915 Pensacola, City of Pensacola MSP Active -

FLRNEE085 Pensacola–Reddy Plant # 330 Pensacola NEX Active - Bayou Grande 740

FLRNEE145 Vehicle Maintenance Facility Pensacola NEX Active - Bayou Grande 740 American Accessories of Direct Runoff to FLRNEE235 Pensacola Inc. Pensacola NEX Active - Bay 639 Domestic ICIS Warrington WTP Pensacola Waste - Domestic Penn Haven WTP Waste -

15

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 4-1 Wastewater Facilities in the Pensacola Bay Basin

16

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 4-2 Wastewater Facilities in the Escambia Bay Watershed

17

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

4.1.1.2 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permittees

Within the Pensacola Basin, the stormwater collection systems owned and operated by Escambia County, City of Pensacola, Town of Century and Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) District Three (NPDES MS4 Permit FLS000019 within Escambia County are covered by an NPDES municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit. Several other local governments in the basin have also applied for coverage under the Phase 2 NPDES MS4 permit. These include Santa Rosa County, Milton, Gulf Breeze, and Florida DOT within Santa Rosa County (Jozwiak, 2007).

4.1.2 Land Uses and Nonpoint Sources

Additional nutrient loadings to Escambia Bay are generated from nonpoint sources in the basin. Potential nonpoint sources of nutrients can be characterized by their pathway or delivery to the bay: river, tributary runoff, ground water, sediment nutrient release, and atmospheric deposition. The nonpoint sources can also be described by type of land use where the sources are generated. Due to the large size of the contributing basin (>4000 square miles), a variety of techniques were used to estimate these loads.

4.1.2.1 Land Uses

The spatial distribution (by HUC and EXTHUC) and acreage of different land use categories in Florida were identified using the 1995 land use coverage (scale 1:40,000) contained in the Department’s GIS library. Land use categories in the watershed were aggregated using the simplified Level 1/Level 2 codes tabulated in Table 4-2. The distribution of land use in Alabama was determined from published reports of 1997 EPA and 1998 SWCD land use at the Level 1 codes (by HUC and EXTHUC). Discrepancies were found for some of the Alabama land use between Alabama and EPA percent coverage for urban areas. Some EPA percent totals for a given EXTHUC did not total to 100 percent. A consistent set of data at the HUC level was used from the SWCD 1998 coverage tabulated in Table 4-2.. Additional summaries of individual EXTHUC land use are given in Appendix B. Figure 4-3. shows the acreage of the principal land uses in the watershed. As shown in Table 4-2., land uses in the Alabama portion of the basin are dominated by forest (76%) and agriculture (19%), while urban (2%) contributes a much smaller fraction. Within the Florida portion of the basin, forest (49.8%), agriculture (17.8%), and urban (6.1%) are the largest contributors. Table 4-2 Classification of Land Use Categories in the Pensacola Basin Square Percent of Code Land Use Acreage Miles Watershed Alabama 4000 Forest/Rural Open 4.0889E+05 3.1029E+03 7.6001E+01 1000 Urban Open 1.0761E+04 8.1740E+01 2.0002E+00 2000 Agriculture 1.0221E+05 6.3188E+02 1.8999E+01 1100 Low Density Residential 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1200 Medium Density Residential 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1300 High Density Residential 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 8000 Communication and Transportation 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3000+7000 Rangeland 2.0000E+00 7.2800E+00 3.7175E-04 5000 Water 5.3760E+03 8.4000E+00 9.9926E-01 6000 Wetlands 1.0761E+04 7.2820E+01 2.0002E+00

18

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TOTAL 5.3800E+05 3.9050E+03 1.0000E+02 Square Percent of Code Land Use Acreage Miles Watershed 3140305 4000 Forest/Rural Open 1.2398E+05 1.9372E+02 4.9862E+01 1000 Urban Open 3.3841E+03 5.2872E+00 1.3610E+00 2000 Agriculture 4.4189E+04 6.9046E+01 1.7772E+01 1100 Low Density Residential 2.8407E+03 4.4388E+00 1.1425E+00 1200 Medium Density Residential 7.5116E+03 1.1737E+01 3.0210E+00 1300 High Density Residential 1.3615E+03 2.1274E+00 5.4756E-01 8000 Communication and Transportation 1.7168E+03 2.6824E+00 6.9045E-01 3000+7000 Rangeland 1.3322E+03 2.0815E+00 5.3577E-01 5000 Water 3.5064E+03 5.4788E+00 1.4102E+00 6000 Wetlands 5.8823E+04 9.1912E+01 2.3658E+01 TOTAL 2.4864E+05 3.8851E+02 1.0000E+02 Square Percent of Code Land Use Acreage Miles Watershed 3140105 4000 Forest/Rural Open 9.1007E+03 1.4220E+01 2.2962E+01 1000 Urban Open 2.8199E+03 4.4063E+00 7.1151E+00 2000 Agriculture 1.4394E+03 2.2491E+00 3.6318E+00 1100 Low Density Residential 1.3446E+03 2.1009E+00 3.3926E+00 1200 Medium Density Residential 5.0147E+03 7.8355E+00 1.2653E+01 1300 High Density Residential 1.4014E+03 2.1896E+00 3.5359E+00 8000 Communication and Transportation 7.7186E+02 1.2060E+00 1.9475E+00 3000+7000 Rangeland 1.9610E+03 3.0642E+00 4.9478E+00 5000 Water 1.2838E+04 2.0054E+01 3.2394E+01 6000 Wetlands 2.9409E+03 4.5951E+00 7.4203E+00 TOTAL 3.9633E+04 6.1921E+01 1.0000E+02

19

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 4-3 Principal Land Uses in the Pensacola Basin

20

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 4-4 Principal Land Uses in the Escambia Bay Watershed

21

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

4.1.3 Population Density

4.1.3.1 Population

According to the U.S Census Bureau, the population density in and around WBID 548A in the year 2000 was about 1500 persons per square mile (10 person/mi2 is the minimum used by the Census Bureau) (Figure 4.3). The Bureau reports that, in Escambia County the total population for 2000 was 294,410 with 111,049 households (HH) and 124,647 housing units. For all of Escambia County, the Bureau reported a housing density of 170 households per square mile (188 housing units per square mile). This places Escambia County among the highest in housing densities in Florida (U.S. Census Bureau Web site, 2007). This is also supported by the land use, where 16.59 percent of the land use in Escambia County is dedicated to residences.

22

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 4-5 Population Density in Escambia County, Florida

Figure 4-6 Population Density in Santa Rosa County, Florida

23

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

4.1.4 Nonpoint Source Runoff

4.1.4.1 Surface Water Runoff WMM Model A spreadsheet model developed by the Department’s Watershed Assessment Section, using methods comparable to the Watershed Management Model (WMM), was used to estimate the watershed surface water runoff loads associated with rainfall. The model is designed to estimate annual or seasonal pollutant loadings from a given watershed (CDM User’s Manual: Watershed Management Model, 1998).

The fundamental assumption of the model is that the amount of stormwater runoff from any given land use is in direct proportion to annual rainfall. The quantity of runoff is controlled by the fraction of the land use category that is characterized as impervious and the runoff coefficients of both pervious and impervious areas. The governing equation is as follows:

(1) RL = [Cp + (CI – Cp) IMPL] * I

Where:

RL = total average annual surface runoff from land use L (inches/year), IMPL = fractional imperviousness of land use L, I = long-term average annual precipitation (inches/year), CP = pervious area runoff coefficient, and CI = impervious area runoff coefficient. The model estimates pollutant loadings based on nonpoint pollution loading factors (expressed as pounds/acre/year) that vary by land use and the percent imperviousness associated with each land use. The pollution loading factor, ML, is computed for each land use L by the following equation:

(2) ML = EMCL * RL * K

Where:

ML = loading factor for land use L (pounds/acre/year), EMCL = event mean concentration of runoff from land use L (mg/L); EMC varies by land use and pollutant, RL = total average annual surface runoff from land use L computed from Equation (1) (inches/year), and K = 0.2266, a unit conversion constant.

The data required for applying the spreadsheet model include the following:

• Area of all the land use categories, • Percent impervious area of each land use category, • EMC for each pollutant type and land use category, • Percent EMC of each pollutant type that is in suspended form, and • Annual precipitation.

24

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

We used the same land use data (1995 in Florida, 1998 Alabama) for the entire historical period analyzed (1970-2006). The loading calculation can be modified for each subbasin (EXTHUC) as updated land use data becomes available. For each EXTHUC in both Alabama and Florida, the land use was determined from GIS coverage and then annual loads were computed for each year of rainfall.

The Escambia County NPDES MS4 annual reports also include the results of WMM calculations (Escambia, 2002), but also break down the land use coverage into the various permittees’ (Escambia County, Pensacola, Town of Century, FDOT) responsible areas. They also used slightly different EMCs. See Appendix A for information on the NPDES program.

4.1.4.2 Base flow

The base-flow component of streamflow was estimated using program BASEFLOW (Arnold, 1995, 1999). This program uses daily flow records from USGS or other agencies and computes baseflow using a digital filter. This analysis was run on both Escambia River at Century USGS gage (02375500) and Pine Barren Creek near Barth (02376000). Baseflow was computed annually for each EXTHUC using the baseflow/drainage area (cfs/mi2) ratio determined from the gaged sites. See Appendix H. The USGS (Grubbs, 1994) has analyzed base flow in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties using many of their continuous and partial record stations (Appendix H). Maps were developed showing the areas of recharge to the Sand and Gravel Aquifer as well as the Upper Floridan Aquifer. The maps show that no recharge (but discharge) from the Upper Floridan Aquifer occurs mainly along the Escambia River and Bay periphery. The significance of this lies in the potential for pollutant loading to the river and bay from industries located along this periphery.

In order to associate the nutrient contribution from baseflow to the overall stream load, we used the FDEP groundwater database (Harrington, 2007). The water quality of the ambient network and drinking water network of wells for Escambia and Santa Rosa counties was downloaded (Appendix I). The STORET parameter codes 623 and 631 representing dissolved TKN (ORGN+NH3N) plus NO23N, and parameter 70507 representing OPO4P were used. We assumed: TN= parameter 623+631 TP= parameter 70507 Escambia data were used for Escambia tributaries and Escambia/Conecuh main stem, while Santa Rosa data were used for Santa Rosa County tributaries. Some tributaries have extremely high NO3N values. In Santa Rosa County, the NWFWMD (Knight, 1996) studied agrichemical usage in several rural areas near the communities of Brownsdale, Whitfield, and Chumuckla, Two of the wells sampled at the headwaters of Moore Creek near SR 197 had values of 11 mg/l. This is above the drinking water criterion of 10 mg/l. The mean value of all wells was 4.4 mg/l.

The USGS (Andrews, 1993) studied several industries utilizing deep well injection in the Escambia Bay Basin. From July 1963 to April 1991, a nylon manufacturing plant (Monsanto, now Solutia) injected about 25 billion gallons of industrial wastewater into the Lower Floridan Aquifer north of Pensacola, Florida. During the same period, another facility in Santa Rosa

25

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

County near Pace, Florida (American Cyanamid, now Sterling Fibers, Inc.) injected about 4.4 billion gallons of industrial wastewater into the Lower Floridan Aquifer. The median injected concentrations of TKN were 870 mg/l and 200 mg/l respectively.

4.1.4.3 SPARROW Model

The USGS (Schwarz, 2006, Alexander, 2000; Smith, 1997) has developed a model to use spatially referenced regressions of contaminant transport (especially nutrients) nationwide on watershed (SPARROW) attributes for each HUC basin. Appendix D contains a summary of the model predictions. We have downloaded the results for those HUCS in the Conecuh/Escambia basins. Appendix D contains the annual loads (kg/day) of TN and TP exported and the yield (kg/km2/yr) from individual HUCs for a typical year (1987) for the categories of point source, fertilizer, livestock, and non agriculture sources. In order to calculate the exported load, a land- water delivery factor and instream decay factor is assigned to each load source. The model is then calibrated by adjusting the delivery and decay factors and comparing the measured loads at a stream location to the predicted loads at the same point.

A typical USGS stream gage station may have flow measured continuously (hourly and daily) but only have monthly values for nutrient concentrations. In order to estimate daily loads (L) of TN or TP, a regression equation with five explanatory variables was used as shown below:

Ln (L) = λ0 + λ1 * t + λ2 sin(2π t) + λ3 cos(2π t) + λ4 Ln(Q) + λ5 [ Ln (Q) ]2 + e

Here, the instantaneous load L(lb/day)= 5.39 * Q (cfs) * C (mg/l), t is decimal time (yr), Q is instantaneous discharge or flow, e is the sampling error, Ln is the natural logarithm, and the λ are regression coefficients.

4.1.4.4 LOADEST Model

We have also completed a regression analyses of loads at the Escambia River near Century USGS gage site at SR 4 (02375500) and at the Escambia River near Molino USGS gage at SR 186 (02376033) using the LOADEST technique (Runkel, 2004). The concentrations of nutrients were compiled from several agencies that collected data near these gage sites.

Ln (L) = A0 + A1 * Ln(Q) + A2 * [ Ln (Q) ]2 + A3 * sin(2π t/T) + A4 * cos(2π t/T)

Here L is the instantaneous load, t is decimal time (yr), T is 1.0 yr, Q (cfs) is instantaneous discharge or flow, Ln is the natural logarithm, and the An are regression coefficients.

The five parameter regression fit the data very well over the entire period analyzed (1974-2006). The R2 values ranged from 0.838 to 0.915 for the TN and TP data. Appendix D contains the semilog plots of predicted and measured daily loads (lb/day) of LTN and LTP for each year from 1974-2006. Annual loads were the sum of daily loads. Septic Tanks Onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems (OSTDSs), including septic tanks, are commonly used where providing central sewer is not cost-effective or practical. When properly sited, designed, constructed, maintained, and operated, OSTDSs are a safe means of disposing of

26

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL domestic waste. The effluent from a well-functioning OSTDS is comparable to secondarily treated wastewater from a sewage treatment plant. When not functioning properly, OSTDSs can be a source of nutrients, coliforms, pathogens, and other pollutants to both ground water and surface water.

As of 2004, Escambia County had roughly 67761 septic systems (Florida Department of Health Web site, 2007). Data for septic tanks are based on 1970 to 2004 Census results, with year-by- year additions based on new septic tank construction. The data do not reflect septic tanks that have been removed going back to 1970. From years 1991 to 2004, 10515 permits (808.9/yr) for repairs were issued (Florida Department of Health Web site, 2007). Based on the number of permitted septic tanks and housing units located in the county (US Census, 1990), approximately 58.3 percent of the housing units are connected to a wastewater treatment facility; with the remaining 41.7 percent utilizing septic tanks or other systems. The distribution of septic tanks within the county was obtained from the DOH web site as shown in Appendix B.

As of 2004, Santa Rosa County had roughly 40909 septic systems (Florida Department of Health Web site, 2007). Data for septic tanks are based on 1970 to 2004 Census results, with year-by- year additions based on new septic tank construction. The data do not reflect septic tanks that have been removed going back to 1970. From years 1993 to 2004, 4243 permits (353.6/yr) for repairs were issued (Florida Department of Health Web site, 2007). Based on the number of permitted septic tanks and housing units located in the county, approximately 29.5 percent of the housing units are connected to a wastewater treatment facility; with the remaining 70.5 percent utilizing septic tanks or other systems. The distribution of septic tanks within the county was obtained from the DOH web site as shown in Appendix B.

The septic tank inventory in Alabama is not readily available by year. The 1999 nonpoint source summary report (ADEM, 2002) gives the septic tank density (tanks per acre) by EXTHUC. Most densities fell in the range of 0.01 to 0.06 tanks/ac. We used a density of 0.02 tanks/ac to represent the counties in Alabama that drain to the Escambia basin. Septic tanks failing per acre are all shown as 0.0. However, the EPA (2002) reports that about 20% of the systems may be failing statewide.

To estimate the TN and TP loading per septic system, the EPA methodology was used. The mean household use in Tampa, FL is 65.8 gal/cap/day (EPA, 2002). We used a value of: Qseptic = 70 gal/cap/day* 2.6 persons /household*0.1337 (cuft/gal)*(1 day/(24*3600 sec)

Qseptic = 2.8164E-04 cfs/tank.

To represent the water quality exiting the septic tank, the mean values for TN=50.5 mg/l and TP=9.0 mg/l were used (EPA, 2002).

4.1.4.5 Boats

There is a large amount of and barge traffic on the Escambia River and Bay system. A shoreline inventory (as of July, 2003) of the subbasins in the Pensacola Bay area was completed by DACS (Brooks, 2007; Knight, 2003). Table 3-5 of their report lists the number of boat slips for each marina, while Appendix 3-1 lists the marinas by subbasin. An estimate can be made of the

27

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

nutrient contribution from the boats given the actual boat population of each marina. The 2000 US Census shows that in Escambia County 178 housing units were in the boat/RV/van category, while Santa Rosa County had 56 in this category. Using DACS data, the only marina listed (Swamphouse) for Upper Escambia Bay has 100 boat slips and no pumpout station. DACS assumes that there are two persons/boat with fecal coliform load of 2.00E06 cfu/100ml per person/day. This is about the same as the load used for a failing septic tank. Consequently we will use the nutrient load from each boat equivalent to one septic tank.

Maintenance dredging files (FDEP, 2005) show approximate amounts of barge traffic on the Escambia River delivering materials to Gulf Power Plant and Solutia. Gulf Power receives between 115-180 barges per month, with each barge carrying 1600 short tons of coal. Solutia receives a variety of barges per month) carrying chemicals such as adiponitrile, butane, cyclohexane, fuel oil, and ammonia. At this time, it is unknown what amount (if any) of nutrients may be leaked or spilled from the barges during transport or during unloading operations. The FDCA (2007) maintains a web site for both land and water based spills. Additional barge traffic to the Florida-Alabama state line is not yet available.

4.1.4.6 Agriculture

The USGS (Ruddy, 2006) has estimated nutrient inputs to the land surface at the county level from livestock, fertilizer use, and atmospheric deposition. We have utilized these estimates from both Alabama and Florida counties and determined the contributions to the Escambia Bay. The percent of each county contained within the Escambia watershed (Appendix B) was applied to each county on an annual load basis. The methodology for each estimate is outlined below. Counties in Alabama include: Bullock, Butler, Coffee, Conecuh, Covington, Crenshaw, Escambia, Lowndes, Monroe, Montgomery, and Pike, while Florida counties include: Escambia and Santa Rosa. Additional Florida counties (Okaloosa and Walton) contribute indirectly via the Blackwater and Yellow River basins.

4.1.4.7 Livestock

The USGS (Goolsby, 1999) developed methods to estimate the nitrogen (TN) and phosphorus (TP) content of manure generated by various types of livestock. The method accounts for the different life cycles of the animals on an annual basis and whether the animals were in confined or unconfined conditions. Losses of nitrogen due to storage, handling, and volatilization have also been determined. Please see the CD of Appendix B which contains tables of TN and TP by county.

4.1.4.8 Fertilizer

Several methods have been used to allocate State fertilizer data to counties. State fertilizer-sales data, in tons, were compiled by US Census of Agriculture from 1945 through 1985. The USGS (Alexander, 1990) used county fertilized-acreage data from the Census to allocate the State-level sales to fertilizer use within individual counties. Additional data from 1985-2001 have also been compiled by USGS (Battaglin, 1995). It was assumed fertilizer sold within the county was used in the same year. Fertilizer in tons of product was converted to tons of nitrogen and phosphorus based on the chemical composition data for each product. In addition, fertilizer was divided into

28

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL farm (agricultural) and non-farm (urban) land use. Appendix B contains summary tables of the fertilizer used by Alabama and Florida from 1987 to 2001 (to see complete table please refer to the CD of Appendix B). The data show that the trends vary greatly by county. For example, Escambia County, AL farm TN use has varied from about 1.7E6 kg/yr to 2.5E6 kg/yr from 1987 to 2001, while Escambia County, FL has declined from about 1.9E6 kg/yr to about 0.8E6 kg/yr over the same time frame. The non-farm use (although much smaller than farm) has shown an increasing trend over the same time frame for many counties.

4.1.4.9 Atmospheric Deposition

The annual summaries of wet deposition in kg/ha were obtained by USGS from the NADP web page (NADP, 2002). Nationwide wet deposition sites were utilized and developed into 1 km resolution grid cells. Annual wet deposition for each county by year was then developed from the grid cells within each county. Appendix B contains tables of TN (kg/yr). No TP data were developed, because concentrations were not considered significant and samples were subject to contamination.

The wet and dry atmospheric deposition direct to Escambia Bay (WBID 548A) was calculated separately from the USGS. NADP data from 1984-2005 for the Quincy, FL site (FL14) were used and applied to the bay area water surface of 19.477 mi2 These data are included in Appendix B summary table (please refer to the CD of Appendix B to see the complete table). Dry deposition was assumed equal to wet deposition (wet:dry ratio = 1.00) based on studies in Tampa Bay area, (Poor, 2001; Pribble, 1999). However, there are some monitoring sites (Pollman, 2003) where the wet:dry ratio is much lower (Sumatra, Florida wet:dry ratio = 1:0.19). However, the wet deposition data at the Sumatra, Florida site (SUM156, CASTNET web site, 2007) were comparable to the Quincy site (FL14).

Additional studies from air pollution files at FDEP (Rogers, 2006) have compiled Nitrogen Oxides Emissions (Tons/Yr) by county for various source categories. These categories include: stationary point, stationary area, on-road mobile, non-road mobile, and total sources.

TP deposition data from early studies in Florida (Brezonik, 1983) show that wet+dry deposition of TP= 59 mg/sqm/yr. However, their analysis showed that dry deposition accounted for 80% of the total. Concentration ranges for Florida studies from 1955-1975 ranged from 26 to 150 ug/l. A recent study of mercury in the Pensacola Bay watershed (Cleveland, 2006) included TP precipitation analysis. Although this study focused primarily on metals such as mercury from power plants, a correlation was found between phosphorus, copper, and zinc loadings. Possible sources described in this study include agriculture and open pit mining. The TP data, which were collected approximately weekly (from 12/09/2004 to 12/15/2005) was generally less than 10 ppb. However, values as high as 133 ppb (ug/l) were recorded. To simplify the analysis, the average TP deposition data from the Jacksonville airport site was used for all the years studied.

4.1.4.10 Domesticated Animals

Domesticated animals can also provide a source of nutrients to Escambia Bay. The number of households (HH) can be used to estimate the numbers of dogs, cats, and horses within each

29

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

county. Using nationwide figures from the American Veterinary web site (www.avma.org), the numbers are:

NDOGS = 0.58* HH

NCATS = 0.66* HH

NHORSES = 0.05*HH

The fecal loading rates from a variety of farm and domestic animals are well documented in the literature (EPA, 2001). However, the nutrient loading rates for dogs and cats were much more difficult to find.

Warden (2007) of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board estimated an average 45 lb dog will produce TN=13 lb/yr and TP=2 lb/yr. Using household census figures from 1990 and 2000, linear interpolation was used to estimate the number of dogs (NDOGS) for each year from 1970-2006 and the corresponding load.

Domestic cats are not considered equivalent to dogs, because many use a litter box. However, the number of feral or wild cats (NFERALCATS) can be quite large.

Veterinary research in Canada (Funaba, 2005) tested a variety of cat foods and measured the input and output of TN, TP, and other nutrients based on an average cat with Body Weight (BW= 4 kg).

Domestic horses and ponies utilize the same loading rates as agricultural horses (Ruddy, 2006).

4.1.4.11 Wildlife

Another possible source of nutrients to Escambia Bay could be wild animals. The Department of Agriculture (DACS, 2004) notes that there are five major wildlife areas along several tributaries of the shellfish harvesting areas in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties. The white-tailed deer population has been estimated at various densities (DACS (2004), however, we used a deer density of 1/50 ac or 12.8/mi2. A land use designation for wildlife has been estimated from 73% to 97% of total land use in the major river basins bordering Pensacola Bay. The CD of Appendix B has a table that shows the estimated deer population for the Escambia River, Blackwater River, Yellow River, and East Bay River Basins. Using the average TN and TP loading per animal (Ontario, 2007), the annual TN and TP loads to the river basins can be calculated.

Migratory waterfowl and other wild bird populations have been estimated annually from 1998- 2006 (Birdsource, 2007, Knight, 2003) as shown in Appendix B (refer to the CD of Appendix B). The numbers of waterfowl and other birds are compiled annually through the Christmas bird count. Some birds may frequent wetland areas, while others may congregate near landfills.

Studies of nutrient loading from migratory waterfowl showed that median TN=3.15 g/day/bird and TP=0.45 g/day/bird (Post, 1998). USGS summaries (Ruddy, 2006) of livestock nutrient loading show values for chickens and hens, tom and hen turkeys similar to these numbers,

30

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

The most recent TMDL work (Benham, 2007) quantifying wildlife contributions to fecal coliform divide the load among eight categories of wildlife: deer, raccoons, muskrats, beavers, geese, ducks, wild turkeys, and other.

4.1.5 Sediment Nutrient Release

Sediment nutrients deposited in Escambia Bay can be released to the water column for a variety of conditions. EPA (Olinger, 1975) determined the nutrient release rates at 6 sites in Escambia Bay using sediment cores analyzed in the lab. Average values for TN=10.49E-06 kg/meter2/day and TP=0.272E-06 kg/ meter2/day. Additional data on sediment nutrients were collected by NOAA (1997) and EPA Gulf Breeze in 2000-2006 (Smith, 2007). The recent EPA data included sediment flux values at 12 sites that included both positive (flux out of sediment) and negative (flux into sediment). Analysis of data at individual sites pre and post hurricanes of 2004 showed no consistent increase or decrease of flux from sediments.

4.1.6 Denitrification

Strictly speaking, denitrification is the “anoxic respiratory reduction of NO2 or NO3 to the gaseous end products N2 and N2O, results in a loss of combined N to the atmosphere” (Flemer, 1998). The anoxic layers of sediment are the primary locations where this process takes place. Their report describes the measurement of potential denitrification rates (PDRs) in Perdido Bay, Bayous Chico, Texar, and Grande, and Pensacola Bay. Three sites were located near sewage outfalls, however, no measurements were made in Escambia Bay. The Pensacola Bay denitrification rate was PDR= 1122 umol N /meter2/hr. This report includes a discussion about the potential for trace metals effects to reduce the PDR.

4.1.7 Maintenance Dredging

FDEP (2005) files on maintenance dredging of Escambia River and Bay note that:

1. Dredging on 51 river miles from River Mile 7 to the Florida-Alabama Border will be maintained under another permit.

2. Dredging of 12.5 river miles from River Mile 7 to Escambia Bay will require dredging of material to -12 ft Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) plus 2 ft allowable overdredge and 2 ft advanced maintenance. The amount of dredged material in the first dredging event (187,000 cubic yards) will be placed near Macky Island.

Sediment and elutriate analysis from this project is not yet available.

4.1.8 Tidal Prism Inputs

The tides in Pensacola are primarily diurnal with a range of 1.3 ft (Tide Tables, 1996). Using the area of Escambia Bay N (WBID548A) of 19.477 mi2, a tidal flow over about a 12 hr period is estimated to be QTIDAL=8.1704E03 cfs. From the annual average TN and TP concentrations for Escambia Bay S (WBID 548B), the annual tidal loads can be estimated (Appendix B).

31

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

4.1.9 Storm Surge

The recent hurricanes (Ivan, 2004) in the Pensacola area have made a substantial impact on the water quality of Escambia Bay. The EPA (Hagy, 2006) completed an analysis of the short term effects of the storm surge on the flushing and water quality of the bay. They compared survey data before (14 days prior) landfall on September 16, 2004 to data 20 days and 50 days after the storm. Analysis showed that the 3.5 m surge inundated 165 km2 and increased the surface area of Pensacola Bay by 50% and volume by 230%. We have not made an estimate of the nutrient loading from these rare events.

4.1.10 Spills

The Florida Dept. Community Affairs (FDCA, 2007) maintains a web site (www.eoconline.org) which lists pollutant spills by date, time, county, reported amount, and description. Pollutants may be wastewater, petroleum, or other types of waste. The summaries (Ziegmont, 2005) for Escambia and Santa Rosa counties are listed in Appendix C. Using the annual estimate of gallons spilled and typical nutrient values for raw wastewater, TN and TP loads can be estimated. Sewage line leaks are sometimes lumped into this category, but are considered a chronic problem from joint leaks.

4.2 Source Summary

4.2.1 Summary of the Nutrient Loadings into Escambia Bay from the Various Sources

Table 4-3 summarizes the annual average TN loadings (during the period from 1974 through 2006) from point sources, atmospheric deposition, runoff, baseflow (groundwater), septic tank leakage, livestock, fertilizer, domestic animals, and wildlife generated within the Escambia Bay watershed. Data were not available for all years for all categories. Missing data are shown as a zero load. Table 4-4 summarizes average daily quantity of TP loads to the Escambia Bay Watershed for the categories noted above. Appendix B gives a detailed breakdown for each category. Table 4-3 Summary of TN Loads to Escambia River and Bay, 1974-2006

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1974 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.4173E+05 6.1078E+05 6.2184E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 7.0917E+11 6.9113E+11 9.8822E+11 7.9191E+11 9.7647E+11 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 8.5597E+08 8.3136E+08 8.1970E+08 8.2145E+08 8.2894E+08 Total Baseflow 0.0000E+00 2.2217E+06 2.0294E+06 2.5454E+06 3.2208E+06 2.4912E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 9.7693E+05 1.2430E+06 1.2614E+06 1.2754E+06 1.2877E+06 1.2985E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 5.7867E+06 7.6191E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.5303E+07 0.0000E+00

32

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Sediment Nutrient Release 4.2581E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 0.0000E+00 4.0906E+08 4.5997E+08 4.1656E+08 3.0705E+08 4.3991E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07

Total Domestic Animals 8.9223E+05 1.0852E+06 1.1000E+06 1.1149E+06 1.1297E+06 1.1446E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.0361E+06 1.0138E+06 1.4636E+06 2.5922E+06 1.2104E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 1.4027E+06 7.1045E+11 6.9243E+11 9.8946E+11 7.9306E+11 9.7775E+11

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 1.4027E+06 7.1045E+11 6.9243E+11 9.8946E+11 7.9306E+11 9.7775E+11

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 5.9978E+05 6.2226E+05 5.4945E+05 5.2603E+05 5.9006E+05 4.8649E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 7.8674E+11 9.6996E+11 8.5206E+11 9.9099E+11 9.2569E+11 9.7641E+11 Total Agriculture 8.4542E+08 8.9698E+08 9.4277E+08 9.6882E+08 9.8788E+08 1.7813E+09 Total Baseflow 2.8144E+06 2.7354E+06 3.0174E+06 3.0773E+06 3.5839E+06 2.5283E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.3104E+06 1.3234E+06 1.3369E+06 1.3471E+06 1.3617E+06 1.3767E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.3400E+03 1.3726E+04 8.5000E+03 2.0000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.2287E+06 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.5608E+08 3.6523E+08 4.5110E+08 4.9666E+08 3.9751E+08 4.7909E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.1594E+06 1.1743E+06 1.1891E+06 1.2040E+06 1.2188E+06 1.2336E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.5987E+06 1.1333E+06 1.5821E+06 2.0336E+06 1.8796E+06 1.2835E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 7.8805E+11 9.7122E+11 8.5346E+11 9.9246E+11 9.2708E+11 9.7869E+11

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 7.8805E+11 9.7123E+11 8.5346E+11 9.9246E+11 9.2708E+11 9.7869E+11

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 4.7914E+05 1.9713E+05 5.4949E+05 7.6923E+05 3.3836E+05 2.1295E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 8.2295E+11 8.2764E+11 8.0660E+11 7.4753E+11 5.7083E+04 6.9958E+04 Total Agriculture 1.8916E+07 1.7691E+07 1.6617E+07 1.6735E+07 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 3.7784E+06 2.2517E+06 1.0353E+06 2.5820E+06 1.9338E+06 3.5882E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.3857E+06 1.3930E+06 1.4003E+06 1.4076E+06 1.4148E+06 1.4229E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.9348E+00 2.9122E+01 1.6838E+02 2.3650E+02

33

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 5.5000E+03 8.8000E+03 9.7720E+03 5.3211E+04 2.0053E+05 1.7800E+04 Total Tidal Input/Output 6.2721E+06 5.4073E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.0870E+08 2.8031E+08 2.5232E+08 2.8305E+08 3.8018E+08 3.8048E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.2485E+06 1.2633E+06 1.2782E+06 1.2930E+06 1.3079E+06 1.3227E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 3.4629E+06 1.0142E+06 3.5570E+05 1.8719E+06 8.5960E+05 1.8620E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 8.2339E+11 8.2795E+11 8.0688E+11 7.4783E+11 3.8464E+08 3.8744E+08

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 8.2339E+11 8.2795E+11 8.0688E+11 7.4783E+11 3.8498E+08 3.8765E+08

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 2004 2005 2006 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.6491E+05 4.1180E+05 3.2315E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 6.3345E+04 7.0979E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 2.9550E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.4320E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 2.1824E+02 1.8903E+02 3.0783E+01 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 1.5793E+05 3.8000E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 6.8717E+06 1.0019E+07 4.8029E+06 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.1418E+08 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.3376E+06 1.3524E+06 1.3672E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.5960E+06 1.9538E+06 9.5644E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 4.2726E+08 1.2082E+07 5.7594E+06

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 4.2762E+08 1.2494E+07 6.0826E+06

Table 4-4 Summary of TP Loads to Escambia River and Bay, 1974-2006

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1974 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 2.8928E+04 5.2989E+04 4.8756E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 2.6845E+08 2.6250E+08 2.5974E+08 2.5894E+08 2.5943E+08

34

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Baseflow 0.0000E+00 1.4787E+05 1.3507E+05 1.6939E+05 2.1433E+05 1.6581E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.7411E+05 2.2152E+05 2.2480E+05 2.2730E+05 2.2948E+05 2.3142E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 1.6074E+05 1.6074E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 1.1041E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 0.0000E+00 2.8157E+07 3.1690E+07 2.8673E+07 2.1135E+07 3.0280E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 1.4425E+05 1.7545E+05 1.7785E+05 1.8025E+05 1.8265E+05 1.8505E+05

Total Measured Regression Loads 8.6827E+04 8.6744E+04 1.3241E+05 3.1297E+05 1.0428E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 1.8515E+05 2.9723E+08 2.9480E+08 2.8894E+08 2.8103E+08 2.9021E+08

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 1.8515E+05 2.9723E+08 2.9480E+08 2.8897E+08 2.8109E+08 2.9026E+08

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.8547E+04 3.6319E+04 4.0232E+04 4.1148E+04 3.7640E+04 3.8510E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 2.6067E+08 2.7042E+08 2.7438E+08 2.7293E+08 2.6241E+08 4.3150E+08 Total Baseflow 1.8729E+05 1.8205E+05 2.0079E+05 2.0478E+05 2.3849E+05 1.6827E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.3354E+05 2.3585E+05 2.3827E+05 2.4007E+05 2.4268E+05 2.4535E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3.1700E+03 6.8630E+03 4.2500E+03 1.0000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.4204E+05 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 3.1396E+07 2.5140E+07 3.1051E+07 3.4186E+07 2.7361E+07 3.2977E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 1.8745E+05 1.8985E+05 1.9225E+05 1.9465E+05 1.9705E+05 1.9945E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.4848E+05 9.5009E+04 1.4630E+05 2.0025E+05 1.7848E+05 1.1019E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 2.9264E+08 2.9607E+08 3.0602E+08 3.0776E+08 2.9044E+08 4.6545E+08

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 2.9267E+08 2.9611E+08 3.0606E+08 3.0780E+08 2.9047E+08 4.6549E+08

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 4.2001E+04 3.4098E+04 5.2515E+04 8.0508E+04 2.6828E+04 2.4078E+04

Nonpoint Sources

35

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 4.1894E+06 3.5532E+06 3.3286E+06 3.3532E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 2.5143E+05 1.4987E+05 6.8940E+04 1.7184E+05 1.2871E+05 2.3877E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.4695E+05 2.4827E+05 2.4955E+05 2.5086E+05 2.5214E+05 2.5359E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.8370E-01 7.2804E+00 4.2095E+01 5.9126E+01 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 2.7500E+03 4.4000E+03 4.8860E+03 2.6606E+04 1.0027E+05 8.9000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 4.3561E+05 3.3916E+05 1.1573E+05 3.0541E+04 2.7326E+04 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 2.8132E+07 1.9294E+07 1.7368E+07 1.9483E+07 2.6169E+07 2.6189E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 2.0185E+05 2.0425E+05 2.0665E+05 2.0905E+05 2.1145E+05 2.1385E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 4.3807E+05 8.4678E+04 2.3993E+04 1.9649E+05 6.9042E+04 1.6875E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 3.3696E+07 2.3674E+07 2.1395E+07 2.3512E+07 2.6746E+07 2.6859E+07

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 3.3738E+07 2.3708E+07 2.1447E+07 2.3593E+07 2.6773E+07 2.6883E+07

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 2004 2005 2006 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.1485E+04 3.8932E+04 3.9194E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 1.9665E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.5520E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 5.4561E+01 4.7258E+01 7.6958E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 7.8965E+04 1.9000E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 2.1700E+05 2.2986E+05 3.6488E+05 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 2.8509E+07 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 2.1625E+05 2.1865E+05 2.2105E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.4480E+05 1.9407E+05 7.4079E+04 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 2.9402E+07 4.4293E+05 4.3896E+05

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 2.9433E+07 4.8186E+05 4.7815E+05

36

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

5 Determination of Assimilative Capacity

5.1 Determination of Loading Capacity

The chl a impairment for WBID 548A is twofold: exceedances of the chl a =11 ug/l criterion and the historical increase of 50% above the baseline level. Therefore, it is important to not only analyze present day data, but historical trends. The sample density of these data in both time and space is very nonuniform. Aside from special studies conducted by EPA, DACS, NWFWMD, FDEP, or a discharger, trend sampling is driven by available funds, manpower, or particular special interest of volunteer groups (Bream Fisherman Assoc.). Recognizing that some of the older data collected in the 1960’s and 1970’s may have some QA issues, we have attempted to make use of all available data in our database. This includes both published paper reports as well as electronic data of recent vintage (Livingston, 1999). Ideally, trend data is best analyzed by focusing on individual stations at fixed locations. However, we have included analysis of both individual stations and WBID averaged data.

Although the focus of this TMDL is chl a, many other parameters besides nutrients (TN, TP) can affect chl a production. This includes: water column parameters such as BOD5, DO, Temperature, Salinity, Color, Light Transmission, TSS, etc.; sediment parameters such as nutrients, grain size, organics, hydrodynamic parameters such as velocity, depth, tides, turbulence, and meteorological parameters such as solar radiation, wind speed and direction, rainfall, etc.

5.1.1 Data Used in the Determination of the TMDL

There are 119 sampling stations in WBID 548A that have historical chl a observations along with the routine nutrients and metered parameters (Figure 5-1). The primary data collectors of historical data are FDEP NW District, FDEP NE District (SEAS), Florida Marine Research Institute, and Pensacola Bay Nutrient Study Gulf Breeze. Additional data sets for this WBID (not included in STORET) were sampled by Livingston (1999) and Niedoroda (1999), and USEPA Athens (Olinger, 1975). Table 5.1 provides a brief overview of the agencies sampling data for this WBID as well as upstream Escambia River WBIDs 10C with 17 stations and WBID 10D with 14 stations. Table 5.2 is a brief summary of the data from WBID 548A, while Figure 5.2a, 5.2b and 5.2c are charts showing the observed historical data over time, and Appendix E-G contains the historical observations from these sites.

In addition to the historical data, the Department conducted an intensive survey of the Escambia River in conjunction with Solutia (formerly Monsanto) in the early 1980s. These data were intended to support a WQBEL for the facility, but the WQBEL was never completed. The FDEP Pensacola office conducted many mini surveys associated with bioasssessments of various dischargers in the basin (FDEP, 2007).

Listed below is a brief summary of additional surveys conducted in the Escambia River and Bay and Pensacola Bay basins. Only a fraction of the data collected has been entered into EPA or Florida STORET.

37

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

The US Dept. of the Interior (USDI, 1970), prior to EPA, conducted surveys of the Escambia River, Escambia Bay, Mulatto Bayou, and the major dischargers to this system in 1969. The many fish kills in Escambia Bay led to recommend effluent limits for BOD and nutrients for the dischargers. As an example, the NO3N levels of 0.03 mg/l of a relatively unpolluted estuary (Wacasassa) were used as a reference stream.

The EPA (Olinger, 1975) conducted the most comprehensive surveys (1974) to date of the entire Escambia Bay System. The intent was to develop permit limits (BOD and nutrients) for the major domestic and industrial dischargers. Water quality, sediment, dye tracing, and biological studies were included in their analysis.

Several of the major dischargers have conducted intensive surveys and dye studies as part of their permitting process. These include:

International Paper (Livingston, 1999; Niedoroda, 1999; Gallagher, 1999) conducted a one year data collection to support a circulation and water quality model of Escambia Bay. See Appendix J for data from this study.

The ECUA WQBEL Study (Volkert, 2004) compiled and mapped historical water quality data, but focused mainly on Pensacola Bay proper, near their present discharge location. Historical loadings of other point sources and nonpoint sources were also summarized.

The Jefferson Smurfit (CCA) pulp mill located in Brewton, Alabama has conducted several intensive surveys on the Escambia River (above and below the Alabama-Florida state line). Some of these surveys were used to develop Wasteload Allocation (WQBEL) limits via modeling with QUAL2E.

The EPA Gulf Breeze staff has conducted numerous special studies of the Pensacola and Perdido Bay systems.

University of West Florida researchers have also conducted numerous water quality studies in the area. Appendix E contains a chart of the TKN data collected along the Escambia River and its tributaries on October 2, 2002.

The NWFWMD have developed a SWIM Plan to address the Pensacola Bay water resources. Because of limited funding, their sampling has focused mainly on stormwater and sediments of the urban tidal tributaries to Pensacola Bay including: Bayou Chico, Bayou Texar, etc.

DACS SEAS report (Knight, 2003) summarizes many of the pollutant sources in the Pensacola Bay system that affect shellfish harvesting. Included in their analysis are regression equations relating Escambia River flows and rainfall to bacteria samples at individual sample stations. Since their data is collected at a greater density in both space and time than typical nutrient sampling, it provides valuable insight to the response of the bay system to local and regional rainfall and runoff.

38

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

5.1.2 Temporal Trends We have examined the temporal trend of a variety of water quality parameters (in addition to chl a, TN, and TP). A simple linear regression was used to standardize the analysis. It is apparent, however, that many parameters that were very high in the 1970’s may have been undergoing both increasing and decreasing trends since. Listed below is a summary of the types of trends developed. A complete set of these trends can be found on the companion CD. Appendix F and Appendix G are summaries by WBID and parameter of the regression equations, R2, and number of data points.

Individual Station Trends Station 21FLBFA 33030001- Daily loads of BOD5, nutrients vs. Date, Correlations of Ln concentration vs. Ln flow.

WBID 548A Escambia Bay N composite stations Monthly average concentrations of Chl a , Nutrients, BOD5, etc. vs. Date.

WBID 548B Escambia Bay S composite stations Monthly average concentrations of Chl a, Nutrients, BOD5, etc. vs. Date.

Escambia River WBIDs 10A, 10B, 10C, 10D, 10E, and 10F composite stations Monthly average concentrations of Chl a, Nutrients, BOD5, etc. vs. Date.

Escambia River and Bay Tributaries WBIDs 420, 493, 523 composite stations Monthly average concentrations of Chl a, Nutrients, BOD5, etc. vs. Date.

5.1.3 Spatial Trends

These data are very sparse for given small windows of time, such as intensive surveys during stable flow conditions. They are valuable for developing deterministic models (Chapra, 1997) of loads by individual point sources or tributaries and the decay or loss of pollutants moving downstream in a river or bay system. The Escambia River (FEMA, 2006) streambed elevation vs. river mile graph (Appendix J) is a valuable tool to show the absolute locations of tributaries as well as the extent of tidal influence from the bay on the river. In Alabama, the Conecuh River is impounded to form several reservoirs. These reservoirs serve to settle out, store, or delay the arrival of some pollutants (ADEM, 1999).

In order to visualize the contributions from Alabama vs. Florida, we have plotted the spatial (annual average) profiles (from the Conecuh headwaters to Escambia Bay) for TN and TP from 2004. The TN data show that in Alabama, the values stabilized at about 0.402 mg/l, but increased at WBID 10C to 0.532 mg/l and then declined slightly at WBID 10D to 0.516 mg/l. TN increased dramatically at WBID 10F and Escambia Bay WBIDs 548A, 548B, and 548C. The increase at WBID 10C suggests that point sources (JSC pulp mill) near Brewton, Alabama and Century, Florida may be contributing to this increased load. The increase in the lower river and upper bay may also be tied into point source inputs from the major industries located there. See Fig. 4.1b for location of the point sources. The TP data in Alabama are fairly uniform at 0.05 to 0.06 mg/l. These values decrease to 0.04 mg/l in the lower river and upper bay.

39

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 5-1 Monitoring Sites in Escambia Bay N (WBID 548A)

40

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 5-2 Monitoring Sites in Escambia River (WBID 10C)

41

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Figure 5-3 Monitoring Sites in Escambia River (WBID 10D)

42

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Table 5-1 Organizations that are sampling WBID 548A, 10C, & 10D WBID ORGANIZATION 10C Bream Fisherman's Association 10C FDEP Ambient Monitoring 10C Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FL Dept. of Environmental Protection, Northeast 10C District 10C Northwest Florida Water Management District 10C USEPA HQ 10C USEPA Region 4 10C USGS 10D Bream Fisherman's Association 10D FDEP Ambient Monitoring 10D Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FL Dept. of Environmental Protection, Northeast 10D District 10D Gulf Power Company 10D Northwest Florida Water Management District 10D USGS 548A BRA - Biological Research Associates 548A Bream Fisherman's Association 548A FDEP Northwest District FL Dept. of Environmental Protection, Northeast 548A District 548A Florida Marine Research Institute 548A Pensacola Bay Nutrient Study (Gulf Breeze)

Table 5-2 Statistical Table of Observed Historical Data for Escambia Bay WBID 548A TN TP Wbid Year (MG/L) (MG/L) 548A 1970 2.8342 548A 1971 1.5839 0.0187 548A 1972 9.3609 0.7977 548A 1973 0.9598 0.0337 548A 1974 0.5080 0.0322 548A 1975 0.8263 0.0482 548A 1976 0.6199 0.0644 548A 1977 0.6894 0.0407 548A 1978 0.9214 0.0414 548A 1979 0.6489 0.0562 548A 1980 0.5886 0.0300 548A 1981 0.7069 0.0520 548A 1982 0.5240 0.0491 548A 1983 0.5340 0.0389 548A 1984 0.7288 0.0400 548A 1985 0.5433 0.0600 548A 1986 0.5533 0.0383 548A 1987 0.7424 0.0407

43

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

548A 1988 0.6357 0.0179 548A 1989 0.8629 0.0271 548A 1990 0.8286 0.0811 548A 1991 0.9394 0.0656 548A 1992 0.5876 0.0418 548A 1993 0.4850 0.0312 548A 1994 0.6209 0.0340 548A 1995 0.6410 0.0523 548A 1996 0.5370 0.0317 548A 1997 0.5562 0.0337 548A 1998 0.5075 0.0419 548A 1999 0.5860 0.0216 548A 2000 0.7939 0.0356 548A 2001 0.6331 0.0165 548A 2002 0.9600 0.0068 548A 2003 0.0000 0.0000 548A 2004 0.7041 0.0438 548A 2005 0.6590 0.0400 548A 2006 0.5363 0.0213

548A

25.0000

20.0000

15.0000

10.0000

5.0000 CHLA CHLAC (UG/L AND 0.0000 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 DATE

CHLA C (UG/L) CHLA (UG/L)

Figure 5-4 Chart of Historical Observations for Chl a for Escambia Bay N Watershed, 548A

44

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

548A

10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00 TN (MG/L) TN 2.00

0.00 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 DATE

Figure 5-5 Chart of Historical Observations for TN for Escambia Bay N Watershed, 548A

548A

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40 TP (MG/L) 0.20

0.00 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 DATE

Figure 5-6 Chart of Historical Observations for TP for Escambia Bay N Watershed, 548A

5.2 TMDL Development Process

There are several approaches we can take to develop a nutrient TMDL for Escambia Bay. They are described in detail below.

45

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

5.2.1 Develop reference bay nutrient concentrations

5.2.1.1 Method 1

EPA (USDI, 1970) has used the reference water body approach to develop target nutrient concentrations in earlier studies of Escambia Bay. Using the unpolluted Wacasassa estuary in central Florida as a reference waterbody (NO3N = 0.03 mg/l), the EPA determined that the average value for Escambia Bay in 1969 (NH3N+NO23N = 0.49 mg/l) should be reduced by 93.9%.

The EPA (2001) is presently developing a Technical Guidance Manual (TGM) for Estuarine & Coastal Marine Waters www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/guidance/marine/index.html). There are two schools of thought regarding which is most important: concentrations or loads in estuarine chl a response. The freshwater residence time is also an important parameter in determining the fraction of TN exported from an estuary. Figure 2-14 of the TGM illustrates this concept with a worldwide set of estuaries. The only Florida estuary included in this data set was Ochlockonee Bay. This estuary had a very high fraction (about 0.87) of TN exported and a very low freshwater residence time (0.1 months). The Potomac River estuary exports a smaller fraction (about 0.4) of its TN load and has a much higher freshwater residence time (about 5 months). The response of chl a for the Potomac is a curvilinear increasing trend with TN loads (with a 1-2 month lag time) as shown in Fig. 2-15 of the TGM.

The EPA’s Regional Technical Assistance Group (RTAG) has also proposed a hypothetical TN criteria of TN= 50 uMoles (X 14 g N/Mole =0.700 mg/l) based on an assessment of seagrass coverage from 1970 onward. This methodology relies on an empirical relationship between the causal nutrients (TN and TP) and response variables such chl a, phytoplankton species composition, Sechhi depth, DO in the hypolimnion, and seagrass or submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) biomass or coverage. A decision making protocol is set up such that both the causal nutrient criteria must be met and three of five response criteria must be met for three out of four sampling events for two consecutive calendar years of sampling. Additional methods for establishing criteria include a multivariable enrichment index (EI) score. This methodology assigns each of the causal and response variables a score based on its deviation from an individual criterion.

At the upper end of the watershed, we can also establish TN and TP criteria based on unimpacted streams draining to Escambia Bay. The USGS started the Hydrologic Benchmark Program (HBN) to track water-quality trends in streams draining basins free from anthropogenic influence (Clark, 2000; Smith, 2003). The median flow weighted values of TN=0.26 mg/l and TP=0.022 mg/l were obtained for all sites. These values are approximately 50% of the concentrations shown for Escambia River in Appendix E.

Using the hypothetical TN=0.700 mg/l criterion, we find that in WBID 548A, 15 years of 36 had annual average TN values exceeding 0.700 mg/l. Using the years (1973-2006) with annual average TN> 0.700 mg/l, the average percent reduction needed for TN is 14.7%. Develop TN and TP loads for chl a <11 ug/l

46

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

5.2.1.2 Method 2

This method relies on water quality and flow data for WBID 10C. Using the daily flows from the USGS gage site at SR 4 (02375500), loads were computed for each date TN and TP values were measured. A regression was performed (LOADEST) as outlined in Chapter 4. Daily loads of LTN and LTP were computed for the entire flow record from 1976-2006. The daily loads were then summed to give annual loads. These were then divided into two groups: those with chl a >11 ug/l and those with chl a < 11 ug/l. LTN% reduction = (LTN>-LTN<)*100%/ LTN>= 20.6% LTP% reduction = (LTP>-LTP<)*100%/ LTP> = 26.5% 5.2.1.3 Method 3

This method is an extension of Method 2 using water quality and flow data for WBID 10D. LTN% reduction = (LTN>-LTN<)*100%/ LTN>= 18.3% LTP% reduction = (LTP>-LTP<)*100%/ LTP> = 22.0%

Develop TN and TP loads for chl a <7.5 ug/l 5.2.1.4 Method 4

Similar to method 2 above for WBID 10C loads, we used chl a< 7.5 ug/l. LTN% reduction = (LTN>-LTN<)*100%/ LTN>= 22.9% LTP% reduction = (LTP>-LTP<)*100%/ LTP> = 30.5%

5.2.1.5 Method 5

Similar to method 3 above for WBID 10D. LTN% reduction = (LTN>-LTN<)*100%/ LTN>= 18.5% LTP% reduction = (LTP>-LTP<)*100%/ LTP> = 19.4%

Comparing the methods above, the percent reductions are comparable in value (about 20%). The loads computed from flows at the WBID 10C site are slightly more accurate than those from WBID 10D based on the nature of the USGS gage. Develop TN and TP loads for chl a <11 ug/l using 3D models 5.2.1.6 Method 6

This method relies on a deterministic model including 3D hydrodynamics and water quality. The WQBEL developed for a proposed discharge (24 MGD) for Champion International Corporation Paper Mill (CIC) in 1999 included a 3D model of Escambia Bay and part of Pensacola Bay. The HydroQual ECOM model (Gallagher, 1999) was calibrated with data collected from September-October 1997. The proposed increased loading from CIC (TNmax = 10.0 mg/l or LTNmax= 2.0016E3 lb/day; TP= 1.0 mg/l or LTPmax= 2.0016E2 lb/day) resulted in increases of chl a in upper Escambia Bay of 1 ug/l to 4 ug/l, depending on flow and wind conditions in the bay. During this time, the max chl a in upper Escambia Bay varied from about 9 to 17 ug/l and Escambia River flow was stable at about 1800 to 2000 cfs.

47

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

In 2007, Emerald Coast Utilities Authority (ECUA) proposed moving their discharge (20 MGD design flow) from Pensacola Bay to a point on the Escambia River. The WQBEL analysis is still being developed, but it includes the same model and data set developed for CIC. HydroQual (Thuman, 2007) has included both ECUA and the Gulf Power discharge in the most recent modelling.

5.3 Critical Conditions/Seasonality

The critical condition for chl a in a given watershed depends on many factors, including the presence of point sources and the land use pattern in the watershed. Typically, the critical condition for nonpoint sources is an extended dry period followed by a rainfall runoff event. During the wet weather period, rainfall washes off nutrients that have built up on the land surface under dry conditions. However, significant nonpoint source contributions can also appear under dry conditions without any major surface runoff event. This may happen when nonpoint sources contaminate the surficial aquifer and nutrients are brought into the receiving waters through baseflow. In addition, sediments that have accumulated for months may provide a flux of nutrients to the water column under certain weather or DO conditions. The critical condition for point source loading typically occurs during periods of low stream flow, when dilution is minimized.

For the Escambia Bay watershed, exceedances occurred primarily during the third quarter of the year: July, August, September (IWR seasonal tool, Run 27). This was also true for TP, but TN was slightly higher during the first quarter compared to the third. Additional studies by EPA (Murrell, 2002; Murrell, 2003; Murrell, 2005) confirm peak phytoplankton productivity during the summer period. Large episodic freshwater flow events from the Escambia River are also a strong influence in this system (Murrell, 2006). The large flow can have an initial inhibitory effect on phytoplankton (chl a) production and then a lagged stimulatory effect.

While all the nutrient load calculations in this report are determined on an annual load basis, the dynamics of chl a production proceeds at a much more rapid rate. The water quality modeling report developed for Champion (Gallagher, 1999) shows scenarios of the driving forces (wind speed/direction, flow, solar radiation and OPO4P concentration) that can change the chl a levels appreciably (see Fig. 4-62 and Page 4-62) in Escambia Bay.

48

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

6 Determination of the TMDL

6.1 Expression and Allocation of the TMDL

The objective of a TMDL is to provide a basis for allocating acceptable loads among all of the known pollutant sources in a watershed so that appropriate control measures can be implemented and water quality standards achieved. A TMDL is expressed as the sum of all point source loads (Waste Load Allocations, or WLAs), nonpoint source loads (Load Allocations, or LAs), and an appropriate margin of safety (MOS), which takes into account any uncertainty concerning the relationship between effluent limitations and water quality: TMDL = ∑ WLAs + ∑ LAs + MOS As discussed earlier, the WLA is broken out into separate subcategories for wastewater discharges and stormwater discharges regulated under the NPDES Program:

TMDL ≅ ∑ WLAswastewater + ∑ WLAsNPDES Stormwater + ∑ LAs + MOS It should be noted that the various components of the revised TMDL equation may not sum up to the value of the TMDL because a) the WLA for NPDES stormwater is typically based on the percent reduction needed for nonpoint sources and is also accounted for within the LA, and b) TMDL components can be expressed in different terms (for example, the WLA for stormwater is typically expressed as a percent reduction, and the WLA for wastewater is typically expressed as mass per day).

WLAs for stormwater discharges are typically expressed as “percent reduction” because it is very difficult to quantify the loads from MS4s (given the numerous discharge points) and to distinguish loads from MS4s from other nonpoint sources (given the nature of stormwater transport). The permitting of stormwater discharges also differs from the permitting of most wastewater point sources. Because stormwater discharges cannot be centrally collected, monitored, and treated, they are not subject to the same types of effluent limitations as wastewater facilities, and instead are required to meet a performance standard of providing treatment to the “maximum extent practical” through the implementation of BMPs.

This approach is consistent with federal regulations (40 CFR § 130.2[I]), which state that TMDLs can be expressed in terms of mass per time (e.g., pounds per day), toxicity, or other appropriate measure. TMDLs for the Escambia Bay watershed are expressed in terms of percent reduction, and represent the maximum annual total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) load the Watershed can assimilate and maintain the chl a criterion (Table 6.1).

For the development of the load reductions needed to achieve the chl a target of 7.5 ug/l, the analysis conducted in Method 4, which uses flows and loads in WBID 10C. This amount of information available from this site was more adequate than other gage sites in the watershed. Table 6.1 includes the results of Method 4 and is the most conservative.

49

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Table 6-1 TMDL Components for the Escambia Bay N Watershed

TMDL WLA LA WBID Parameter (Percent (Percent MOS NPDES Wastewater Reduction) Stormwater Reduction) Escambia Bay N Watershed (WBID TN 22.9 22.9 22.9 22.9 Implicit 548A) Escambia Bay N Watershed (WBID TP 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 Implicit 548A) 6.1.1 Load Allocation (LA)

Based on a load approach similar to that developed for Roberts Bay, FL (Petrus,, 2005), a total nitrogen (TN) reduction of 22.9 % and total phosphorus (TP) reduction of 30.5 % is needed from nonpoint sources. It should be noted that the LA includes loading from stormwater discharges regulated by the Department and the Water Management Districts that are not part of the NPDES Stormwater Program (see Appendix A).

6.1.2 Wasteload Allocation (WLA)

Based on a load approach similar to that developed for Roberts Bay, FL (Petrus, 2005), a total nitrogen (TN) reduction of 22.9 % and total phosphorus (TP) reduction of 30.5 % is needed from point sources.

6.1.3 NPDES Wastewater Discharges

As part of this TMDL, these facilities, and any future discharge permits issued within the Pensacola Basin, will be required to meet state Class III criteria for chl a as well as the TMDL nutrient values. Any future allocations would require a reduction in nonpoint sources such that these values are not exceeded. Currently, the TMDL expresses the wasteload allocation of discrete point source dischargers as a percent reduction. As specified in Section 7 a process needs to be developed to implement the percent reduction of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in the basin.

6.1.3.1 NPDES Stormwater Discharges

Escambia County, City of Pensacola, Town of Century, and Florida DOT District Three, MS4 permit number FLS000019, and Phase II Permittees Santa Rosa County, Milton Gulf Breeze, MS4 permit number FLS000019 must obtain an 22.9 percent reduction in current TN and 30.5 percent reduction in TP loading during the both annual and summer flow conditions It should be noted that any MS4 permittee will only be responsible for reducing the loads associated with stormwater outfalls for which it owns or otherwise has responsible control, and is not responsible for reducing other nonpoint source loads within its jurisdiction.

50

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

6.2 Margin of Safety (MOS)

Consistent with the recommendations of the Allocation Technical Advisory Committee (FDEP, February 2001), an implicit margin of safety (MOS) was used in the development of this TMDL. An implicit MOS was provided by the conservative decisions associated with a number of modeling assumptions and the development of the assimilative capacity.

For nutrients, an implicit MOS was inherently incorporated by using the lower chl a as the water quality target. Some of the point source dischargers near Escambia Bay have reduced their surface loadings and this may reduce the suggested percent reductions.

51

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

7 Next Steps: Implementation Plan Development and Beyond

7.1 Basin Management Action Plan

Following the adoption of this TMDL by rule, the next step in the TMDL process is to develop an implementation plan for the TMDL, which will be a component of the Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) for the Pensacola Watershed. This document will be developed over the next year in cooperation with local stakeholders and will attempt to reach consensus on more detailed allocations and on how load reductions will be accomplished. The BMAP will include the following: • Appropriate allocations among the affected parties, • A description of the load reduction activities to be undertaken, • Timetables for project implementation and completion, • Funding mechanisms that may be utilized, • Any applicable signed agreement, • Local ordinances defining actions to be taken or prohibited, • Local water quality standards, permits, or load limitation agreements, and • Monitoring and follow-up measures.

The current NPDES MS 4 program in Escambia County (see Appendix A) includes a listing of basins where BMP coverage of Dry and Wet stormwater ponds have been created. According to the NPDES 2002 annual report, approximately 14% of the land area in unincorporated Escambia County is served by BMPs.

52

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

8 References Alabama Department of Environmental Management. 2002 Nonpoint Source Screening Assessment of Southeast Alabama River Basins–1999, Volume II Perdido and Escambia Basins. Report Date: May 1, 2002.

ADEM, 2001. Fact Sheet for JSC Brewton, Inc. NPDES Permit AL0002682. Includes QUAL2E model runs for Escambia River from Alabama SR 41 to below Century, Florida and Canoe Creek (51.8 miles).

ADEM, 2005a. Alabama’s 2002 water quality report to Congress (Clean Water Act Section 305(b) Report), and Draft 2004 section 303(d) list fact sheet. Available: http://www.adem.state.al.us/WaterDivision/WQuality/305b/Draft2002/2002.htm and http://www.adem.state.al.us/WaterDivision/WQuality/303d/WQ303d.htm.

ADEM, 2005b. Alabama’s Chapter 335-6-10 water quality criteria.

ADEM, 2005d. Alabama regulations. http://www.adem.state.al.us/Regulations/regulations.htm.

Alexander, R.B. and R.A. Smith, 1990. County level estimates of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer use in the United States, 1945 to 1985. OFR 90-130.

Alexander, R.B., R.A. Smith, and G.E. Schwarz, 2000. Effect of Stream Channel Size on the Delivery of Nitrogen to the Gulf of Mexico, Nature, Vol. 403, Feb. 17, 2000/ www.nature.com.

Andrews, W.J., 1993. Ground-Water Quality and Trends at Two Industrial Wastewater-Injection Sites in Northwestern Florida, 1975-1991, USGS WRI 93-4224.

Arnold, J.G., P.M.Allen, R. Muttiah, and G. Bernhardt, 1995. Automated base flow separation and recession analysis techniques. Ground Water 33(6): 1010-1018.

Arnold, J.G. and P.M.Allen, 1999. Automated methods for estimating baseflow and ground water recharge from streamflow records. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35(2): 411-424.

Battaglin, W.A., and D.A. Goolsby, 1995. Spatial data in geographic information system format on agricultural chemical use-Land use, and cropping practices in the United States. USGS WRI 95-4176. http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri944176.

Benham, B., 2007. Bacteria Source Load Calculator v. 2.0, Users Manual BSE Doc. No. 2007- 0002, Virginia Tech Center for TMDL and Watershed Studies.

Bottcher, D., B. Jacobson, and J. G. Hiscock. May 25-26, 2005. WAM training manual.

Brezonik, P.L., C.D. Hendry, Jr., E.S. Edgerton, R.L. Schulze, and T.L. Crisman, 1983. Acidity, Nutrients, and Minerals in Atmospheric Precipitation over Florida: Deposition Patterns, Mechanisms, and Ecological Effects, EPA-600/3-83-004.

53

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

CDM. September 1998. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, Michigan. Technical memorandum. User’s manual: Watershed management model version 4.0. RPO-NPS-TM27.01.

CDM. 1998. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project, Wayne County, Michigan. User’s manual: Watershed management model, version 4.1. PRO-NPS- TM27.02.

Chapra, S. 1997. Surface water-quality modeling. McGraw Hill Science/Engineering/Math.

Choquette, A. F., L. K. Ham, and A. A. Sepulveda. 1997. Methods for estimating streamflow and water-quality trends for the Surface-Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Network in Florida. USGS OFR 97-352.

Cleland, B. 2002. TMDL development from the “bottom up”—Part II: Using duration curves to connect the pieces. Washington, D. C.: America’s Clean Water Foundation.

Cleland, B. 2003. TMDL development from the “bottom up”—Part III: Duration durves and wet-weather assessments. Washington, D. C.: America’s Clean Water Foundation.

Cleveland, S.D., 2006. Atmospheric Mercury Input to the Pensacola Bay Watershed, MS Thesis, The Florida State University, Fall 2006.

Cooley, B, 2001. FDEP comments to Jim Philips ADEM on NPDES Permit AL0002682, JSC Brewton, Inc. Feb. 19, 2001.

Cowan, J.L.W., J.R. Pennock, and W.R. Boynton, 1996. Seasonal and interannual patterns of sediment-water nutrient and oxygen fluxes in Mobile Bay, Alabama (USA): regulating factors and ecological significance, Marine Ecology Progress Series Vol. 141: 229-245, 1996.

Davis, M. 2004. EPA/FDEP load duration curve protocols.

DiDonato, G.T., E.M. Lores. M.C. Murrell, L.M. Smith, and J.M. Caffrey, 2006. Gulf and Caribbean Research Vol. 18, 15-25, 2006.

DiToro, D.M., 2001. Sediment Flux Modeling, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

FEMA, 2006. Flood Insurance Study, Escambia County, Florida and Incorporated Areas, FISN 12033CV000A, Sept. 29, 2006.

Flemer, D.A., E.M. LOres, and C.M. BUndrick, 1998. Potential Sediment Denitrification Rates in Esruaries of Northern Gulf of Mexico, Journal Environmental Quality, Vol. 27:859-868 (1998).

Florida Administrative Code. Chapter 62-302, Surface water quality standards.

Florida Administrative Code. Chapter 62-303, Identification of impaired surface waters.

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. September 2001. Florida Aquaculture. Issue No. 11.

54

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 2003. Florida Agricultural Fast Facts.

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Web site. 2001. Available: http://doacs.state.fl.us/aqua/seas.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection , January 1998. 1997 residuals inventory, Florida residuals: Spread the wealth! Domestic Wastewater Section.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. February 2001. A Report to the Governor and the Legislature on the Allocation of Total Maximum Daily Loads in Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: Bureau of Watershed Management. Available: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/Allocation.pdf.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. November 2001. Ocklawaha Basin Status Report. Tallahassee, Florida. Available: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/stat_rep.htm.

FDEP, 2006. Water Quality Status Report Pensacola Bay.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2005. FDEP Maintenance Dredging File No. 0187162-001-EI.

Florida Department of Health. 2001. Florida Healthy Beaches Program Web site. Available: http://esetappsdoh.doh.state.fl.us/irm00beachwater/default.aspx.

Florida Department of Health Web site. 2004. Available: http://www.doh.state.fl.us/.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 1999. Personal communication August 27, 1999 to EPA cited in USEPA February 2001 TMDL.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Web site. 2001. Available: http://floridaconservation.org/.

Florida Watershed Restoration Act. Chapter 99-223, Laws of Florida.

Fujioka, R. S., and M. N. Byaappanahalli. 2004. Proceedings and report, Tropical Water Quality Indicator Workshop. Special report SR-2004-01. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Water Resources Center.atano, and M. Abe, 2005

Funaba, M., Y. Oka, S. Kobayashi, M. Kaneko, H. Yamamoto, K. Namikawa, T. Iriki, Y. Hatano, and M. Abe, 2005. Evaluation of meat meal, chicken meal, and corn gluten meal as dietary sources of protein in dry cat food, Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research, Vol. 69(4), Oct. 2005.

Gallagher, T.W., A.J.Thuman, A.F. Blumberg, and Q. Ahsan, 1999. Pensacola Bay System Environmental Study Vol. 3 (of 5), Section 4-Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Modeling, Prepared for Champion International Corp., Feb. 1, 1999.

Grubbs, J.W., 1994. Ground-Water Recharge in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida, USGS WRI Report 94-4179.

55

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Hagedorn, C., R. B. Reneau, M. Saluta, and A. Chapman. 2003. Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program, memorandum of agreement 50312-01-13-PT, impact of onsite wastewater systems on water quality in coastal regions.

Hagy III, J.D., J.C. Lehrter, and M.C. Murrell, 2006. Effects of Hurricane Ivan on Water Quality in Pensacola Bay, Florida, Estauries and Coasts, Vol. 29, No. 6A, p.919-925, December 2006.

Harwood, V. May 27, 2004. Microbial source tracking: tools for refining total maximum daily load assessments, draft scope of work. Prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Department of Biology, University of South Florida.

Hirsch, R. M. August 1982. A comparison of four streamflow record extension techniques. Water Resources Research, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 1081-1088.

Jozwiak, S. 2005. FDEP NPDES program, personal communication regarding NPDES MS4 permitted facilities in NW District.

Knight, C.R. and P.E. Couch, 2004. Comprehensive Shellfish Harvesting Area Survey of the Pensacola Bay System Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services Shellfish Environmental Assessment Section, Oct. 6, 2004.

Knight, J., A. Bahtijarevic, and T.R.Pratt, 1996. Phase 1 Evaluation of Impacts to Ground water Quality from Agrichemical Usage in Rural Areas of Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Prepared by NWFWMD for FDEP Bureau of Water Resource protection Bioassessment and Hydrologic Survey Section Tallahassee, Florida, December, 1996.

Lewis, M.A., J.C. Moore, L.R. Goodman, J.M. Patrick, R.S. Stanley, T.H. Roush, and R.L. Quarles, 1998a. The Effects of Urbanization on the Spatial and Temporal Chemical Quality of Three Tidal Bayous in the Gulf of Mexico, USEPA Gulf Breeze, FL.

Lewis, M.A., D.E. Weber, R.S. Stanley, R.L. Quarles, T.H. Roush, and B. Albrecht, 1998b. Wastewater Discharges as a Source of Sediment Contamination in Gulf of Mexico Near- Coastal Areas, USEPA Gulf Breeze, FL.

Lewis, M.A., D.E. Weber, and R.S. Stanley, 1998c. Comparative Animal and Plant Toxicities of Ten Treated Effluents Discharged to Near-Coastal Areas of the Gulf of Mexico, EPA Gulf Breeze, FL.

Livingston, R.J., 1999. . Pensacola Bay System Environmental Study Vol. 4 (of 5), Section 5a- Ecology and Trophic Organization, Prepared for Champion International Corp., Feb. 1, 1999.

Livingston, R.J., 2001. Eutrophication Processes in coastal systems: origin and succession of plankton blooms and effects on secondary production in Gulf Coast estuaries, CRC Press.

Livingston, R.J., 2003. Trophic organization in coastal systems, CRC Press.

Matassa, M. R., C. L. McEntyre, and J. T. Watson. October 2003. Tennessee Valley marina and campground wastewater characterization screening study. Environmental Impacts and Reduction Technologies Public Power Institute.

56

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Murrell, M.C., R.S. Stanley, E.M. Lores, G.T. DiDonato, L.M. Smith, and D.A. Flemer, 2002. Bulletin of Marine Science, 70 (1): 155-167, 2002.

Murrell, M.C. and J.M. Caffrey, 2005. High Cyanobacterial Abundance in Three Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Estuaries, Gulf and Caribbean Research Vol. 17, 95-106, 2005.

Murrell, M.C., J.D.Hagy III, E.M.Lores, and R.M.Greene, 2006. Phytoplankton production and nutrient distributions in a sub-tropical estuary: importance of freshwater flow, Proposed Journal: Estuaries and Coasts, Draft: June 28, 2006.

Niedoroda, A., 1999. . Pensacola Bay System Environmental Study Vol. 3 (of 5), Section 4- Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Modeling, Prepared for Champion International Corp., Feb. 1, 1999.

Northwest Florida Water Management District Web site. 2001. Available: http://www.nwfwmd.state.fl.us/.

Pollman, C.D. and S. Roy, 2003. Examination of Atmospheric Deposition Chemistry and its Potential Effects on the Lower St. Johns Estuary, Tasks 1 through 4 , Tetra Tech Final report submitted to St. Johns River Water Management District, Aug. 20, 2003.

Poor, N., R. Pribble, and H. Greening, 2001. Direct wet and dry deposition of ammonia, nitric acid, ammonium, and nitrate to Tampa bay Estuary, FL, USA. Atmos. Environ. 35:3947- 3955.

Post, D.M., J.P.Taylor, J.F.Kitchell, M.H.Olson, D.E. Schindler, and B.R. Herwig, 1998. The role of migratory waterfowl as nutrient vectors in a managed wetland, Conservation Biology, Vol. 12, 910-920.

Pribble, R. and A. Janicki, 1999. Atmospheric deposition contributions to nitrogen and phosphorus loadings in Tampa Bay: Intensive wet and dry deposition data collection and analysis, August, 1996-July 1998. Interim data report. Tampa Bay Estuary Program Tech. Pub. #05-99.

Roaza, H.P., T.R.Pratt, and C.J. Richards, 1993. Numerical Modeling of Ground Water Flow and Contaminant Transport in the Sand-and Gravel Aquifer, Escambia County, Florida, NWFWMD Water Resources Special Report 93-4, June 1993.

RMT, Inc. 1994. Conecuh/Escambia River Study Report for the Jefferson Smurfit Corporation and Container Corporation of America Brewton, Alabama. Includes QUAL2E model runs for 1993 data.

Roeder, E. May 7, 2004. Presentation, FDOH Research Review and Advisory Committee, for Bureau of Onsite Sewage Programs Meeting. Notes by Patti Sanzone, Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Roehl, J. W. October 1-8, 1962. Sediment source areas, delivery ratios, and influencing morphological factors. International Association of Scientific Hydrology. 59: 202-213. Symposium of Bari.

57

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Rogers, T., 2006. Nitrogen Oxides Emissions for Florida Counties 2002, private communication.

Rosenau, J. C., G. L. Faulkner, C. W. Hendry, and R. W. Hull. 1977. Springs of Florida. Florida Bureau of Geology Bulletin No. 31 (revised).

Ruddy, B.C., D.L. Lorenz, and D.K. Mueller, 2006. County-Level Estimates of Nutrient Inputs to the Land Surface of the Conterminous United States, 1982-2001. USGS SRI 2006-5012.

Rumenik, R. P., and J. W. Grubbs. 1996. Low-flow characteristics of Florida streams. U. S. Geological Survey Water Resource Investigations Report 93–4165.

Runkel, R.L., C.G. Crawford, and T.A. Cohn, 2004. Load Estimator (LOADEST): A FORTRAN Program for Estimating Constituent Loads in Streams and Rivers, USGS Techniques and Methods Book 4, Chapter A5.

Schwarz, G.E., A.B.Hoos, R.B. Alexander, and R.A. Smith, 2006. The SPARROW Surface Water-Quality Model: Theory, Application and User Documentation: USGS Techniques and Methods 6-B3, 248 p. and CD-ROM.

Shirley, S. July 12, 2005. Alabama Department of Environmental Management. Personal communication on river mile distances of WWTP.

Smith, R.A., R.B. Alexander, and G.E. Schwarz, 2003. Natural Background Concentrations of Nutrients in Streams and Rivers of the Conterminous United States, Environmental Science &/Technology Vol. 37, No. 14, 2003.

Smith, R.A., G.E. Schwarz, and R.B. Alexander, 1997. Regional Interpretation of water-quality monitoring data, Water Resources Research, Vol. 33, No. 12, pages 2781-2798, December 1997.

Snyder, R.A., 2006. Analysis of Fecal Loadings Into Bayous Grande, Chico, and Texar Pensacola Bay System, FL, Univ. of West Florida, Center for Environmental Diagnostics and Remediation, Prepared for Florida Dept. of Health Escambia County Health Dept. Sept. 12, 2006. http://uwf.edu/cedb

Speas, S. 2004. FDEP domestic waste, personal communication regarding septic tank treatment units.

Stiles, T. 2002. Kansas Department of Health and Environment Web site. Available: http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/tmdl/Data.htm.

Torak, L. J., G. A. Strain, and J. G. Herndon. 1996. Geohydrology and evaluation of stream– aquifer relations in the Apalachicola–Chattahoochee–Flint River Basin, southeastern Alabama, northwestern Florida, and southwestern Georgia. U. S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2460.

U. S. Census Bureau Web site. 2007. Available: http://www.census.gov/.

58

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

U. S. Census Bureau 2003. Census data. Available: http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/highlights/fl/.

U. S. Department of Agriculture. 2002. National Agricultural Statistics Service. Available: http://www.usda.gov/nass/.

U. S. Department of the Interior, 1970. Effects of Pollution on Water Quality- Escambia River and Bay, Florida, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Southeast Water Laboratory, Athens, Georgia, January 1970.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 2000. Bacteria indicator tool user’s guide. EPA-823-B-01-003.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Protocol for determining pathogen TMDLs. EPA 841-R-00-002. Washington, D. C.: Office of Water. Available: http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/pathogen_all.pdf.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, EPA/625/R-00/008, February 2002.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. January 7, 2003. Watershed-based National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting policy statement. Memorandum from G. Tracy Mehan, III. Available: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/watershed-permitting- policy.pdf.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. Delta Whitewater® ATU. Region 1, New England. Available: www.epa.gov/region1/assistance/ceitts/wastewater/techs/delta.html.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. 1995. Gulf sturgeon recovery plan. Atlanta, Georgia.

U. S. Geological Survey Web site. 2005. Available: http://www.usgs.gov/.

U. S. Veterinary Association Web site. 2004. Available: http://www.avma.org..

Volkert and Associates, Inc., 2004. Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation Study Main Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, Pensacola, Florida. Prepared for The Emerald Coast Utilities Authority, July 2, 2004, Revision Number: 1.

Warden, B., 2007. Web site www.nricd.org/landwaterconnection/scooponpoop.htm.

Washington State Department of Health Web site. 2004. Available: http://www.doh.wa.gov/wastewater.htm.

Wieckowicz, R., 2001. FDEP comments on Jefferson Smurfit (JSC) Brewton, Inc. Alabama NPDES Permit AL0002682, Memo January 23, 2001 to Vince Seibold.

Ziegmont, C. 2005. FDEP permitting, personal communication regarding data sources for spills. Referred to web site http://www.eoconline.org.

59

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix A: Background Information on Federal and State Stormwater Programs-NPDES MS4 Data

60

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

61

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

62

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

63

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

64

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix B: Summary of Land Use Loads and Trends by Category Mulatto Bayou WMM:

Nonpoint source estimate: Contribution to nitrogen and phosphorus loads from different land use categories:

Step 1: Runoff Effective Area Percent Impervious Pervious precipitat. Runoff runoff runoff (acre) impervious coef. coef. (in/year) (acre-feet)

Forest/Rural Open 3244 0.5% 0.95 0.31 80.45 6,742.4 Urban Open 545 0.5% 0.95 0.04 80.45 168.1 Agricultural 35 0.0% 0.95 0.30 80.45 70.6 Low density residential 511 14.7% 0.95 0.15 80.45 918.5 Medium density residential 418 28.1% 0.95 0.15 80.45 1,051.6 High density residential 0 67.0% 0.95 0.12 80.45 0.0 Highways 70 36.2% 0.95 0.69 80.45 366.0 Water 659 100.0% 0.95 0.00 80.45 4,194.8 Rangeland 120 0.0% 0.95 0.30 80.45 244.1 Wetlands 1085 0.0% 0.95 0.23 80.45 1,637.0 Other 1 (Barren Land) 0 0.2% 0.95 0.30 80.45 0.0 Other 2 0.00 0.0% 0.95 0.00 80.45 0.0 Total 6686.33 15,393.10

Step 2: Nutrient Loads

concentrations of original EMCs suspended form particulate form Ctn Ctp %Stn %Stp CPtn CPtp (mg/L) (mg/L) % % (mg/L) (mg/L) Forest/Rural Open 1.09 0.046 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Urban Open 1.12 0.18 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Agricultural 2.32 0.344 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Low density residential 1.64 0.191 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Medium density residential 2.18 0.335 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 High density residential 2.42 0.49 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Highways 2.23 0.27 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Water 1.6 0.067 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Rangeland 2.32 0.344 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Wetlands 1.01 0.09 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Other 1 (Barren Land) 1.91 0.245 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 Other 2 0 0 0% 0% Total

65

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

concentrations of dissolved form CDtn CDtp Delivery TN load TP load Percent Percent (mg/L) (mg/L) Ratio (lbs) (lbs) of total TN of total TP 1.09 0.05 1 19,985.1 843.4 35 21 1.12 0.18 1 512.0 82.3 1 2 2.32 0.34 1 445.2 66.0 1 2 1.64 0.19 1 4,096.1 477.0 7 12 2.18 0.34 1 6,234.0 958.0 11 23 2.42 0.49 1 0.0 0.0 0 0 2.23 0.27 1 2,219.4 268.7 4 7 1.60 0.07 1 18,251.7 764.3 32 19 2.32 0.34 1 1,540.3 228.4 3 6 1.01 0.09 1 4,496.2 400.7 8 10 1.91 0.25 1 0.0 0.0 0 0 1 0.0 0.0 0 0 57,780.0 4,088.8

MULATTO BAYOU

R 7.00E+04 6.00E+04 5.00E+04 4.00E+04 3.00E+04 2.00E+04 1.00E+04

WMM TN LOAD (LB/YEA LOAD TN WMM 0.00E+00 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 DATE

66

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

MULATTO BAYOU

5.00E+03

4.00E+03

3.00E+03

2.00E+03

1.00E+03

WMM TP LOAD (LB/YEAR LOAD TP WMM 0.00E+00 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 DATE

Summary of TN Loads to Escambia River and Bay, 1974-2006: Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1974 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.4173E+05 6.1078E+05 6.2184E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 7.0917E+11 6.9113E+11 9.8822E+11 7.9191E+11 9.7647E+11 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 8.5597E+08 8.3136E+08 8.1970E+08 8.2145E+08 8.2894E+08 Total Baseflow 0.0000E+00 2.2217E+06 2.0294E+06 2.5454E+06 3.2208E+06 2.4912E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 9.7693E+05 1.2430E+06 1.2614E+06 1.2754E+06 1.2877E+06 1.2985E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 5.7867E+06 7.6191E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.5303E+07 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 4.2581E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 0.0000E+00 4.0906E+08 4.5997E+08 4.1656E+08 3.0705E+08 4.3991E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07

Total Domestic Animals 8.9223E+05 1.0852E+06 1.1000E+06 1.1149E+06 1.1297E+06 1.1446E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.0361E+06 1.0138E+06 1.4636E+06 2.5922E+06 1.2104E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 1.4027E+06 7.1045E+11 6.9243E+11 9.8946E+11 7.9306E+11 9.7775E+11

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 1.4027E+06 7.1045E+11 6.9243E+11 9.8946E+11 7.9306E+11 9.7775E+11

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Point Sources

67

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Point Source Load 5.9978E+05 6.2226E+05 5.4945E+05 5.2603E+05 5.9006E+05 4.8649E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 7.8674E+11 9.6996E+11 8.5206E+11 9.9099E+11 9.2569E+11 9.7641E+11 Total Agriculture 8.4542E+08 8.9698E+08 9.4277E+08 9.6882E+08 9.8788E+08 1.7813E+09 Total Baseflow 2.8144E+06 2.7354E+06 3.0174E+06 3.0773E+06 3.5839E+06 2.5283E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.3104E+06 1.3234E+06 1.3369E+06 1.3471E+06 1.3617E+06 1.3767E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.3400E+03 1.3726E+04 8.5000E+03 2.0000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.2287E+06 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.5608E+08 3.6523E+08 4.5110E+08 4.9666E+08 3.9751E+08 4.7909E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.1594E+06 1.1743E+06 1.1891E+06 1.2040E+06 1.2188E+06 1.2336E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.5987E+06 1.1333E+06 1.5821E+06 2.0336E+06 1.8796E+06 1.2835E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 7.8805E+11 9.7122E+11 8.5346E+11 9.9246E+11 9.2708E+11 9.7869E+11

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 7.8805E+11 9.7123E+11 8.5346E+11 9.9246E+11 9.2708E+11 9.7869E+11

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 4.7914E+05 1.9713E+05 5.4949E+05 7.6923E+05 3.3836E+05 2.1295E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 8.2295E+11 8.2764E+11 8.0660E+11 7.4753E+11 5.7083E+04 6.9958E+04 Total Agriculture 1.8916E+07 1.7691E+07 1.6617E+07 1.6735E+07 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 3.7784E+06 2.2517E+06 1.0353E+06 2.5820E+06 1.9338E+06 3.5882E+06 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.3857E+06 1.3930E+06 1.4003E+06 1.4076E+06 1.4148E+06 1.4229E+06 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.9348E+00 2.9122E+01 1.6838E+02 2.3650E+02 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 5.5000E+03 8.8000E+03 9.7720E+03 5.3211E+04 2.0053E+05 1.7800E+04 Total Tidal Input/Output 6.2721E+06 5.4073E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.0870E+08 2.8031E+08 2.5232E+08 2.8305E+08 3.8018E+08 3.8048E+08 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.2485E+06 1.2633E+06 1.2782E+06 1.2930E+06 1.3079E+06 1.3227E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 3.4629E+06 1.0142E+06 3.5570E+05 1.8719E+06 8.5960E+05 1.8620E+06 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 8.2339E+11 8.2795E+11 8.0688E+11 7.4783E+11 3.8464E+08 3.8744E+08

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 8.2339E+11 8.2795E+11 8.0688E+11 7.4783E+11 3.8498E+08 3.8765E+08

Estimated Annual TN loadings (lbs/yr)

68

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

2004 2005 2006 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.6491E+05 4.1180E+05 3.2315E+05

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 6.3345E+04 7.0979E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 2.9550E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.4320E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 2.1824E+02 1.8903E+02 3.0783E+01 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 1.5793E+05 3.8000E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 6.8717E+06 1.0019E+07 4.8029E+06 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 4.1418E+08 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Wildlife 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 1.3054E+07 Total Domestic Animals 1.3376E+06 1.3524E+06 1.3672E+06 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.5960E+06 1.9538E+06 9.5644E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 4.2726E+08 1.2082E+07 5.7594E+06

Total Point and Nonpoint

Source Load 4.2762E+08 1.2494E+07 6.0826E+06

Summary of TP Loads to Escambia River and Bay, 1974-2006: Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1974 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 2.8928E+04 5.2989E+04 4.8756E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 2.6845E+08 2.6250E+08 2.5974E+08 2.5894E+08 2.5943E+08 Total Baseflow 0.0000E+00 1.4787E+05 1.3507E+05 1.6939E+05 2.1433E+05 1.6581E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 1.7411E+05 2.2152E+05 2.2480E+05 2.2730E+05 2.2948E+05 2.3142E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 1.6074E+05 1.6074E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 1.1041E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 0.0000E+00 2.8157E+07 3.1690E+07 2.8673E+07 2.1135E+07 3.0280E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 1.4425E+05 1.7545E+05 1.7785E+05 1.8025E+05 1.8265E+05 1.8505E+05

Total Measured Regression Loads 8.6827E+04 8.6744E+04 1.3241E+05 3.1297E+05 1.0428E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 1.8515E+05 2.9723E+08 2.9480E+08 2.8894E+08 2.8103E+08 2.9021E+08

69

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 1.8515E+05 2.9723E+08 2.9480E+08 2.8897E+08 2.8109E+08 2.9026E+08

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.8547E+04 3.6319E+04 4.0232E+04 4.1148E+04 3.7640E+04 3.8510E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 2.6067E+08 2.7042E+08 2.7438E+08 2.7293E+08 2.6241E+08 4.3150E+08 Total Baseflow 1.8729E+05 1.8205E+05 2.0079E+05 2.0478E+05 2.3849E+05 1.6827E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.3354E+05 2.3585E+05 2.3827E+05 2.4007E+05 2.4268E+05 2.4535E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3.1700E+03 6.8630E+03 4.2500E+03 1.0000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.4204E+05 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 3.1396E+07 2.5140E+07 3.1051E+07 3.4186E+07 2.7361E+07 3.2977E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 1.8745E+05 1.8985E+05 1.9225E+05 1.9465E+05 1.9705E+05 1.9945E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.4848E+05 9.5009E+04 1.4630E+05 2.0025E+05 1.7848E+05 1.1019E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 2.9264E+08 2.9607E+08 3.0602E+08 3.0776E+08 2.9044E+08 4.6545E+08

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 2.9267E+08 2.9611E+08 3.0606E+08 3.0780E+08 2.9047E+08 4.6549E+08

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 4.2001E+04 3.4098E+04 5.2515E+04 8.0508E+04 2.6828E+04 2.4078E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 4.1894E+06 3.5532E+06 3.3286E+06 3.3532E+06 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 2.5143E+05 1.4987E+05 6.8940E+04 1.7184E+05 1.2871E+05 2.3877E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.4695E+05 2.4827E+05 2.4955E+05 2.5086E+05 2.5214E+05 2.5359E+05 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.8370E-01 7.2804E+00 4.2095E+01 5.9126E+01 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 2.7500E+03 4.4000E+03 4.8860E+03 2.6606E+04 1.0027E+05 8.9000E+03 Total Tidal Input/Output 4.3561E+05 3.3916E+05 1.1573E+05 3.0541E+04 2.7326E+04 0.0000E+00 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 2.8132E+07 1.9294E+07 1.7368E+07 1.9483E+07 2.6169E+07 2.6189E+07 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 2.0185E+05 2.0425E+05 2.0665E+05 2.0905E+05 2.1145E+05 2.1385E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 4.3807E+05 8.4678E+04 2.3993E+04 1.9649E+05 6.9042E+04 1.6875E+05 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 3.3696E+07 2.3674E+07 2.1395E+07 2.3512E+07 2.6746E+07 2.6859E+07

70

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 3.3738E+07 2.3708E+07 2.1447E+07 2.3593E+07 2.6773E+07 2.6883E+07

Estimated Annual TP loadings (lbs/yr) 2004 2005 2006 Point Sources Total Point Source Load 3.1485E+04 3.8932E+04 3.9194E+04

Nonpoint Sources Total Atmospheric Deposition 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Agriculture 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Baseflow 1.9665E+05 Groundwater Seepage to Bay Total Septic Tanks 2.5520E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Spills Sewage and Stuff 5.4561E+01 4.7258E+01 7.6958E+00 Total Sludge/Residuals Loading 7.8965E+04 1.9000E+04 0.0000E+00 Total Tidal Input/Output 2.1700E+05 2.2986E+05 3.6488E+05 Sediment Denitrification N2/N2O 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Sediment Nutrient Release 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Surface Water Runoff 2.8509E+07 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 Total Wildlife 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 7.1949E+03 Total Domestic Animals 2.1625E+05 2.1865E+05 2.2105E+05 Total Measured Regression Loads 1.4480E+05 1.9407E+05 7.4079E+04 (WBID 10C, SR 4) Total Nonpoint Source Load 2.9402E+07 4.4293E+05 4.3896E+05

Total Point and Nonpoint Source Load 2.9433E+07 4.8186E+05 4.7815E+05

71

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

72

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

73

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

PERCENT AREA IN AREA IN AREA IN AREA IN OF PERCENT COUNTY COUNTY BASIN BASIN SQ COUNTY OF BASIN COUNTY STATE ACRES SQ MILE ACRES MILE IN BASIN IN COUNTY ESCAMBIA FL 4.1714E+05 6.5157E+02 1.5049E+05 2.3506E+02 36.0765091 5.5396E+00 SANTA ROSA FL 6.5073E+05 1.0164E+03 1.1260E+05 1.7589E+02 17.3044164 4.1450E+00 BULLOCK AL 4.0068E+05 6.2586E+02 7.0186E+04 1.0963E+02 17.516828 2.5836E+00 BUTLER AL 4.9789E+05 7.7771E+02 4.0068E+05 6.2587E+02 80.4755687 1.4749E+01 COFFEE AL 4.3548E+05 6.8023E+02 2.0266E+03 3.1655E+00 0.46536028 7.4599E-02 CONECUH AL 5.4558E+05 8.5220E+02 5.4521E+05 8.5161E+02 99.9304141 2.0069E+01 COVINGTON AL 6.6605E+05 1.0404E+03 2.4072E+05 3.7601E+02 36.1420376 8.8611E+00 CRENSHAW AL 3.9093E+05 6.1063E+02 3.5816E+05 5.5945E+02 91.6182625 1.3184E+01 ESCAMBIA AL 6.0821E+05 9.5002E+02 4.8445E+05 7.5670E+02 79.6510915 1.7833E+01 LOWNDES AL 4.6120E+05 7.2039E+02 1.1760E+04 1.8368E+01 2.54978942 4.3287E-01 MONROE AL 6.3185E+05 9.8695E+02 5.7538E+04 8.9874E+01 9.10620657 2.1180E+00 MONTGOMERY AL 5.0563E+05 7.8979E+02 6.3903E+04 9.9816E+01 12.6382984 2.3523E+00 PIKE AL 4.3017E+05 6.7193E+02 2.1891E+05 3.4194E+02 50.8883031 8.0581E+00

74

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix C: Summary of Permitted Point Source Loads FL0002313 Air Products and Chemicals TN TP Inc. (LB/YEAR) (LB/YEAR) 1989 1.0696E+05 5.93E+03 1990 1.2569E+05 6.62E+03 1991 1.4759E+05 6.19E+03 1992 1.2175E+05 7.92E+03 1993 9.4504E+04 8.24E+03 1994 1.0499E+05 8.27E+03 1995 9.8847E+04 7.95E+03 1996 1.2626E+05 6.85E+03 1997 1.0128E+05 5.72E+03 1998 8.3786E+04 4.49E+03 1999 4.9889E+04 3.45E+03 2000 2.4695E+04 3.28E+03 2001 1.7053E+04 2.75E+03 2002 3.1546E+04 4.74E+03 2003 2.7121E+04 4.01E+03 2004 2005 2006

FL0002313 Air Products and Chemicals Inc.

1.6000E+05 1.4000E+05 1.2000E+05 1.0000E+05 8.0000E+04 6.0000E+04 4.0000E+04 TN (LB/YEAR) TN 2.0000E+04 0.0000E+00 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR

75

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

FL0002313 Air Products and Chemicals Inc.

1.00E+04

8.00E+03

6.00E+03

4.00E+03

TP (LB/YEAR) 2.00E+03

0.00E+00 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR

AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS INC.

2.50E+04

2.00E+04

1.50E+04

1.00E+04

5.00E+03 TN (LB/ MONTH)

0.00E+00 Dec-89 Jan-90 Mar-90 May-90 Jun-90 Aug-90 Oct-90 Nov-90 Jan-91 DATE

76

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS INC.

9.00E+02 8.00E+02 7.00E+02 6.00E+02 5.00E+02 4.00E+02 3.00E+02 2.00E+02 TP (LB/ MONTH) 1.00E+02 0.00E+00 Dec-89 Jan-90 Mar-90 May-90 Jun-90 Aug-90 Oct-90 Nov-90 Jan-91 DATE

77

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix D: Summary of Measured USGS Loads and Decay Rates

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10C GREATER THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AVE TN AVE TN AVE TP AVE TP LOAD LOAD LOAD LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1990 2.8553E+04 1.0422E+07 3.7347E+03 1.3632E+06 1993 1.5700E+04 5.7303E+06 1.2733E+03 4.6474E+05 2003 2.5657E+04 9.3648E+06 2.5066E+03 9.1490E+05 AVE 2.3303E+04 8.5057E+06 2.5049E+03 9.1428E+05 LESS THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AVE TN AVE TN AVE TP AVE TP LOAD LOAD LOAD LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.6141E+04 9.5676E+06 2.6091E+03 9.5494E+05 1977 1.7936E+04 6.5467E+06 1.6174E+03 5.9035E+05 1978 2.2728E+04 8.2959E+06 2.4881E+03 9.0816E+05 1981 1.1355E+04 4.1445E+06 1.0613E+03 3.8737E+05 1982 1.7363E+04 6.3375E+06 1.5671E+03 5.7199E+05 1986 1.4184E+04 5.1773E+06 1.2799E+03 4.6715E+05 1987 1.4348E+04 5.2371E+06 1.1732E+03 4.2822E+05 1988 1.3867E+04 5.0752E+06 1.1883E+03 4.3491E+05 1989 2.0151E+04 7.3552E+06 1.9873E+03 7.2536E+05 1991 1.6801E+04 6.1324E+06 1.4563E+03 5.3155E+05 1992 2.0822E+04 7.6209E+06 1.9471E+03 7.1266E+05 1994 2.1737E+04 7.9340E+06 2.2782E+03 8.3155E+05 1998 3.7421E+04 1.3659E+07 5.8043E+03 2.1186E+06 1999 1.4329E+04 5.2301E+06 1.2115E+03 4.4220E+05 2000 5.1427E+03 1.8822E+06 3.3877E+02 1.2399E+05 2001 2.2875E+04 8.3492E+06 2.0962E+03 7.6513E+05 2002 1.2187E+04 4.4483E+06 9.7629E+02 3.5634E+05 2004 2.1770E+04 7.9679E+06 2.0982E+03 7.6794E+05 2005 2.5405E+04 9.2728E+06 2.6820E+03 9.7892E+05 2006 1.3452E+04 4.9101E+06 9.2762E+02 3.3858E+05 AVE 1.8501E+04 6.7572E+06 1.8394E+03 6.7179E+05 % REMOVAL

TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 20.5570 26.5218

*Years 1979, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1997 were not used do to the fact that the years did not have all four seasons .

*Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

78

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10C GREATER THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1980 2.8189E+04 1.0317E+07 3.1877E+03 1.1667E+06 1987 1.4348E+04 5.2371E+06 1.1732E+03 4.2822E+05 1990 2.8553E+04 1.0422E+07 3.7347E+03 1.3632E+06 1993 1.5700E+04 5.7303E+06 1.2733E+03 4.6474E+05 1998 3.7421E+04 1.3659E+07 5.8043E+03 2.1186E+06 1999 1.4329E+04 5.2301E+06 1.2115E+03 4.4220E+05 2002 1.2187E+04 4.4483E+06 9.7629E+02 3.5634E+05 2003 2.5657E+04 9.3648E+06 2.5066E+03 9.1490E+05 AVE 2.2048E+04 8.0510E+06 2.4834E+03 9.0686E+05 LESS THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.6141E+04 9.5676E+06 2.6091E+03 9.5494E+05 1977 1.7936E+04 6.5467E+06 1.6174E+03 5.9035E+05 1978 2.2728E+04 8.2959E+06 2.4881E+03 9.0816E+05 1979 2.5905E+04 9.4553E+06 2.6702E+03 9.7462E+05 1981 1.1355E+04 4.1445E+06 1.0613E+03 3.8737E+05 1982 1.7363E+04 6.3375E+06 1.5671E+03 5.7199E+05 1983 3.0664E+04 1.1192E+07 3.2683E+03 1.1929E+06 1984 1.8430E+04 6.7454E+06 1.6818E+03 6.1554E+05 1985 1.5526E+04 5.6671E+06 1.3678E+03 4.9926E+05 1986 1.4184E+04 5.1773E+06 1.2799E+03 4.6715E+05 1988 1.3867E+04 5.0752E+06 1.1883E+03 4.3491E+05 1989 2.0151E+04 7.3552E+06 1.9873E+03 7.2536E+05 1991 1.6801E+04 6.1324E+06 1.4563E+03 5.3155E+05 1992 2.0822E+04 7.6209E+06 1.9471E+03 7.1266E+05 1994 2.1737E+04 7.9340E+06 2.2782E+03 8.3155E+05 1997 1.7699E+04 6.4601E+06 1.5068E+03 5.5000E+05 2000 5.1427E+03 1.8822E+06 3.3877E+02 1.2399E+05 2001 2.2875E+04 8.3492E+06 2.0962E+03 7.6513E+05 2004 2.1770E+04 7.9679E+06 2.0982E+03 7.6794E+05 2005 2.5405E+04 9.2728E+06 2.6820E+03 9.7892E+05 2006 1.3452E+04 4.9101E+06 9.2762E+02 3.3858E+05 AVE 1.9045E+04 6.9566E+06 1.8151E+03 6.6299E+05 % REMOVAL TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 13.5932 26.8909

*Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

79

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10C TN 548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10C TP y = 4E-07x + 5.9492 y = 3E-06x + 6.8845 R2 = 0.0633 R2 = 0.0735 2.50E+01 2.50E+01

2.00E+01 2.00E+01

1.50E+01 1.50E+01

1.00E+01 1.00E+01 ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L 5.00E+00 ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L 5.00E+00

0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.50E+07 0.00E+00 5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06 2.00E+06 2.50E+06 CHLA 11 ANNUAL TN LOAD (LB/YEAR) CHLA 11 ANNUAL TP LOAD (LB/YEAR) STANDARD STA NDA RD

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10C GREATER THAN 7.5 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1982 1.7363E+04 6.3375E+06 1.5671E+03 5.7199E+05 1987 1.4348E+04 5.2371E+06 1.1732E+03 4.2822E+05 1988 1.3867E+04 5.0752E+06 1.1883E+03 4.3491E+05 1989 2.0151E+04 7.3552E+06 1.9873E+03 7.2536E+05 1990 28553.08391 10421875.63 3734.748449 1363183.184 1991 1.6801E+04 6.1324E+06 1.4563E+03 5.3155E+05 1992 2.0822E+04 7.6209E+06 1.9471E+03 7.1266E+05 1993 1.5700E+04 5.7303E+06 1.2733E+03 4.6474E+05 1994 2.1737E+04 7.9340E+06 2.2782E+03 8.3155E+05 1998 3.7421E+04 1.3659E+07 5.8043E+03 2.1186E+06 1999 1.4329E+04 5.2301E+06 1.2115E+03 4.4220E+05 2001 2.2875E+04 8.3492E+06 2.0962E+03 7.6513E+05 2002 1.2187E+04 4.4483E+06 9.7629E+02 3.5634E+05 2003 2.5657E+04 9.3648E+06 2.5066E+03 9.1490E+05 2004 2.1770E+04 7.9679E+06 2.0982E+03 7.6794E+05 2005 2.5405E+04 9.2728E+06 2.6820E+03 9.7892E+05 AVE 2.0562E+04 7.5085E+06 2.1238E+03 7.7551E+05 LESS THAN 7.5 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.6141E+04 9.5676E+06 2.6091E+03 9.5494E+05 1977 1.7936E+04 6.5467E+06 1.6174E+03 5.9035E+05 1978 2.2728E+04 8.2959E+06 2.4881E+03 9.0816E+05 1981 1.1355E+04 4.1445E+06 1.0613E+03 3.8737E+05 1986 1.4184E+04 5.1773E+06 1.2799E+03 4.6715E+05 2000 5.1427E+03 1.8822E+06 3.3877E+02 1.2399E+05 2006 1.3452E+04 4.9101E+06 9.2762E+02 3.3858E+05 AVE 1.5849E+04 5.7892E+06 1.4746E+03 5.3865E+05 % REMOVAL TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 22.8983 30.5425

*Years 1979, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1997 were not used do to the fact that the years did not have all four seasons . *Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

80

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10C TN 548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10C TP y = 4E-07x + 5.9492 y = 3E-06x + 6.8845 R2 = 0.0735 R2 = 0.0633 2.50E+01 2.50E+01 L 2.00E+01 2.00E+01

1.50E+01 1.50E+01

1.00E+01 1.00E+01

5.00E+00 ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L 5.00E+00 ANNUAL CHLA (UG/ CHLA ANNUAL

0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.50E+07 0.00E+00 5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06 2.00E+06 2.50E+06 CHLA 7.5 ANNUAL TN LOAD (LB/YEAR) CHLA 7.5 ANNUAL TP LOAD (LB/YEAR) STANDARD STA NDA RD

81

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10

TN LOAD (LB/DAY 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY 1 1 1974.00 1984.00 1994.00 2004.00 1974.00 1974.25 1974.50 1974.75 1975.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY 1 1 1975.00 1975.25 1975.50 1975.75 1976.00 1976.00 1976.25 1976.50 1976.75 1977.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY 1 1 1977.00 1977.25 1977.50 1977.75 1978.00 1978.00 1978.25 1978.50 1978.75 1979.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1979.00 1979.25 1979.50 1979.75 1980.00 1980.00 1980.25 1980.50 1980.75 1981.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

82

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1981.00 1981.25 1981.50 1981.75 1982.00 1982.00 1982.25 1982.50 1982.75 1983.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY 1 1 1983.00 1983.25 1983.50 1983.75 1984.00 1984.00 1984.25 1984.50 1984.75 1985.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD(LB/DAY TN LOAD(LB/DAY 1 1 1985.00 1985.25 1985.50 1985.75 1986.00 1986.00 1986.25 1986.50 1986.75 1987.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1987.00 1987.25 1987.50 1987.75 1988.00 1988.00 1988.25 1988.50 1988.75 1989.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

83

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1989.00 1989.25 1989.50 1989.75 1990.00 1990.00 1990.25 1990.50 1990.75 1991.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1991.00 1991.25 1991.50 1991.75 1992.00 1992.00 1992.25 1992.50 1992.75 1993.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1993.00 1993.25 1993.50 1993.75 1994.00 1994.00 1994.25 1994.50 1994.75 1995.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1995.00 1995.25 1995.50 1995.75 1996.00 1996.00 1996.25 1996.50 1996.75 1997.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

84

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY 1 1 1997.00 1997.25 1997.50 1997.75 1998.00 1998.00 1998.25 1998.50 1998.75 1999.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TN (LB/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1999.00 1999.25 1999.50 1999.75 2000.00 2000.00 2000.25 2000.50 2000.75 2001.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD(LB/DAY TN LOAD(LB/DAY 1 1 2001.00 2001.25 2001.50 2001.75 2002.00 2002.00 2002.25 2002.50 2002.75 2003.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10

TN LOAD (LB/DAY TN LOAD (LB/DAY 10 1 1 2003.00 2003.25 2003.50 2003.75 2004.00 2004.00 2004.25 2004.50 2004.75 2005.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

85

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) 100000 ) 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100

TN LOAD (LB/DAY 10

TN LOAD(LB/DAY 10 1 1 2005.00 2005.25 2005.50 2005.75 2006.00 2006.00 2006.25 2006.50 2006.75 2007.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY TP LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1974.00 1984.00 1994.00 2004.00 1974.00 1974.25 1974.50 1974.75 1975.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1975.00 1975.25 1975.50 1975.75 1976.00 1976.00 1976.25 1976.50 1976.75 1977.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1977.00 1977.25 1977.50 1977.75 1978.00 1978.00 1978.25 1978.50 1978.75 1979.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

86

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1979.00 1979.25 1979.50 1979.75 1980.00 1980.00 1980.25 1980.50 1980.75 1981.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1981.00 1981.25 1981.50 1981.75 1982.00 1982.00 1982.25 1982.50 1982.75 1983.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1983.00 1983.25 1983.50 1983.75 1984.00 1984.00 1984.25 1984.50 1984.75 1985.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP (LB/DAY LOAD TP 1 1 1985.00 1985.25 1985.50 1985.75 1986.00 1986.00 1986.25 1986.50 1986.75 1987.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

87

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1987.00 1987.25 1987.50 1987.75 1988.00 1988.00 1988.25 1988.50 1988.75 1989.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1989.00 1989.25 1989.50 1989.75 1990.00 1990.00 1990.25 1990.50 1990.75 1991.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1991.00 1991.25 1991.50 1991.75 1992.00 1992.00 1992.25 1992.50 1992.75 1993.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1993.00 1993.25 1993.50 1993.75 1994.00 1994.00 1994.25 1994.50 1994.75 1995.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

88

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP (LB/DAY LOAD TP 1 1 1995.00 1995.25 1995.50 1995.75 1996.00 1996.00 1996.25 1996.50 1996.75 1997.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1997.00 1997.25 1997.50 1997.75 1998.00 1998.00 1998.25 1998.50 1998.75 1999.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10

TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP 10 TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP 1 1 1999.00 1999.25 1999.50 1999.75 2000.00 2000.00 2000.25 2000.50 2000.75 2001.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q PRED MEA S 02375500 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP (LB/DAY LOAD TP 1 1 2001.00 2001.25 2001.50 2001.75 2002.00 2002.00 2002.25 2002.50 2002.75 2003.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

89

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 2003.00 2003.25 2003.50 2003.75 2004.00 2004.00 2004.25 2004.50 2004.75 2005.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000

) 100000 ) 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TP LOAD (LB/DAY LOAD TP (LB/DAY LOAD TP 1 1 2005.00 2005.25 2005.50 2005.75 2006.00 2006.00 2006.25 2006.50 2006.75 2007.00 DATE DATE WBID 10C and Q WBID 10C and Q 02375500 PRED MEA S 02375500 PRED MEA S

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10D GREATER THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AVE TN AVE TN AVE TP AVE TP LOAD LOAD LOAD LOAD Year (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1990 2.5521E+04 9.3152E+06 2.3356E+03 8.5249E+05 1993 1.5900E+04 5.8035E+06 1.1048E+03 4.0324E+05 2003 2.4898E+04 9.0878E+06 2.0214E+03 7.3780E+05 AVE 2.2106E+04 8.0688E+06 1.8206E+03 6.6451E+05 LESS THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AVE TN AVE TN AVE TP AVE TP LOAD LOAD LOAD LOAD Year (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.5850E+04 9.4610E+06 2.2105E+03 8.0903E+05 1977 1.8213E+04 6.6476E+06 1.4211E+03 5.1870E+05 1978 2.2395E+04 8.1741E+06 2.0416E+03 7.4520E+05 1981 1.1544E+04 4.2136E+06 8.6991E+02 3.1752E+05 1982 1.7572E+04 6.4137E+06 1.3525E+03 4.9365E+05 1986 1.4413E+04 5.2609E+06 1.0961E+03 4.0009E+05 1987 1.4569E+04 5.3177E+06 1.0224E+03 3.7319E+05 1988 1.3853E+04 5.0700E+06 9.7433E+02 3.5660E+05 1989 1.9626E+04 7.1635E+06 1.5819E+03 5.7739E+05 1991 1.6902E+04 6.1693E+06 1.2491E+03 4.5591E+05 1992 1.9994E+04 7.3178E+06 1.4921E+03 5.4611E+05 1994 2.0931E+04 7.6398E+06 1.7148E+03 6.2592E+05 1998 3.1702E+04 1.1571E+07 3.1060E+03 1.1337E+06

90

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

1999 1.4534E+04 5.3050E+06 1.0408E+03 3.7988E+05 2000 5.5373E+03 2.0267E+06 3.0486E+02 1.1158E+05 2001 2.1455E+04 7.8311E+06 1.6049E+03 5.8577E+05 2002 1.2306E+04 4.4919E+06 8.1212E+02 2.9642E+05 2004 2.0971E+04 7.6754E+06 1.5980E+03 5.8488E+05 2005 2.4182E+04 8.8263E+06 2.0168E+03 7.3615E+05 2006 1.4298E+04 5.2187E+06 8.8043E+02 3.2136E+05 AVE 1.8042E+04 6.5898E+06 1.4195E+03 5.1845E+05 % REMOVAL

TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 18.330749 21.97973674

*Years 1979, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1997 were not used do to the fact that the years did not have all four seasons.

*Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10D GREATER THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1980 2.7141E+04 9.9337E+06 2.5406E+03 9.2987E+05 1987 1.4569E+04 5.3177E+06 1.0224E+03 3.7319E+05 1990 2.5521E+04 9.3152E+06 2.3356E+03 8.5249E+05 1993 1.5900E+04 5.8035E+06 1.1048E+03 4.0324E+05 1998 3.1702E+04 1.1571E+07 3.1060E+03 1.1337E+06 1999 1.4534E+04 5.3050E+06 1.0408E+03 3.7988E+05 2002 1.2306E+04 4.4919E+06 8.1212E+02 2.9642E+05 2003 2.4898E+04 9.0878E+06 2.0214E+03 7.3780E+05 AVE 2.0822E+04 7.6033E+06 1.7480E+03 6.3832E+05 LESS THAN 11 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD YEAR (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.5850E+04 9.4610E+06 2.2105E+03 8.0903E+05 1977 1.8213E+04 6.6476E+06 1.4211E+03 5.1870E+05 1978 2.2395E+04 8.1741E+06 2.0416E+03 7.4520E+05 1979 2.5311E+04 9.2384E+06 2.1762E+03 7.9432E+05 1981 1.1544E+04 4.2136E+06 8.6991E+02 3.1752E+05 1982 1.7572E+04 6.4137E+06 1.3525E+03 4.9365E+05 1983 2.9669E+04 1.0829E+07 2.6469E+03 9.6613E+05 1984 1.8788E+04 6.8764E+06 1.4851E+03 5.4355E+05 1985 1.5796E+04 5.7655E+06 1.1830E+03 4.3179E+05 1986 1.4413E+04 5.2609E+06 1.0961E+03 4.0009E+05 1988 1.3853E+04 5.0700E+06 9.7433E+02 3.5660E+05 1989 1.9626E+04 7.1635E+06 1.5819E+03 5.7739E+05 1991 1.6902E+04 6.1693E+06 1.2491E+03 4.5591E+05 1992 1.9994E+04 7.3178E+06 1.4921E+03 5.4611E+05 1994 2.0931E+04 7.6398E+06 1.7148E+03 6.2592E+05 1997 1.7662E+04 6.4468E+06 1.2664E+03 4.6224E+05 2000 5.5373E+03 2.0267E+06 3.0486E+02 1.1158E+05 2001 2.1455E+04 7.8311E+06 1.6049E+03 5.8577E+05

91

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

2004 2.0971E+04 7.6754E+06 1.5980E+03 5.8488E+05 2005 2.4182E+04 8.8263E+06 2.0168E+03 7.3615E+05 2006 1.4298E+04 5.2187E+06 8.8043E+02 3.2136E+05 AVE 1.8808E+04 6.8698E+06 1.4841E+03 5.4209E+05 % REMOVAL

TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 9.6468 15.0761

*Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10D TN 548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10D TP y = 4E-07x + 6.0335 y = 4E-06x + 6.795 R2 = 0.0444 R2 = 0.0415 2.50E+01 2.50E+01

2.00E+01 2.00E+01

1.50E+01 1.50E+01

1.00E+01 1.00E+01 ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L 5.00E+00 5.00E+00

0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.50E+07 0.0E+00 2.0E+05 4.0E+05 6.0E+05 8.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.2E+06 CHLA 11 ANNUAL TN LOAD (LB/YEAR) CHLA 11 ANNUAL TP LOAD (LB/YEAR) STA NDA RD STA NDA RD

LOAD REDUCTION TABLE FOR 10D GREATER THAN 7.5 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD Year (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1982 1.7572E+04 6.4137E+06 1.3525E+03 4.9365E+05 1987 1.4569E+04 5.3177E+06 1.0224E+03 3.7319E+05 1988 1.3853E+04 5.0700E+06 9.7433E+02 3.5660E+05 1989 1.9626E+04 7.1635E+06 1.5819E+03 5.7739E+05 1990 2.5521E+04 9.3152E+06 2.3356E+03 8.5249E+05 1991 1.6902E+04 6.1693E+06 1.2491E+03 4.5591E+05 1992 1.9994E+04 7.3178E+06 1.4921E+03 5.4611E+05 1993 1.5900E+04 5.8035E+06 1.1048E+03 4.0324E+05 1994 2.0931E+04 7.6398E+06 1.7148E+03 6.2592E+05 1998 3.1702E+04 1.1571E+07 3.1060E+03 1.1337E+06 1999 1.4534E+04 5.3050E+06 1.0408E+03 3.7988E+05 2001 2.1455E+04 7.8311E+06 1.6049E+03 5.8577E+05 2002 1.2306E+04 4.4919E+06 8.1212E+02 2.9642E+05 2003 2.4898E+04 9.0878E+06 2.0214E+03 7.3780E+05 2004 2.0971E+04 7.6754E+06 1.5980E+03 5.8488E+05 2005 2.4182E+04 8.8263E+06 2.0168E+03 7.3615E+05 AVE 1.9682E+04 7.1875E+06 1.5642E+03 5.7119E+05 LESS THAN 7.5 UG/L CHLA ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE ANNUAL AVE TN LOAD TN LOAD TP LOAD TP LOAD Year (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) (LB/DAY) (LB/YEAR) 1976 2.5850E+04 9.4610E+06 2.2105E+03 8.0903E+05 1977 1.8213E+04 6.6476E+06 1.4211E+03 5.1870E+05 1978 2.2395E+04 8.1741E+06 2.0416E+03 7.4520E+05 1981 1.1544E+04 4.2136E+06 8.6991E+02 3.1752E+05

92

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

1986 1.4413E+04 5.2609E+06 1.0961E+03 4.0009E+05 2000 5.5373E+03 2.0267E+06 3.0486E+02 1.1158E+05 2006 1.4298E+04 5.2187E+06 8.8043E+02 3.2136E+05 AVE 1.6036E+04 5.8575E+06 1.2606E+03 4.6050E+05 % REMOVAL TN % TP % REMOVAL REMOVAL 18.50363748 19.3798854

*Years 1979, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1997 were not used do to the fact that the years did not have all four seasons . *Years 1995 and 1996 were not used do to the fact that 548A did not have CHLA data for those years.

548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10D TN 548A SEASONAL CHLA vs. 10D TP y = 4E-07x + 6.0335 y = 4E-06x + 6.795 R2 = 0.0444 R2 = 0.0415 2.50E+01 2.50E+01

2.00E+01 2.00E+01

1.50E+01 1.50E+01

1.00E+01 1.00E+01 5.00E+00 ANNUAL CHLA(UG/L

ANNUAL CHLA (UG/L 5.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 2.0E+05 4.0E+05 6.0E+05 8.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.2E+06 0.00E+00 5.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.50E+07 CHLA 7.5 ANNUAL TN LOAD (LB/YEAR) CHLA 7.5 ANNUAL TP LOAD (LB/YEAR) STANDARD STANDARD

93

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10

TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1975.00 1985.00 1995.00 2005.00 2015.00 1974.00 1974.25 1974.50 1974.75 1975.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 1975.00 1975.25 1975.50 1975.75 1976.00 1976.00 1976.25 1976.50 1976.75 1977.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000

100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1977.00 1977.25 1977.50 1977.75 1978.00 1978.00 1978.25 1978.50 1978.75 1979.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

94

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 1979.00 1979.25 1979.50 1979.75 1980.00 1980.00 1980.25 1980.50 1980.75 1981.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1981.00 1981.25 1981.50 1981.75 1982.00 1982.00 1982.25 1982.50 1982.75 1983.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1983.00 1983.25 1983.50 1983.75 1984.00 1984.00 1984.25 1984.50 1984.75 1985.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000

100 100 10

10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 1985.00 1985.25 1985.50 1985.75 1986.00 1986.00 1986.25 1986.50 1986.75 1987.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

95

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD(MG/DAY TN LOAD(MG/DAY 1 1 1987.00 1987.25 1987.50 1987.75 1988.00 1988.00 1988.25 1988.50 1988.75 1989.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000

100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1989.00 1989.25 1989.50 1989.75 1990.00 1990.00 1990.25 1990.50 1990.75 1991.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 1991.00 1991.25 1991.50 1991.75 1992.00 1992.00 1992.25 1992.50 1992.75 1993.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 1993.00 1993.25 1993.50 1993.75 1994.00 1994.00 1994.25 1994.50 1994.75 1995.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

96

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000

10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1995.00 1995.25 1995.50 1995.75 1996.00 1996.00 1996.25 1996.50 1996.75 1997.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 1997.00 1997.25 1997.50 1997.75 1998.00 1998.00 1998.25 1998.50 1998.75 1999.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD(MG/DAY TN LOAD(MG/DAY 1 1 1999.00 1999.25 1999.50 1999.75 2000.00 2000.00 2000.25 2000.50 2000.75 2001.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 2001.00 2001.25 2001.50 2001.75 2002.00 2002.00 2002.25 2002.50 2002.75 2003.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

97

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000 1000 1000 100 100

10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY LOAD TN (MG/DAY LOAD TN 1 1 2003.00 2003.25 2003.50 2003.75 2004.00 2004.00 2004.25 2004.50 2004.75 2005.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TN LOAD (LB/DAY) TN LOAD (LB/DAY)

1000000 1000000 ) ) 100000 100000 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100 10 10 TN LOAD (MG/DAY TN LOAD (MG/DAY 1 1 2005.00 2005.25 2005.50 2005.75 2006.00 2006.00 2006.25 2006.50 2006.75 2007.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 PRED MEA S 02376033 PRED MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY TP LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1975.00 1985.00 1995.00 2005.00 2015.00 1974.00 1974.25 1974.50 1974.75 1975.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1975.00 1975.25 1975.50 1975.75 1976.00 1976.00 1976.25 1976.50 1976.75 1977.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

98

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1977.00 1977.25 1977.50 1977.75 1978.00 1978.00 1978.25 1978.50 1978.75 1979.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1979.00 1979.25 1979.50 1979.75 1980.00 1980.00 1980.25 1980.50 1980.75 1981.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1981.00 1981.25 1981.50 1981.75 1982.00 1982.00 1982.25 1982.50 1982.75 1983.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1983.00 1983.25 1983.50 1983.75 1984.00 1984.00 1984.25 1984.50 1984.75 1985.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

99

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1985.00 1985.25 1985.50 1985.75 1986.00 1986.00 1986.25 1986.50 1986.75 1987.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1987.00 1987.25 1987.50 1987.75 1988.00 1988.00 1988.25 1988.50 1988.75 1989.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1989.00 1989.25 1989.50 1989.75 1990.00 1990.00 1990.25 1990.50 1990.75 1991.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1991.00 1991.25 1991.50 1991.75 1992.00 1992.00 1992.25 1992.50 1992.75 1993.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

100

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1993.00 1993.25 1993.50 1993.75 1994.00 1994.00 1994.25 1994.50 1994.75 1995.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1995.00 1995.25 1995.50 1995.75 1996.00 1996.00 1996.25 1996.50 1996.75 1997.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1997.00 1997.25 1997.50 1997.75 1998.00 1998.00 1998.25 1998.50 1998.75 1999.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 1999.00 1999.25 1999.50 1999.75 2000.00 2000.00 2000.25 2000.50 2000.75 2001.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

101

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 2001.00 2001.25 2001.50 2001.75 2002.00 2002.00 2002.25 2002.50 2002.75 2003.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 2003.00 2003.25 2003.50 2003.75 2004.00 2004.00 2004.25 2004.50 2004.75 2005.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TP LOAD (LB/DAY) TP LOAD (LB/DAY)

100000 100000 ) ) 10000 10000

1000 1000

100 100

10 10 TP LOADTP (LB/DAY LOADTP (LB/DAY 1 1 2005.00 2005.25 2005.50 2005.75 2006.00 2006.00 2006.25 2006.50 2006.75 2007.00 DATE DATE WBID 10D and Q WBID 10D and Q 02376033 02376033 PERD MEA S PERD MEA S

TABLE 5.2 ESCAMBIA BAY WBID 548A 0.7 WBID YEAR TN TP TN>= TN MG/L MG/L MG/L %REDUCT EPACRIT 548A 1970 2.8342E+00 2.8342E+00 7.5302E+01 548A 1971 1.5839E+00 1.8700E-02 1.5839E+00 5.5805E+01 548A 1972 9.3609E+00 7.9770E-01 9.3609E+00 9.2522E+01 548A 1973 9.5980E-01 3.3700E-02 9.5980E-01 2.7068E+01 548A 1974 5.0800E-01 3.2200E-02 548A 1975 8.2630E-01 4.8200E-02 8.2630E-01 1.5285E+01 548A 1976 6.1990E-01 6.4400E-02 548A 1977 6.8940E-01 4.0700E-02 548A 1978 9.2140E-01 4.1400E-02 9.2140E-01 2.4029E+01

102

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

548A 1979 6.4890E-01 5.6200E-02 548A 1980 5.8860E-01 3.0000E-02 548A 1981 7.0690E-01 5.2000E-02 7.0690E-01 9.7609E-01 548A 1982 5.2400E-01 4.9100E-02 548A 1983 5.3400E-01 3.8900E-02 548A 1984 7.2880E-01 4.0000E-02 7.2880E-01 3.9517E+00 548A 1985 5.4330E-01 6.0000E-02 548A 1986 5.5330E-01 3.8300E-02 548A 1987 7.4240E-01 4.0700E-02 7.4240E-01 5.7112E+00 548A 1988 6.3570E-01 1.7900E-02 548A 1989 8.6290E-01 2.7100E-02 8.6290E-01 1.8878E+01 548A 1990 8.2860E-01 8.1100E-02 8.2860E-01 1.5520E+01 548A 1991 9.3940E-01 6.5600E-02 9.3940E-01 2.5484E+01 548A 1992 5.8760E-01 4.1800E-02 548A 1993 4.8500E-01 3.1200E-02 548A 1994 6.2090E-01 3.4000E-02 548A 1995 6.4100E-01 5.2300E-02 548A 1996 5.3700E-01 3.1700E-02 548A 1997 5.5620E-01 3.3700E-02 548A 1998 5.0750E-01 4.1900E-02 548A 1999 5.8600E-01 2.1600E-02 548A 2000 7.9390E-01 3.5600E-02 7.9390E-01 1.1828E+01 548A 2001 6.3310E-01 1.6500E-02 548A 2002 9.6000E-01 6.8000E-03 9.6000E-01 2.7083E+01 548A 2003 548A 2004 7.0410E-01 4.3800E-02 7.0410E-01 5.8230E-01 548A 2005 6.5900E-01 4.0000E-02 548A 2006 5.3630E-01 2.1300E-02 AVE 1970- 2006 1.5836E+00 2.6668E+01 AVE 1973- 2006 8.3121E-01 1.4700E+01

USGS SPARROW MODEL

TN Export: RIVER BASIN NAME HUC No. DA TOTAL POINT FERTILIZER LIVESTOCK ATMOSPHERE NONAGRICULTURE

Reaches SQMI Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY

UPPER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA 3140301 28 853 3257.50 58.84 0.00 0.00 950.18 17.60 862.77 31.52 592.65 38.61 851.90 23.21

PATSALIGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140302 25 593 2768.29 63.39 0.00 0.00 694.40 19.46 864.04 29.61 476.33 39.87 733.52 23.73

SEPULGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140303 27 1050 3337.56 53.47 0.00 0.00 775.00 16.87 542.91 35.30 880.17 35.97 1139.47 22.81

103

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

LOWER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140304 28 1010 4365.64 63.64 0.73 56.90 1200.05 15.76 427.40 38.24 1254.79 34.97 1482.67 22.83

ESCAMBIA RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140305 22 780 3884.74 64.92 56.99 55.95 1262.71 14.44 282.36 39.36 1049.65 35.32 1233.03 22.75

SUBTOTAL 130 4286 17613.73 57.72 4882.34 2979.48 4253.59 5440.59

TN Yield: RIVER BASIN NAME HUC No. DA TOTAL POINT FERTILIZER LIVESTOCK ATMOSPHERE NONAGRICULTURE Reac SQ hes MI Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE KG/KM2 KG/KM2/ KG/KM2/ KG/KM2 KG/KM2/ KG/KM2/ /YR YR YR /YR YR YR UPPER CONEC UH RIVER- ALABA 3140 MA 301 28 853 537.05 58.84 0.00 0.00 156.65 17.60 142.24 31.52 97.71 38.61 140.45 23.21 PATSAL IGA RIVER- ALABA 3140 MA 302 25 593 665.51 63.39 0.00 0.00 166.94 19.46 207.72 29.61 114.51 39.87 176.34 23.73 SEPUL GA RIVER- ALABA 3140 105 MA 303 27 0 445.46 53.47 0.00 0.00 103.44 16.87 72.46 35.30 117.48 35.97 152.08 22.81 LOWER CONEC UH RIVER- ALABA MA, FLORID 3140 101 A 304 28 0 609.67 63.64 0.10 56.90 167.59 15.76 59.69 38.24 175.23 34.97 207.06 22.83 ESCAM BIA RIVER- ALABA MA, FLORID 3140 A 305 22 780 715.72 64.92 10.50 55.95 232.64 14.44 52.02 39.36 193.39 35.32 227.17 22.75 SUBTO 428 TAL 130 6 2973.41 10.60 827.26 534.13 698.32 903.10

TP Export: RIVER BASIN NAME HUC No. DA TOTAL POINT FERTILIZER LIVESTOCK NONAGRICULTURE Reaches SQMI Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY KG/DAY

UPPER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA 3140301 28 853 347.48 76.83 0 0 79.79 31.5 173.68 18 94.01 15.72 PATSALIGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140302 25 593 370.15 85.61 0 0 68.53 33.92 205.97 15.75 95.64 16.97 SEPULGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140303 27 1050 308.05 72.47 0 0 65.5 29.73 114.16 21.23 128.4 12.11

LOWER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140304 28 1010 372.97 82.95 0.21 44.25 106.03 25.78 88.39 26.11 178.33 10.84

104

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

ESCAMBIA RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140305 22 780 293.61 80.42 21.56 41.65 96.09 24.02 48.28 28.34 127.68 11.77 SUBTOTAL 130 4286 1692.26 21.77 415.94 630.48 624.06

TP Yield:

RIVER BASIN NAME HUC No. DA TOTAL POINT FERTILIZER LIVESTOCK NONAGRICULTURE Reaches SQMI Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE KG/KM2/YR KG/KM2/YR KG/KM2/YR KG/KM2/YR KG/KM2/YR

UPPER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA 3140301 28 853 57.29 76.83 0.00 0.00 13.15 31.50 28.63 18.00 15.50 15.72 PATSALIGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140302 25 593 88.99 85.61 0.00 0.00 16.48 33.92 49.52 15.75 22.99 16.97 SEPULGA RIVER- ALABAMA 3140303 27 1050 41.11 72.47 0.00 0.00 8.74 29.73 15.24 21.23 17.14 12.11

LOWER CONECUH RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140304 28 1010 52.09 82.95 0.03 44.25 14.81 25.78 12.34 26.11 24.90 10.84

ESCAMBIA RIVER- ALABAMA, FLORIDA 3140305 22 780 54.09 80.42 3.97 41.65 17.70 24.02 8.89 28.34 23.52 11.77 SUBTOTAL 130 4286 293.57 4.00 70.88 114.62 104.05

105

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix E: Summary of Escambia River Water Quality Spatial Trend Data

Year 2004 TP vs. RIVER

0.070 0.0600 0.060 0.0560 0.05300.05400.05300.0520 0.0515 0.050 0.04280.0438 0.0395 0.040 0.0364 0.030 TP (MG/L) TP 0.020 0.0133 0.010 0.000 10B 10A 10E 10F 10C 10D 10G 548A 548B 548C GANTT LOWER GABTT UPPPER POINT A LOWER CONECUH HWY. 41 HWY. CONECUH CONECUH HWY. 331 HWY. CONECUH CONECUH STATELINECONECUH CONECUH AND ESCAMBIA RIVERS

Year 2004 TN vs. RIVER

0.900 0.7700 0.800 0.7041 0.700 0.6130 0.6100 0.600 0.5321 0.5156 0.4480 0.4520 0.4275 0.500 0.38800.4020 0.400 0.3600

TN (MG/L) TN 0.300 0.200 0.100 0.000 10E 10F 10B 10A 10C 10D 10G 548A 548B 548C GANTT LOWER GABTT UPPPER POINT A LOWER CONECUH HWY. 41 HWY. CONECUH CONECUH HWY. 331 HWY. CONECUH CONECUH STATELINECONECUH CONECUH AND ESCAMBIA RIVERS

106

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

ESCAMBIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 10-2-02

0.07

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03 TKN (MG/L) TKN 0.02

0.01

0

UWF Dr. Snyder Data private communication March 13, 2007 STATION ID

107

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

ESCAMBIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 10-2-02

0.14

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06 COND (mS/cm) 0.04

0.02

0

UWF Dr. Snyder Data STATION ID private communication March 13, 2007

108

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix F: Summary of Escambia River Water Quality Time Trend Data

N WBID PARAMETER Units EQUATION R2 Data y = -0.0145x + 10 BOD5 MG/L 29.855 0.0363 20 y = -0.1093x + 10 COLOR PT-CO 280.35 0.0012 23 10 CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM y = 1.1171x - 2200.3 0.4418 4 y = -0.2423x + 10 DO MG/L 490.75 0.8223 4 y = -0.0077x + 10 NH3N MG/L 15.356 0.174 14 y = -0.0168x + 10 ORGN MG/L 33.638 0.0421 10 10 TEMPERATURE C y = 0.1805x - 337.58 0.08 23 y = -0.0156x + 10 TN MG/L 31.665 0.2164 14 10 TOC MG/L y = -0.083x + 169.07 0.4356 5 10 TP MG/L y = 0.001x - 0.2545 0.0056 12 10 TSS MG/L y = 0.1758x - 340.34 0.1965 5 10 TURBIDITY NTU y = 0.2017x - 388.95 0.026 5 y = -0.0142x + 10C BOD5 MG/L 29.746 0.0241 423 y = -0.0045x + 10C CHLA UG/L 13.961 0.0109 75 10C CHLAC UG/L y = 0.2794x - 558.1 0.2399 74 10C COLOR PT-CO y = 0.9854x - 1876.3 0.1401 458 y = -0.0763x + 10C CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM 251.74 0.0001 166 10C DO MG/L y = 0.0155x - 22.815 0.0047 163 10C FCOLI TUBE y = 228.82x - 481283 0.0448 21 10C NH3N MG/L y = -0.0053x + 10.6 0.1579 406 10C NO3NO2 MG/L y = 0.0004x - 0.5864 0.0007 278 y = -0.0317x + 10C ORGN MG/L 63.384 0.0103 206 y = -0.0003x + 10C PORD MG/L 0.6789 0.097 139 10C SECCHI METERS y = -0.0047x + 10.09 0.0093 148 1.00E- 10C TKN MG/L y = -2E-06x + 0.4077 08 275 y = -0.0345x + 10C TN MG/L 69.468 0.0181 243 10C TOC MG/L y = 0.1278x + 261.57 0.02424 266 y = -0.0001x + 10C TP MG/L 0.2715 0.001 344 y = -0.5538x + 10C TSS MG/L 1123.4 0.0767 268 10C TURBIDITY NTU y = 0.608x - 1189.1 0.0195 156 y = -0.0279x + 10A BOD5 MG/L 56.542 0.2452 46 10A CHLA UG/L y = 0.1562x - 306.55 0.96 5 y = -1.1072x + 10A COLOR UG/L 2271.9 0.1292 46 10A CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM y = 4.0582x - 7989.4 0.3551 18 y = -0.0932x + 10A DO MG/L 193.66 0.0342 19 y = -0.0037x + 10A NH3N MG/L 7.4039 0.352 39

109

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

10A NO3NO2 MG/L y = 0.0041x - 7.9197 0.0311 25 y = -0.0463x + 10A ORGN MG/L 91.995 0.0709 16 y = -0.5379x + 10A SECCHI METERS 1070.3 0.1267 4 10A TEMPERATURE C y = 0.0463x - 71.963 0.006 47 10A TKN MG/L y = 0.0058x - 11.093 0.0104 24 y = -0.0173x + 10A TN MG/L 35.123 0.1298 40 y = -0.0003x + 10A TP MG/L 0.5441 0.0044 34 10A TSS MG/L y = .3094x - 602.06 0.0222 30 y = -0.0314x + 10A TURBIDITY NTU 76.767 0.002 31 y = -0.0049x + 10D BOD5 MG/L 10.724 0.0182 124 10D CHLA UG/L y = 0.0445x - 84.271 0.6929 21 10D CHLAC UG/L y = 0.2633x - 525.92 0.2264 76 10D COLOR PT-CO y = 0.496x - 909.63 0.0449 178 10D CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM y = 0.7748x - 1470.1 0.0142 135 10D DO MG/L y = 0.0346x - 61.802 0.0114 146 y = -0.0014x + 10D NH3N MG/L 2.9118 0.0456 229 10D NO3NO2 MG/L y = 0.0009x - 1.6018 0.011 148 y = -0.0051x + 10D ORGN MG/L 10.372 0.0437 128 10D PORD MG/L y = -0.0002x + .4466 0.013 87 y = -0.0041x + 10D SECCHI METERS 8.9947 0.0072 97 10D TEMPERATURE C y = 0.0116x - 3.0434 0.0005 251 y = -0.0049x + 10D TKN MG/L 10.264 0.048 154 y = -0.0117x + 10D TN MG/L 23.894 0.1621 217 10D TOC MG/L y = 0.0125x - 19.515 0.0053 126 y = -0.0005x + 10D TP MG/L 0.9484 0.0137 190 10D TSS MG/L y = 0.0322x - 52.934 0.0009 149 10D TURBIDITY NTU y = 0.0671x - 117.09 0.0052 53 10G COLOR UG/L y= -65x + 129542 0.6369 3 10G CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM y= 18x - 35826 0.9067 3 10G DO MG/L y= -x + 2000.5 0.8929 3 10G NH3N MG/L y= -0.021x + 41.858 0.9992 3 9.50E- 10G NO3NO2 MG/L y= 2.66x - 5298.3 01 3 10G SECCHI METERS y = 0.6x -1195.2 0.871 3 10G TEMPERATURE C y =5.2x - 10340 0.75 3 10G TKN MG/L y= 0.17x - 338.61 0.3827 3 10G TN MG/L y=2.83x - 5636.9 0.9808 3 10G TOC MG/L y= 6.2x - 12351 0.75 3 10G TP MG/L y= 0.01x - 19.89 0.25 3 10G TSS MG/L y= 40x + 79710 0.75 3 10G TURBIDITY NTU y= -50.05x + 99737 0.847 3 y = -0.8682x + 10E BOD5 MG/L 1728.4 0.0123 102 10E CHLA UG/L y = 0.0715x - 136.41 0.0384 48 10E COLOR UG/L y = 0.6324x - 1183.2 0.0435 121 10E CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM y = 47.038x - 92798 0.012 77 y = -0.0792x + 10E DO MG/L 163.98 0.1011 56

110

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

10E FCOLI y = -0.0337x + 10E NH3N MG/L 67.082 0.0167 122 10E NO3NO2 MG/L y = -0.134x + 266.61 0.021 85 y = -0.0023x + 10E ORGN MG/L 4.9385 0.0044 70 y = -0.0001x + 10E PORD MG/L 0.3053 0.4038 14 10E SECCHI METERS y = 0.0033x - 5.7768 0.0042 73 10E TEMPERATURE C y = 0.161x - 297.09 0.0891 185 y = -0.0571x + 10E TKN MG/L 114.42 0.0161 94 y = -0.1462x + 10E TN MG/L 291.48 0.0128 121 y = -0.5766x + 10E TOC MG/L 1154.2 0.0258 59 y = -0.0004x + 10E TP MG/L 0.9436 0.0017 114 y = -0.0446x + 10E TSS MG/L 96.966 0.0024 101 y = -0.0349x + 10E TURBIDITY NTU 82.688 0.0011 78 y = -0.0267x + 10F BOD5 MG/L 54.088 0.1947 113 10F CHLA UG/L y = 0.099x - 193.05 0.3855 119 y = -0.0385x + 10F CHLAC UG/L 82.035 0.0044 90 10F COLOR PT-CO y = 0.1916x - 311.93 0.0051 188 y = -80.241x + 10F CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM 162369 0.0143 70 y = -0.0817x + 10F DO MG/L 169.92 0.0593 165 10F FCOLI TUBE y = 5.847x - 11483 0.0037 17 y = -0.0024x + 10F NH3N MG/L 4.8867 0.0805 188 10F NO3NO2 MG/L y = 0.0005x -0.8721 0.0051 93 y = -0.0047x + 10F ORGN MG/L 9.6971 0.0345 136 10F PORD MG/L y = 0.0022x - 4.3902 0.1613 11 3.00E- 10F SECCHI METERS y = 0.0002x + 0.5066 05 52 1.00E- 10F TEMPERATURE C y = 0.0022x + 17.341 05 273 10F TKN MG/L y = 0.0025x - 4.4576 0.0193 103 y = -0.0041x + 10F TN MG/L 8.8203 0.0297 183 10F TOC MG/L y = 0.009x - 12.06 0.0008 60 10F TP MG/L y = 0.0108x - 21.281 0.0524 145 y = -0.0381x + 10F TSS MG/L 84.767 0.0056 162 10F TURBIDITY NTU y= -0.0659x + 141.59 0.0108 51

Note: X= Decimal Year

111

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix G: Historical Summary of Escambia Bay Trend Data

WBID PARAMETER Units EQUATION R2 N Data y = -0.0401x + 548A BOD5 MG/L 81.267 0.0424 202 y = 0.1716x - 548A CHLA UG/L 332.2 0.0441 229 y = -0.0033x + 548A CHLAC UG/L 16.068 3.00E-06 93 y = 0.2009x - 548A COLOR PT-CO 347.88 0.0028 289 y = -0.0775x + 548A DO MG/L 161.91 0.1165 234 y = -2.3028x + 548A FCOLI TUBE 4622.9 0.0893 194 y = -0.0365x + 548A NH3N MG/L 72.736 0.0121 238 y = -0.0165x + 548A NO3NO2 MG/L 32.917 0.0179 178 y = -0.0656x + 548A ORGN MG/L 130.28 0.0979 91 y = 0.0004x - 548A PORD MG/L 0.7117 0.407 20 y = 0.0843x - 548A SALINITY PPTH 156.13 0.0168 320 y = 0.004x - 548A SECCHI METERS 7.0651 0.0037 140 y = -0.3808x + 548A TEMPERATURE C 781.93 0.0057 385 y = -0.0324x + 548A TKN MG/L 65.262 0.021 184 y = -0.0533x + 548A TN MG/L 106.92 0.024 238 y = -0.2175x + 548A TOC MG/L 736.31 0.057 86 y = -0.0099x + 548A TP MG/L 19.773 0.0077 238 y = 0.0365x - 548A TSS MG/L 56.687 0.0004 252 y = 0.0211x - 548A TURBIDITY NTU 31.674 0.0001 157 y = -0.0101x + 548B BOD5 MG/L 21.762 0.0122 38 y = 0.0208x - 548B CHLA UG/L 36.538 0.0191 13 y = -0.5974x + 548B CHLAC UG/L 1204.6 0.0189 29 y = 0.1997x - 548B COLOR PT-CO 345.83 0.0013 37 y = -0.0433x + 548B DO MG/L 93.843 0.0307 153 y = -1.472x + 548B FCOLI TUBE 2954.9 0.0525 200 y = -0.0052x + 548B NH3N MG/L 10.404 0.0495 46 y = -0.0008x + 548B NO3NO2 MG/L 1.6692 0.0347 25 y = -0.0796x + 548B ORGN MG/L 157.51 0.4219 33 y = 0.004x - 548B PORD MG/L 7.8059 0.6709 19 y = 0.2299x - 548B SALINITY PPTH 441.76 0.091 219

112

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

y = 0.005x - 548B SECCHI METERS 8.5369 0.0033 10 y = -0.7865x + 548B TEMPERATURE C 1592.2 0.0135 251 y = 0.0049x - 548B TKN MG/L 9.2128 0.0257 34 y = -0.0112x + 548B TN MG/L 22.86 0.0408 55 y = -0.1734x + 548B TOC MG/L 348.95 0.6182 24 y = -0.0025x + 548B TP MG/L 5.0018 0.0227 56 y = -0.4509x + 548B TSS MG/L 914.34 0.113 21 y = -0.7507x + 548B TURBIDITY NTU 1499.2 0.1433 8 y = 0.083x - 420 BOD5 MG/L 162.51 0.0728 25 y = 0.0376x - 420 CHLA UG/L 70.503 0.1056 9 y = -1.2669x + 420 COLOR PT-CO 2570.1 0.1641 23 y = 178.73x - 420 CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM 352512 0.1526 23 y = -0.1669x + 420 DO MG/L 337.98 0.2196 10 y = 0.0014x - 420 NH3N MG/L 2.588 0.0018 25 y = 0.0051x - 420 NO3NO2 MG/L 9.7061 0.0038 11 y = -0.0408x + 420 ORGN MG/L 80.875 0.2607 14 y = 0.0003x - 420 PORD MG/L 0.5829 0.3355 11 y = 0.0151x - 420 SECCHI METERS 29.286 0.1035 10 y = 0.1332x - 420 TEMPERATURE C 241.91 0.025 34 y = 0.0148x - 420 TKN MG/L 28.394 0.015 21 y = 0.0152x - 420 TN MG/L 28.935 0.0144 34 y = -.1961x + 420 TOC MG/L 394.34 0.5196 11 y = .0009x - 420 TP MG/L 1.6482 0.0319 30 y = 0.1644x - 420 TSS MG/L 319.11 0.0941 14 y = -1.6263x + 420 TURBIDITY NTU 3264.9 0.0194 13 y = -0.0787 + 493 BOD5 MG/L 158.85 0.2507 11 y = -0.2846x + 493 CHLA UG/L 577.76 0.3756 5 y = -0.003x + 493 COLOR PT-CO 107.62 2.00E-07 10 y = 39.778x - 493 CONDUCTIVITY UMHOS/CM 67943 0.0006 5 y = -0.0103x + 493 DO MG/L 26.235 0.0036 8 y = -0.1567x + 493 NH3N MG/L 313.32 0.222 16 y = 0.0598x - 493 NO3NO2 MG/L 118.49 0.6797 12 y = 0.004x - 493 SECCHI METERS 7.1567 0.3316 4 y = 0.0225x - 493 TEMPERATURE C 22.267 0.0031 18

113

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

y = -0.0117x + 493 TKN MG/L 24.317 0.0877 9 y = -0.0459x + 493 TN MG/L 93.943 0.0567 14 y = -0.0013x + 493 TP MG/L 2.6235 0.1858 15 y = -0.1944x + 493 TSS MG/L 399.68 0.0636 14 y = 0.1672x - 493 TURBIDITY NTU 323.01 0.0404 11

Note: X= Decimal Year

114

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix H: USGS Gage and Flow Data

USGS 002375500 ESCAMBIA RIVER NEAR CENTURY, FL AT OLD SR 4

1000000

100000 S

10000

1000

100 Y = DAILY MEANY = DAILY CF 10

1 0 20406080100 X = PERCENT OF TIME DESCHARFE IS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED (T)

USGS 02376000 PINE BARREN CREEK NEAR BARTH, FL

100000

10000 S

1000

100 Y = DAILY MEAN CF MEAN DAILY = Y 10

1 0 102030405060708090100 X = PERCENT OF TIME DISCHARGE IS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED (T)

115

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Century and Pine Barren Annual Base Flow:

02375500 02375500 02375500 02375500 02375500 02375500 PINE PINE 02375500 02375500 CENTURY CENTURY PINE PINE BARREN BARREN CENTURY CENTURY ANNUAL ANNUAL BARREN BARREN 02375500 ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL 02375500 AVERAGE AVERAGE ANNUAL ANNUAL PINE AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE CENTURY FLOW BASE AVERAGE AVERAGE BARREN FLOW BASE FLOW BASE % BASE CFS/SQ CFS/SQ FLOW BASE % BASE CFS/SQ CFS/SQ YEAR (CFS) (CFS) IN FLOW MI (3817) MI (3817) (CFS) (CFS) IN FLOW MI (75.3) MI (75.3) 1934 4216.522 1909.046 45.275% 1.105 0.500 1935 4593.699 2528.941 55.052% 1.203 0.663 1936 7031.899 3599.479 51.188% 1.842 0.943 1937 7011.890 3468.749 49.470% 1.837 0.909 1938 5223.795 2501.173 47.880% 1.369 0.655 1939 7071.863 2817.516 39.841% 1.853 0.738 1940 6322.459 3082.777 48.759% 1.656 0.808 1941 3701.521 2316.622 62.586% 0.970 0.607 1942 6483.479 3487.861 53.796% 1.699 0.914 1943 7500.384 3440.910 45.876% 1.965 0.901 1944 10404.891 5206.779 50.042% 2.726 1.364 1945 4751.068 2808.079 59.104% 1.245 0.736 1946 10426.904 5250.012 50.351% 2.732 1.375 1947 9164.274 4591.009 50.097% 2.401 1.203 1948 8968.224 4494.053 50.111% 2.350 1.177 1949 7085.945 4398.208 62.069% 1.856 1.152 1950 3509.808 2117.979 60.345% 0.920 0.555 1951 3368.414 1896.207 56.294% 0.882 0.497 1952 4518.309 2502.728 55.391% 1.184 0.656 95.641 69.001 0.721 1.270 0.916 1953 6658.301 3103.586 46.612% 1.744 0.813 154.159 89.780 0.582 2.047 1.192 1954 2889.652 1967.806 68.098% 0.757 0.516 90.638 78.631 0.868 1.204 1.044 1955 3650.408 1572.036 43.065% 0.956 0.412 116.918 66.905 0.572 1.553 0.889 1956 3769.612 1765.231 46.828% 0.988 0.462 103.746 68.651 0.662 1.378 0.912 1957 5096.167 2563.630 50.305% 1.335 0.672 139.655 85.502 0.612 1.855 1.135 1958 4371.863 2657.342 60.783% 1.145 0.696 131.425 100.652 0.766 1.745 1.337 1959 6810.137 3501.581 51.417% 1.784 0.917 150.803 103.374 0.685 2.003 1.373 1960 7288.907 3904.061 53.562% 1.910 1.023 154.770 107.194 0.693 2.055 1.424 1961 8671.726 3911.271 45.104% 2.272 1.025 228.274 131.809 0.577 3.032 1.750 1962 5399.151 2954.363 54.719% 1.415 0.774 187.493 118.399 0.631 2.490 1.572 1963 3457.734 2058.580 59.536% 0.906 0.539 114.170 87.875 0.770 1.516 1.167 1964 7408.716 3474.727 46.901% 1.941 0.910 176.068 107.084 0.608 2.338 1.422 1965 6832.027 3581.072 52.416% 1.790 0.938 139.611 98.361 0.705 1.854 1.306 1966 5363.052 2814.324 52.476% 1.405 0.737 134.310 90.068 0.671 1.784 1.196 1967 4620.556 2259.530 48.902% 1.211 0.592 130.449 89.059 0.683 1.732 1.183 1968 2199.388 1559.264 70.895% 0.576 0.409 83.082 68.419 0.824 1.103 0.909 1969 3945.370 1865.388 47.280% 1.034 0.489 148.833 84.093 0.565 1.977 1.117 1970 6633.836 2843.806 42.868% 1.738 0.745 148.230 96.351 0.650 1.969 1.280 1971 7282.466 3687.245 50.632% 1.908 0.966 136.767 100.221 0.733 1.816 1.331 1972 4807.210 2351.630 48.919% 1.259 0.616 107.795 76.366 0.708 1.432 1.014 1973 10050.959 5040.520 50.150% 2.633 1.321 183.353 112.300 0.612 2.435 1.491 1974 6715.808 3212.980 47.842% 1.759 0.842 189.463 108.532 0.573 2.516 1.441 1975 13820.274 6029.708 43.629% 3.621 1.580 263.781 135.614 0.514 3.503 1.801 1976 8119.945 4173.066 51.393% 2.127 1.093 164.934 116.543 0.707 2.190 1.548 1977 5746.822 3150.267 54.818% 1.506 0.825 135.945 96.856 0.712 1.805 1.286 1978 8113.726 3454.387 42.575% 2.126 0.905 222.107 121.774 0.548 2.950 1.617 1979 7958.219 3760.129 47.248% 2.085 0.985 212.773 124.820 0.587 2.826 1.658 1980 8334.481 4173.524 50.075% 2.184 1.093 234.699 135.303 0.576 3.117 1.797 1981 3581.584 1804.597 50.385% 0.938 0.473 142.334 92.361 0.649 1.890 1.227

116

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

1982 5572.000 2679.481 48.088% 1.460 0.702 126.882 82.455 0.650 1.685 1.095 1983 9300.685 4614.361 49.613% 2.437 1.209 260.258 124.680 0.479 3.456 1.656 1984 5892.104 3068.889 52.085% 1.544 0.804 162.541 104.972 0.646 2.159 1.394 1985 5019.096 2391.946 47.657% 1.315 0.627 173.800 96.356 0.554 2.308 1.280 1986 4544.359 2254.478 49.610% 1.191 0.591 133.142 93.171 0.700 1.768 1.237 1987 4711.652 2598.060 55.141% 1.234 0.681 144.778 93.685 0.647 1.923 1.244 1988 4514.899 2362.345 52.323% 1.183 0.619 139.301 89.058 0.639 1.850 1.183 1989 6268.438 3031.644 48.364% 1.642 0.794 172.252 87.576 0.508 2.288 1.163 1990 8199.548 3838.314 46.811% 2.148 1.006 216.726 111.819 0.516 2.878 1.485 1991 5420.603 2899.766 53.495% 1.420 0.760 198.649 111.029 0.559 2.638 1.474 1992 6655.929 3344.733 50.252% 1.744 0.876 175.295 100.309 0.572 2.328 1.332 1993 5197.918 3214.552 61.843% 1.362 0.842 160.879 111.023 0.690 2.137 1.474 1994 6713.616 3621.181 53.938% 1.759 0.949 152.469 94.779 0.622 2.025 1.259 1995 7930.110 3662.218 46.181% 2.078 0.959 1.440 1996 7597.432 4289.836 56.464% 1.990 1.124 1.569 1997 5789.479 2982.267 51.512% 1.517 0.781 1.300 1998 10298.301 4530.789 43.995% 2.698 1.187 1.618 1999 4663.151 2639.635 56.606% 1.222 0.692 1.230 2000 1732.945 1132.752 65.366% 0.454 0.297 0.920 2001 6874.849 3048.794 44.347% 1.801 0.799 1.314 2002 4051.477 2245.772 55.431% 1.061 0.588 1.149 2003 8016.603 4295.178 53.579% 2.100 1.125 1.570 2004 6910.874 3510.743 50.800% 1.811 0.920 1.409 2005 7956.233 3972.773 49.933% 2.084 1.041 1.504 2006 2930.792 1894.438 64.639% 0.768 0.496 1.077 TOTAL 6215.295 3147.106 51.795% 1.628 0.824 159.051 99.135 0.641 2.112 1.319

BASE FLOW y = 0.784x + 0.6878 R2 = 0.727

2.5000

2.0000

1.5000 1.0000

PINE BARREN 0.5000

0.0000 0.0000 0.5000 1.0000 1.5000 2.0000 ESCAMBIA RIVER

117

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

USGS 2375500

45000.00

40000.00

35000.00

30000.00

25000.00

FLOW 20000.00

15000.00

10000.00

5000.00

0.00 1994 1994.2 1994.4 1994.6 1994.8 1995 DATE

CENTURY FLOW (CFS) CENTURY BASE FLOW (CFS)

USGS 02376000

1800.00

1600.00

1400.00

1200.00

1000.00

FLOW 800.00

600.00

400.00

200.00

0.00 1994 1994.1 1994.2 1994.3 1994.4 1994.5 1994.6 1994.7 1994.8 1994.9 1995 DATE

Pine Barren FLOW (CFS) Pine Barren Base Flow (CFS)

118

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

119

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix I: Ground Water Data in the Pensacola Basin

GENERATING STATISTICS

ANALYTE GROUP: NUTRIENT NETWORK: ALL WATER RESOURCE: CONFINED UNCONFINED COUNTY: SANTA ROSA COLLECTION DATE: FROM : 1-JAN-1980 TO: 4-M AY-2006 RESULTS: MAX PER WELL Ammonia+ Nitrate+Nit Phosphoru Orthophos Organic Ammonia, Nitrite, Nitrate, Nitrate, Organic rite, s, phate, Nitrogen, Nitrogen, Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Total (as Nitrogen, Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved P arameter Name Dissolved Dissolved (as N) (as N) (as N) N) Dissolved (as N) (as P) (as P) Parameter Code 602 607 608 613 618 620 623 631 666 671 Units mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Total Wells 1 1 45 2 3 11 45 45 45 44 Number BDLs 0 1 9 2 0 1 19 5 20 25 Number MCL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA NA 0 NA NA NA NA Percent M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA NA 0% NA NA NA NA M inimum 0.24 0.1 0.005 0.01 0.04 0.025 0.03 0.007 0.002 0.002 1st Quartile 0.24 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.24 0.1 0.02 0.006 0.002 M edian 0.24 0.1 0.015 0.01 0.12 0.83 0.18 0.17 0.01 0.0115

3rd Quartile 0.24 0.1 0.05 0.01 1.21 1.65 0.27 2.2 0.04 0.04225 M aximum 0.24 0.1 2.3 0.01 2.3 3.7 3.2 10 2.9 1.5 Interquartile Range 0 0 0.04 0 1.13 1.41 0.17 2.18 0.034 0.04025 M ean 0.24 0.1 0.109 0.01 0.82 1.135 0.302 1.444 0.092 0.068 Standard Deviation 0 0 0.359 0 1.282 1.134 0.52 2.477 0.43 0.227 Relative Standard Deviation 0% 0% 329.36% 0% 156.34% 99.91% 172.19% 171.54% 467.39% 333.82% Standard Error 0 0 0.054 0 0.74 0.342 0.078 0.369 0.064 0.034 Variance 0 0 0.129 0 1.644 1.286 0.27 6.138 0.185 0.051 Coefficient of Skewness 0 0 869.081 0 1825.273 2270.723 1396.154 1680.258 618.605 848.018 Number Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0 0 NA NA 0 NA NA Percent Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0% 0% NA NA 0 NA NA Number SRA Indicators NA NA NA NA 1 7 NA 17 16 13 Percent SRA Indicators NA NA NA NA 33.30% 63.60% NA 37.80% 35.60% 29.50%

120

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

GENERATING STATISTICS

ANALYTE GROUP: NUTRIENT NETWORK: ALL WATER RESOURCE: CONFINED UNCONFINED COUNTY: SANTA ROSA COLLECTION DATE: FROM : 1-JAN-1980 TO: 4-M AY-2006 RESULTS: MAX PER WELL Orthophos Nitrate+Nit phate, A mmonia, rite, Silica, Total (as Dissolved Dissolved P arameter Name Dissolved P) (As NH4) (As NO3)

Parameter Code 955 70507 71846 71851 Units mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Total Wells 36 11 7 2 Number BDLs 0 4 0 0 Number M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA Percent M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA M inimum 2.4 0.005 0.0258 0.13 1st Quartile 4.3 0.0225 0.04505 0.7975

M edian 5.55 0.025 0.0515 1.465 3rd Quartile 10 0.065 0.0644 2.1325 M aximum 65 0.58 0.0901 2.8 Interquartile Range 5.7 0.0425 0.01935 1.335 M ean 9.272 0.089 0.055 1.465 Standard Deviation 11.297 0.166 0.021 1.888 Relative Standard Deviation 121.84% 186.52% 38.18% 128.87% Standard Error 1.883 0.05 0.008 1.335 Variance 127.617 0.028 0 3.564 Coefficient of Skewness 1970.966 1457.831 5404.762 1551.907 Number Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0 Percent Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0% Number SRA Indicators NA 5 NA NA Percent SRA Indicators NA 0.455 NA NA

121

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

GENERATING STATISTICS

ANALYTE GROUP: NUTRIENT NETWORK: ALL WATER RESOURCE: CONFINED UNCONFINED COUNTY: ESCAM BIA COLLECTION DATE: FROM : 1-JAN-1980 TO: 4-M AY-2006 RESULTS: MAX PER WELL A mmonia+ Nitrate+Nit Phosphoru Orthophos Organic A mmonia, Nitrite, Nitrate, Nitrate, Organic rite, s, phate, Nitrogen, Nitrogen, Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Total (as Nitrogen, Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved P arameter Name Dissolved Dissolved (as N) (as N) (as N) N) Dissolved (as N) (as P) (as P)

Parameter Code 602 607 608 613 618 620 623 631 666 671 Unitsmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/Lmg/L Total Wells4 7906 116286929084 Number BDLs06126204351741 Number MCL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA NA 5 NA NA NA NA Percent M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA NA 8.10% NA NA NA NA M inimum 0.23 0.1 0.005 0.01 0.005 0.061 0.03 0.009 0.002 0.002 1st Quartile 0.26 0.1 0.01025 0.01 0.025 0.44 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.0065

M edian 0.425 0.1 0.0595 0.01 0.04 0.955 0.105 2 0.03 0.025 3rd Quartile 0.935 0.1 0.13 0.01 0.51 3.075 0.2175 5.9175 0.06 0.0555 M aximum 2 1.78 82 0.01 10 28 58 59.6 64 30.1 Interquartile Range 0.675 0 0.11975 0 0.485 2.635 0.1175 5.8175 0.04 0.049 M ean 0.77 0.34 1.366 0.01 1.165 2.952 1.064 4.401 0.754 0.395 Standard Deviation 0.835 0.635 8.874 0 2.971 4.989 6.3 7.615 6.742 3.28 Relative Standard Deviation 108.44% 186.77% 649.63% 0% 255.02% 169.00% 592.11% 173.03% 894.16% 830.38% Standard Error 0.418 0.24 0.935 0 0.896 0.634 0.679 0.794 0.711 0.358 Variance 0.697 0.403 78.743 0 8.826 24.886 39.693 57.995 45.451 10.761 Coefficient of Skewness 2257.485 1448.819 455.094 0 1162.908 1583.684 490 1471.175 331.059 353.659 Number Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0 0 NA NA 11 NA NA Percent Risk Indicators NA NA NA 0% 0% NA NA 0.12 NA NA Number SRA Indicators NA NA NA NA 3 44 NA 59 57 33 Percent SRA Indicators NA NA NA NA 27.30% 71% NA 64% 63.30% 39.30%

122

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

GENERATING STATISTICS

ANALYTE GROUP: NUTRIENT NETWORK: ALL WATER RESOURCE: CONFINED UNCONFINED COUNTY: ESCAMBIA COLLECTION DATE: FROM : 1-JAN-1980 TO: 4-M AY-2006 RESULTS: MAX PER WELL Orthophos Nitrate+Nit phate, Ammonia, rite, Silica, Total (as Dissolved Dissolved Parameter Name Dissolved P) (As NH4) (As NO3)

Parameter Code 955 70507 71846 71851 Units mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Total Wells88622630 Number BDLs 0 1 0 0 Number M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA Percent M CL/GCL Exceedances NA NA NA NA M inimum 2.9 0.005 0.0258 0.1328 1st Quartile 6.95 0.07 0.0258 0.619775

M edian 9.5 0.14 0.0515 4.1391

3rd Quartile 13 0.3 0.347725 13.9444 M aximum 97 1.2 105.6021 84.1092 Interquartile Range 6.05 0.23 0.321925 13.324625 M ean 12.626 0.216 5.415 12.872 Standard Deviation 11.751 0.221 20.997 20.492 Relative Standard Deviation 93.07% 102.32% 387.76% 159.20% Standard Error 1.253 0.028 4.118 3.741 Variance 138.097 0.049 440.886 419.926 Coefficient of Skewness 2414.943 2298.643 771.229 1682.457 Number Risk Indicators NA NA NA 3 Percent Risk Indicators NA NA NA 10% Number SRA Indicators NA 57 NA NA Percent SRA Indicators NA 0.919 NA NA

123

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

124

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

125

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

Appendix J: Modeling Studies in the Pensacola Basin

126

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

127

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

128

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

129

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

130

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

131

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

132

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

133

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

134

Escambia Bay Nutrient TMDL

135