DOCSLIB.ORG

Umpqua Basin Water Quality Status/Action Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Umpqua Basin Water Quality Status/Action Plan Watershed Management – Umpqua Basin Umpqua Basin Status Report and Action Plan July 30, 2014 Water Quality Western Region 811 SW 6th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Phone: (503) 229-5696 (800) 452-4011 Fax: (503) 229-6762 Contact: Heather Tugaw www.oregon.gov/DEQ DEQ is a leader in restoring, maintaining and enhancing the quality of Oregon’s air, land and water. Last Updated: 7/30/2014 By: Jane Doe DEQ 03-??-### This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 811 SW 6th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 1-800-452-4011 www.oregon.gov/deq Contact: Heather Tugaw (541) 776-6010 Alternative formats (Braille, large type) of this document can be made available. Contact DEQ’s Office of Communications & Outreach, Portland, at (503) 229-5696, or toll-free in Oregon at 1-800-452-4011, ext. 5696. Umpqua Basin Status Report and Action Plan ii Table of Contents Concurrences ............................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 8 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 8 1.2 Plan Overview................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Geographic Area .............................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Current Land Uses/Cover and Land Ownership ............................................................................ 10 1.5 Climate ............................................................................................................................................ 10 1.6 Geology .......................................................................................................................................... 11 1.7 Beneficial Uses ............................................................................................................................... 13 1.8 Water Rights ................................................................................................................................... 14 1.9 Fisheries ......................................................................................................................................... 15 1.10 Land Use and Resource Concerns .............................................................................................. 17 2. Water Quality Status and Impacts to Beneficial Uses ............................................................ 21 2.1 General Surface Water Quality Conditions .................................................................................... 21 2.1.1 Oregon Water Quality Index ..................................................................................................... 21 2.1.2 Coastal Environmental Monitoring and Assessment ............................................................... 24 2.1.2.1 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 25 2.1.2.2 Pollutant Exposure: Sediment Quality ................................................................................ 26 2.1.2.2 Pollutant Exposure: Fish and Contaminants ...................................................................... 31 2.2 Water Contact Recreation .............................................................................................................. 34 2.2.1 Fecal bacteria, E. coli, and other pathogens ............................................................................ 34 Umpqua Basin Status Report and Action Plan iv 2.2.2. Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) ................................................................................................. 37 2.3 Fish and Shellfish Consumption ..................................................................................................... 40 2.3.1 Fecal Coliform .......................................................................................................................... 40 2.3.3 Metals ....................................................................................................................................... 44 2.4 Water Supply .................................................................................................................................. 48 2.4.1 Public Water Supply: Bacteria, Turbidity, Nitrates, Toxics ....................................................... 48 2.4.2 Groundwater: Nitrate, Bacteria, Metals .................................................................................... 52 2.5 Fish and Aquatic Life ...................................................................................................................... 56 2.5.1 Macroinvertebrate Assemblage ............................................................................................... 56 2.5.2 Toxics ....................................................................................................................................... 59 2.5.3 Temperature ............................................................................................................................. 67 2.5.4 Sedimentation/Turbidity............................................................................................................ 68 2.5.5 Dissolved Oxygen/pH/Nutrients/Aquatic Weeds and Algae..................................................... 70 2.5.6 Flow/Habitat ............................................................................................................................. 74 3. Water Quality Action Plan ..................................................................................................... 78 3.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 78 3.2 Goals .............................................................................................................................................. 78 3.3 Summary of Water Quality Resource Concerns by Geographic Area ........................................... 79 3.4 General Priorities in the Umpqua Basin ......................................................................................... 80 3.5 Water Quality Standards ................................................................................................................ 80 3.6 Water Quality Assessment ............................................................................................................. 81 3.7 Total Maximum Daily Loads ........................................................................................................... 82 3.7.1 Umpqua Basin TMDLs ............................................................................................................. 82 3.7.2 Little River TMDL ...................................................................................................................... 83 Umpqua Basin Status Report and Action Plan v 3.7.3 TMDL Implementation-Basin wide ........................................................................................... 83 3.7.4 TMDLs and Related Work for 2014-2019 ................................................................................ 86 3.8 Waste Water Control – Point Source Program ............................................................................... 90 3.8.1 Industrial and Domestic Wastewater Permitting ...................................................................... 90 3.8.2 Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) .................................................................................. 90 3.8.3 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) .................................................... 90 3.8.4 Permit Classifications ............................................................................................................... 90 3.8.4.1 General Permits ................................................................................................................. 91 3.8.4.2 Individual Permits ............................................................................................................... 92 3.9 Stormwater Program ...................................................................................................................... 96 3.10 Pretreatment Program .................................................................................................................. 97 3.11 Biosolids Program ........................................................................................................................ 98 3.12 Underground Injection Control.................................................................................................... 100 3.13 401 Certification .......................................................................................................................... 101 3.13.1 Hydroelectric Projects .............................................................................................................. 101 3.13.2 Removal/Fill Certification ........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Source Water Assessment Report
    Source Water Assessment Report City of Myrtle Creelc, Oregon PWS #4100550 Febrnary 20, 2003 Prepared for City of Myrtle Creek Prepared by � � I •1 :(•I State of Oregon Departmentof Envlronmenlal Quality Water Quality Division Drinking Water Protection Program Drinking Water Program Department of Environmental Quality on 811 SW Sixth Avenue reg Portland, OR97204-1390 Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor 503-229-5696 TTY 503-229-6993 February 20, 2003 Steve Johnson City of Myrtle Creek PO Box 940 Myrtle Creek, Oregon 97457 RE: Source Water Assessment Report City of Myitle Creek Public Water System PWS # 4100550 Dear Mr. Johnson: Enclosed is the Source Water Assessment Report for Myrtle Creek's drinking water protection area. The assessment was prepared under the requirements and guidance of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the US Environmental Protection Agency, as well as a detailed Source Water Assessment Plan developed by a statewide citizen's advisory committee here in Oregon over the past two years. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) are conducting the assessments for all public water systems in Oregon. The purpose is to provide information so that the public water system staff/operator, consumers, and community citizens can begin developing strategies to protect your source of drinking water. There are eight other drinking water intakes for public water systems also located on the South Umpqua River or its tributaries upstream of the Myrtle Creek intake. Other upstream intakes include the intakes for Tri-City Water District, Milo Academy, Tiller Elementary School and USPS Tiller Ranger Station (on the South Umpqua River), City of Canyonville (on Canyon Creek), and Lawson Acres Water Association, City of Riddle, and City of Glendale (on Cow Creek).
    [Show full text]
  • Tiller Region Assessment and Action Plan
    Assessment and Action Plan N W E S Umpqua Basin Tiller Region Assessm ent Area Prepared by Nancy A. Geyer for the Umpqua Basin Watershed Council November, 2003 UBWC Tiller Region Assessment and Action Plan Umpqua Basin Watershed Council 1758 NE Airport Road Roseburg, Oregon 97470 541 673-5756 www.ubwc.org Tiller Region Assessment and Action Plan Prepared by Nancy A. Geyer November, 2003 Contributors Robin Biesecker Jeanine Lum Barnes and Associates, Inc. Barnes and Associates, Inc. Kristin Anderson and David Williams John Runyon Oregon Water Resources BioSystems Consulting Department Publication citation This document should be referenced as Geyer, Nancy A. Tiller Region Assessment and Action Plan. Roseburg, Oregon: Prepared for the Umpqua Basin Watershed Council; 2003 November. This project has been funded in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement CO-000451-02 to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 2 UBWC Tiller Region Assessment and Action Plan Acknowledgments This assessment would not have been possible without the help of community volunteers. I am very grateful to the landowners, residents, and UBWC directors and members who attended the monthly assessment meetings and offered their critical review and insight. Their input and participation was invaluable. I am also grateful for the assistance of the following individuals and groups: • The staff of the Umpqua National Forest, Douglas Soil and Water Conservation District, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Oregon Water Resources Department who answered many questions and provided much of the assessment’s quantitative and qualitative data.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees — Summer 2012 President’S Message—Mike Ash
    OldSmokeys Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees — Summer 2012 President’s Message—Mike Ash This message kicks off my official tour as your president, and I feel humbled by this honor. This is a fantastic organization, with members who give much of themselves in carrying out our mission. This past year, as President-elect, I gained first-hand experience about how our organization functions, the ac- tivities we engage in, and the leadership we have in place. I must say that it has been a pleasure to work with John Berry and Bill Shenk as president and past president, respectively, and to work with a very dedicated board of directors and various committee members. I am also quite happy that Linda Goodman has joined us in her new president-elect role. I don’t see a need to make any significant changes to our operations this next year. I think this ship is floating and cruising just fine. I believe my job is to keep it that way, and I’ll appreciate your help in doing that! As always, the spring, summer, and fall are full of activities for OldSmokeys, and I enjoy each opportunity to visit with many of you on a more personal basis. May 20 was our annual spring Banquet that was well at- tended and a real treat. And wasn’t it fantastic to see Bill and Vickie Shenk there after all they have been through! Then, on June 7, we had a fun special meeting up at Government Camp to tour the Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Windows on the Past
    Windows on the Past Interpretive Guide to Pacific Northwest History United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Use this guide as your key to rediscover Each entry contains a site number, site name, many of the treasures left behind by those who once interpretive symbols, and text. The site number lived in the Pacific Northwest. These archaeological corresponds to that shown on the map at the begin­ and historical sites bear testimony to the successes ning of the section. Archaeological sites are indicated and failures, hopes and dreams, and even the day-to­ by an arrowhead symbol next to the site number; day struggles of past generations. This guide is historical sites are denoted by a wagon wheel designed to increase the accessibility of the cultural symbol. Museums, visitor centers, tours, and other resources of our region, and to foster an appreciation interpretive opportunities that introduce you to both for the stories that they tell. archaeology and history are signified by a combina­ tion of these two symbols. One to four additional In Washington and Oregon, archaeological sites symbols give you a quick visual summary of the site's typically consist of the material remains of ancient main cultural features. A key to these symbols is on American Indian cultures. From these sites, only the the fold-out back cover of this guide. In addition, artifacts and Indian mythology can speak to us about each entry includes a brief description and directions the past. Historical sites in our area give us a glimpse to the site. of the lives of Euroamerican and Chinese immigrants who came here during the past 200 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Source Water Assessment Report
    Source Water Assessment Report Milo Academy Milo, Oregon PWS #4100250 February 20, 2003 Prepared for Milo Academy Prepared by �� I •1 :(•1 Stale of Oregon Department of Environmental QuaIlly Water Quality Division Drinking Water Protection Program Drinking Water Program Department of Environmental Quality regon 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 TI1codorc R. Kulongoski, Governor 503-229-5696 TTY 503-229-6993 February 20, 2003 Kelly Kolstad Milo Academy PO Box 278 Days Creek, Oregon 97429 RE: Source Water Assessment Report Milo Academy PWS # 4100250 Dear Mr. Kolstad: Enclosed is the Source Water Assessment Report for Milo Academy's drinking water protection area. The assessment was prepared under the requirements and guidance of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the US Environmental Protection Agency, as well as a detailed Source Water Assessment Plan developed by a statewide citizen's advisory committee here in Oregon over the past two years. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) are conducting the assessments for all public water systems in Oregon. The purpose is to provide information so that the public water system staf£'operator, consumers, and community citizens can begin developing strategies to protect your source of drinking water. The drinking water intake for the Tiller Elementary School and USFS Tiller Ranger Station public water systems are also located on the South Umpqua River upstream of the Milo Academy intake. This source water assessment addresses the geographic area providing water to Milo Academy's intake (Milo Academy's portion of the drinking water protection area) between Milo Academy's intake and the upstream intake for Tiller Elementary School.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS APPLIED to a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE Redacted for Privacy Abstract Approved: Thomas C
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Kathleen Manolescu for the degree of Master of Arts in Interdisciplinary Studies: Anthropology, Agricultural and Resource Economics, and Political Science presented on December 16, 1976 Title: TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS APPLIED TO A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: Thomas C. Hogg Lri Barth's theory of transactional analysis is applied to the community of Tiller, Oregon and its reaction to a development proposal. Community behavior patterns vis2a-vis the development proposal are examined from a processual point of view to determine how these patterns are generated. The community's history and contemporary situation are described. Data derived from bibliographic and field research are presented to illustrate transactions involving reciprocity in the community. A generative model is formulated to depict the constraints and incentives channeling decision-making in the transactions. It is concluded that a transactional analysis is an appropriate tool for examining the community development process and for specifying critical elements in development.The analysis revealed cultural evaluations and therefore provided an indirect means for engaging citizen participation and for assessing the development proposal. Transactional Analysis Applied to a Community Development Issue by Kathleen Marie Manolescu A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Commencement June 1977 APPROVED: Redacted for Privacy Thomas C. Hogg, Professor ofAnhropology Redacted for Privacy Russell C. Youmans, Asso fate Professor of Agricultural and Resi urce Economics Redacted for Privacy -W. Bruce Shepard, Assistant Professor of Political Science Redacted for Privacy Robert W. Newburgh, Dean of the Graduate School Date thesis is presented December 16, 1976 Typed by Kathleen Manolescu ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My participation in Oregon State University's Interdisciplinary Studies program would not have been possible without the guidance of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Classification Wild
    VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION OF WILD TURKEY HABITAT IN UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST USING COLOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY by BRET JACK HAZELL A RESEARCH PAPER submitted to THE GEOSCIENCES DEPARTMENT in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE GEOGRAPHY PROGRAM April 1993 Directed by Dr. Charles Rosenfeld TABLE OF CONTENTS SUBJECT PAGE 1. Introduction 1 A. Rio Grande Wild Turkey Project 1 B. Purpose of this Study 2 C. The Study Area 2 2. Remote Sensing Options 6 3. Basis of Work 8 A. Historical Background of Aerial Photography 8 with Emphasis on Forestry Applications 1. Aerial Photography 8 2. Color Film 11 B. AirPhoto Interpretation Principles 12 1.Interpretation 12 2.Recognition Elements 12 3.Stereoscopic Viewing 13 4.Photo Interpretation Keys 14 5.Photo Scale 16 6.Season and Time of Day Considerations 16 7.Radial Distortion 17 8.Tree Height Measurements 18 C. Equipment and Materials 19 1. Stereoscope 19 2. Kail Reflecting Projector 20 3. Topographic Maps and Orthophotoquads 21 4. Measuring Devices and Drafting Materials 22 5. Photo Interpretation Guides 23 6. Global Positioning System 23 P. Development of Classification System 24 4. South Umpqua Test Project A. Classification System Development 33 B. Delineation of Project Area and Test Site 34 C. Interpretation, Classification, and Transfer of Data 34 D. Ground Truthing 35 E. Work and Cost Estimates 36 5. Project Execution 36 A. Interpretation and Classification 36 B. Transfer of Information and Final Product 36 6. Results and Conclusions 38 7. References 41 8. Appendices 1. Trees of the South Umpqua Basin 46 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Source Water Assessment Report
    Source Water Assessment Report USFS Tiller Ranger Station Tiller, Oregon PWS #4101092 February 19, 2003 Prepared for USFS Tiller Ranger Station Prepared by I 1] =<•1 State oJOregon Departmentof Environmental Quality Water Quality Division Drinking Water Protection Program Drinking Water Program Department of Environmental Quality regon 811 SW SixthAvenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor 503-229-5696 TTY 503-229-6993 February 19, 2003 John Ulicny USFS Tiller Ranger Station PO Box 1008 Roseburg, Oregon 97470 RE: Source Water Assessment Report USFS Tiller Ranger Station PWS # 4101092 Dear Mr. Ulicny: Enclosed is the Source Water Assessment Report for USFS Tiller Ranger Station's drinking water protection area. The assessment was prepared under the requirements and guidance of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the US Environmental Protection Agency, as well as a detailed Source Water Assessment Plan developed by a statewide citizen's advisory committee here in Oregon over the past two years. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Oregon Department of Human Services (DRS) are conducting the assessments for all public water systems in Oregon. The purpose is to provide information so that the public water system staff/operator, consumers, and commnuity citizens can begin developing strategies to protect your source of drinking water. There are eight drinking water intakes on the South Umpqua River downstream of Tiller Ranger Station's intake including the intake for tbe Tiller Elementary School, Milo Academy, Tri City Water District, City of Myrtle Creek, Clarks Branch Water Association, Roseburg Forest Products, Winston-Dillard Water District, and Roberts Creek Water District.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Fall 2010
    OldSmokeys Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Fall 2010 President’s Message—Bill Shenk Having area representatives promote Pacific Northwest Forest Service Association membership and interests over the years has had positive results, and those representatives’ efforts on behalf of the OldSmokeys are greatly appreciated. Yet, membership has declined steadily during the past few years for many reasons, and revitalization of our area repre- sentative system is one way to address this. The PNWFSA offers a positive product to its members. Most important is a way to keep in touch and socialize with old friends and meet new friends. Our last-Friday-of-the-month meetings and annual spring banquets and summer pic- nics are great for this, as is our always up-to-date membership directory. Our quarterly OldSmokeys Newsletter and fre- quent E-Note and E-Forum e-mails help us keep up with and involved not just with each other but with the Outfit in ways that contribute to its continued success and esprit de corps. So does our OldSmokeys website. That involvement is a two-way street; we receive assistance from the Forest Service, too. Much of the success of these efforts depends on active area representatives who recruit new members from and keep the lines of communication open between the administrative units they serve and the association as a whole. Membership Chairman Bob Devlin and I think our area representative system could be revitalized and made even more productive, especially in terms of recruiting the new members—both new retirees and those still working who qualify for membership—needed to keep the OldSmokeys relevant and viable.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.Coist Skvic
    1iLIN[S 1' THIRTY-YEAR CLUB kGIONSix U.S.cOIST SkvIc Volume XXIIJuly 1977 YEA TIMBER LINES June - 1977 VOLU1E XXII * PUBLISHED BY REDICSIX FORZT SERVICE 30-YL&R CLTIB (Not pub1ished in 1975, and.1976) STA?F Editor Carroll E. ro'wn Publication Region Six 'orest Service 30-Year Club Obituaries Many - Asindicated Lor eath Typist Bunty Lilhigren X XJ[X xmmxmx XJ0000)X )O0OC(XX)QOX x x XXxXX Material appearing in TIMBER-LINESmaynot be published with- out express permission of the officers of Region SixTHIRTY - YEft.t CLUB, Forest Service publicationsexcepted. TABLE OF CONTENTS Article and author PAflE FRONTSPIECE Table of Contents i - ii Thirtr Year Club Officers,1975, 1976, 1977 iii A Word From Your Editor iv Greetings From our Club President, Reta V. Eggers 1 Greetings From Forest Service Chief, John FL l4cGuire 2 Greetings From Regional Forester, Ted Schlapfer 3 -b Fifty Years of Forestry Research, Bob Tarrant S -6 In Nanorium and Obituaries 7 - 38 A Memorial to K. C. Langfield 39 Big Challenge Ahead fro Al Wiesendanger 39 Harold Berman was a Big, Big Nan, George Norey ho The J. Roy Mitchell Bridge A Forest Officerts Wife's Viewpoint, Lillian Olson - OurF.arJ,yDays in the West, Alice Mae Poirier . hh - Highlights of My Forest Service Career, Lloyd E. Brom b9 - 55 From Here and There 56 58 Other Bits and Pieces 58 -60 Back in 1921,Hugh A. Hitter 61 Fire Fighting Plans for Army Maneuvers, Harold A. ttRed Thomas . 62 -6b Thomas s Association dth Pat Thompson, Harold A. "Red" Thomas .
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet
    NP8 Form 10400« OM8 Appmnl No. 10244018 (MB) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Section number ___ Page ___ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 91000162 Date Listed: 3/6/91 Tiller Ranger Station Douglas OR Property Name County State USDA Forest Service Administrative Buildings in OR and WA Built by the CCC Multiple Name This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation. L Signature of the Keeper Date of Action Amended Items in Nomination: Classification: The Category of Property should be amended to "district." Statement of Significance: Criteria Consideration G should be deleted. The Period of Significance should read: 1935-41. This information was confirmed with Evan DeBloois, Preservation Officer, Forest Service. DISTRIBUTION: National Register property file Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment) NFS FMm 1MOO« United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Section number ___ Page ___ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 91000162 Date Listed: 3/6/91 Tiller Ranger Station Douglas OR Property Name County State USDA Forest Service Administration Buildings in Oregon and Washington Built by the CCC Multiple Name ^m ^B ^B •» ••) ^» ^m •• ^B •• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••> ••> •• •» •• ••> *• •• •• •• «•» «•» ••» •» •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •» •• •• ^» ^B •• ••> ^» ^» ^B ^B ^* •• ^* «^ •• •• •• «•* ^* •" •• *^ •• •• • This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation.
    [Show full text]