DOCSLIB.ORG

Prescott Active Management Area

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prescott Active Management Area Virtual Tour Prescott AMA Active Management Area 2200 EastHillsdale Road 2200 Prescott, AZ 86301 www.azwater.gov Prescott (928) 778-7202 Prescott AMA r u o General Groundwater Facts T al u t r • New AMAs can be i • The Groundwater V Management Code was designated either by passed in June of 1980 determination by the and established the four director (45-412) or by initial Active Management petition of 10% of the Areas (AMA): Phoenix, registered voters within Tucson, Pinal and the boundary of the Prescott. proposed AMA (45-415). • The Prescott, Phoenix and • Each AMA shall have a Tucson AMAs have a goal groundwater user’s of safe-yield by 2025. advisory council (GUAC) of five members who are appointed by the Governor. 2 Prescott AMA r u o Active Management Areas (AMA) and T al Irrigation Non-expansion Areas (INA) u t r i V Arizona Prescott AMA 485 mile2 ~ 20,000 AF water use Santa Cruz AMA 750 mile2 ~ 20,000 AF water use Tucson AMA 3,800 mile2 ~ 300,000 AF water use Pinal AMA 4,000 mile2 ~ 800,000 AF water use Phoenix AMA 5,600 mile2 ~ 2 million AF water use 3 4 Virtual Tour Prescott AMA Prescott AMA r u o Prescott AMA T al u • The Prescott AMA, 100 miles t • Precipitation varies from 13 to 25 r i north & west of Phoenix, inches per year V comprises 485 square miles in central Yavapai County, Arizona • 2,900,000 acre feet of groundwater in storage in local sub-basins* • Elevation ranges from 4400’ to 7800’ above sea level • The 2003 to 2004 mean annual water-level decline rate was -2.7 • Vegetation varies from high feet* desert grasslands to conifer forests • Broad alluvial basins ringed by fault block mountains 5 *Prescott Active Management Area 2003-2004 Hydrologic Monitoring Report Prescott AMA r u o T Precipitation al u t r 25 in. i 13 in. V • Widely varying 21 in. precipitation events in the AMA are responsible for 100% of the natural aquifer 17 in. recharge 21 in. 25 in. 6 Prescott AMA r u o Prescott AMA T al Sub-basins u t r i V • Groundwater moves southeasterly in LITTLE CHINO the Upper Agua Fria subbasin and northeasterly in the Little Chino sub-basin UPPER AGUA FRIA 7 Prescott AMA r u o T Rivers & Streams al u t r i • Verde River V Big Draw Little Chino Wash Granite Creek • Agua Fria River Lynx Creek Clipper Wash • Hassayampa River 8 Prescott AMA r u o 2003 Water Budget T al Prescott AMA u t r i V Groundwater Inflows Groundwater Outflows Groundwater Pumpage: Natural Recharge 6,600 Non-Exempt wells 19,160 Incidental Recharge 2,020 Exempt Wells 1,830 Artificial Recharge: Groundwater Discharge: City of Prescott 3,480 Underflow to Big Chino 1,800 Prescott Valley 1,740 Del Rio Springs Discharge 1,050 Total Inflows 13,840 Agua Fria Baseflow 1,300 Total Outflow 25,140 Inflow - Outflow = Change in Storage 13,840 – 25,140 = -11,300 acre-feet (overdraft) 9 Prescott AMA r u o T Total Groundwater Pumped (1990-2004) al u t r i Highest Volume = 21,815 AF V Prescott AMA Groundwater Pumping Lowest Volume = 12,007 AF 24,000 Average over last 15 years = 16,600 AF 22,000 Average over last 5 years 20,000 = 19,148 AF 18,000 Pumping from exempt wells 16,000 Acre-feet is estimated to be 14,000 approximately 2,000 AF 12,000 Over the last 5 years, the 10,000 combined annual pumping 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 from exempt and non- Year exempt wells is approximately 21,148 AF of groundwater. 10 Prescott AMA r u o Changes in Water Levels in Wells in the T al Prescott AMA u t r i Period of Wells showing Wells showing Wells showing V Change Increases in Decreases in no change in water levels water levels water levels (% of whole) (% of whole) (% of whole) 2003-2004 10 90 0 2002-2003 22 76 2 2001-2002 12 87 1 2000-2001 10 89 1 1999-2000 24 73 3 For 2003-2004, the maximum and minimum increases were 16.5 and 0.2 feet respectively. The maximum and minimum decreases were -31.9 and -.1 feet, respectively. Source: Prescott AMA 2003-2004 Hydrologic Monitoring Report 11 Prescott AMA # # r # # u # # # o ### # ### ### # ##### ## # ### # ### ### T # ##### ###### Distribution of ###### ### ## ## # # # # #### ## ### ## ### # ##### ################### ########## ############# ######### ############## ################## # ######### ##### ######## ##### ########## # ##### # ########################### # ########## ### # ################################### # ## # # al ############################## ########################################### # ### ### ### ## # # ##################################################### ########################### # ####################################################### # ############## # ######################################################################## # # ########################################## #### ################ ################################# ## u ####### ################## ############# # Wells in the ### ########### ############################################### ############### #### ############## # # ################################# ######################### ############ #### t ################################ ############## # ###### # ########################### # # ### # ##### ###### ##### ####### ########### ###### ######## ## ## ############## ################ ######## # # # r ##### # ######### # ###### ## # # ########## #### ########### # #### #### ###### ######## ######## # ## # i ####### ############# ### ####### #### ######### ################### ## ##### ############# # # ########### ############ # ###### ######## ######### ############### ######## #### ###### # ## # # # ######### ###### ##### ####### ###################### # # ########### ############# ####### ###################### # # ## # V ######### #### ####### ##### ### # ################ ### Prescott AMA ###################################### #### ####### ##### ### ## # ######## ## ######## ################### ############ ####### ######### ##### #### ### ####### # ##### ###### ######### ##### ######################## # # # ### ############ ############# ######################### # ####### ####################### ###### # #################### ###### ##### ##### ## ######### ## #### ########### ### # ######################### # ################# ################# # #### ########################### ####################################### # # ###### ### # ### ####### ###### ##### ############ #### ######################## # # # ######################## ############### ####### # # # ### ########## ####################### # # ### ### # ################# ################ ################# # ### ####### ## ############################################ # # #### #### # # # # ## # ## ### # # ## # ##### ###### # # ##### ## # # # ### #### ## # ## ### # # ######### ## # ##### # # ###### ## # # ### # ##### ####### # # ## # # # # # ##### ####### # #### ####### ######### ## ### #### ### # #### ######### # # # #### ## ## ### ## ## # ## # # ##### # ## ######## #### # # # # # ## # ###### ##### ### ####### ####### # # ######### ### ### ### ##### ## ###### # ######### # ## ### # ###### ### ## ## # # ####### # ### # ### # # ### # # # ##### #### ## # # #### # # # # # # ########## ####### ## # # # # ### ##### ### ## # # # ## ### ### ### # ### # # ## # # ## ######### # # # # Year # of Wells ## ## ####### # #### # #### # # ###### # # # # ## ##### ### ## # # ## #### # # ## ### # ## # ##### ## # ### ####### # ########## # ### ## # ########## # # ####### # ###### ### ### ## ############# # #### ## # ### ################# # # # # # ################ # # ## ############################### # # # 1985 4,463 ############################# # ## # # # # ########################################### # ######### ######### # ## # ####################### ################### ######### ############## # # # # ### ################ # ###### ####### # # ############ # # ##### # # # ## ###### # ####### # # 1995 7,267 ########### # # # # # ####### # ##### # # ### ##### # ### # ################ # ###### # # # # # ##### ### #### #### # # ############### ## ### # # # # ######### ### # # ######### ######## # # # ######### # ##### # ############ ## # # # # # # ########### ## ## # # # ##### ### # # ## ### # # ########### ####### # ## # # # ### ## ####### # # # # # # # # 2006 11,854 ########### ### # # ####### # # # # ### # ################# # # ## # #### #### ### ###### # ## # # # ## # # # # ## # ## ## ################ # # ### # ## # ## # ############## # ##### # # # ##### #### # ###### ################## # # # ### ### # # # ############# ############# # #### # # ## # ## ########## # # ### ## ### # # # # ### #################### #### ### # # #### # # # # # ############################## # # ##### ##### # ## # ################## ########################## #### # # # # ########### # # # # # ## ### #### ############ ######## ##### ###### # ### # # ####### ### # ###### ####################### ## # ###### # # # # # # # #### ###### #### ### ## ## # # ### ## #### ### ###### ## ########### # # ### # # # ####### ####### ####### ################### # ### # ##### #### ## ## #### ## # # # ######## # ## # # ## ##### ## ##################### # # ### #### ## # ######### # # # ################## # ########## ## # ####### ##### ## # # ## ## ### # #### ###### # ############### ###### ### ####### # ### ### # # #### # ## ## # # ###### # # # # ############################################## ##### # # # # # ## #### ## # # ### # # ######## ####################### # ################### # ## # # # # ## #### # # # # #### ##### ################################ ### ### # ###### ## # # # # # # # # ### ###### ################## ################## ######## # ##### # # ### # ### # ## # ########################## ####
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT on the PHOENIX
    CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT ON THE PHOENIX AMA Prepared for: United States Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by: Brown and Caldwell 201 East Washington Street, Suite 500 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Brown and Caldwell Project No. 23481.001 C-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 5 3.0 GENERALIZED GEOLOGY ............................................................................................ 6 3.1 BEDROCK GEOLOGY ......................................................................................... 6 3.2 BASIN GEOLOGY ................................................................................................ 6 4.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 9 4.1 GROUNDWATER OCCURRENCE ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hassayampa Landscape Restoration EA Aquatics Resources Report
    Hassayampa Landscape Restoration Environmental Assessment Aquatics Resources Report Prepared by: Albert Sillas Fishery Biologist Prescott National Forest for: Bradshaw Ranger District Prescott National Forest August 25, 2017 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Chino Valley North 7½' Quadrangle, Yavapai County, Arizona
    DIGITAL GEOLOGIC MAP DGM-80 Arizona Geological Survey www.azgs.az.gov GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE CHINO VALLEY NORTH 7½’ QUADRANGLE, YAVAPAI COUNTY, ARIZONA, V. 1.0 Brian. F. Gootee, Charles A. Ferguson, Jon E. Spencer and Joseph P. Cook December 2010 ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic Map of the Chino Valley North 7½' Quadrangle, Yavapai County, Arizona by Brian F. Gootee, Charles A. Ferguson, Jon E. Spencer, and Joe P. Cook Arizona Geological Survey Digital Geologic Map DGM-80 version 1.0 December, 2010 Scale 1:24,000 (1 sheet, with text) Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., #100, Tucson, Arizona 85701 This geologic map was funded in part by the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, award no. 08HQAG0093. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Government. Table of Contents Table of Contents......................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Geologic Discussion ................................................................................................................... 3 Quaternary faulting ...........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey Ik Salt River Valley, Arizona
    Soil Survey in Salt River Valley Item Type text; Book Authors Means, Thos. H. Publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Rights Public Domain: This material has been identified as being free of known restrictions under U.S. copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. Download date 28/09/2021 11:06:51 Item License http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/192405 U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DIVISION OF SOILS MILTON "WHITNEY, Chief SOIL SURVEY IK SALT RIVER VALLEY, ARIZONA. THOMAS H MEANS [REPRINTED *ROM THE EFFORT o\ FIIID OPLK\.HO\S os mt I)IM^ION ot i OK 1900 ] CONTENTS. Page. Introduction _ to 287 Geology and topography _ 288 Climate 291 Soils 293 Pecos sand 294 River wash 293 Salt Eiver gravel 293 G-ilafine sandy loam 296 Salt River adobe 296 G-lendale loess „__ 299 Colluvial soils, or mountain waste - 302 Maricopa gravelly loam 303 Maricopa sandy loam _ 304 Maricopaloam 306 Maricopa clay lo?-m „ 307 Hardpan _ 308 Solrnaps - - 308 Tempesheet , 308 Phoenix sheet 309 Buckeye sheet 309 Irrigation waters 310 Underground waters 31S Tempesheet „ , 314 Phoenix sheet 315 Buckeye sheet , 317 Alkali of the soils 319 Templesheet 319 Origin of alkali salts of Tempe sheet 321 Reclamation of alkali lands 323 Phoenix &heet - - 325 Buckeye sheet-, S38 Agriculture in Salt River Valley 331 Fruit farming 331 Cattle raising - 33S Dairying * — - %8& in ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES. PLATE XXIV. Character of native vegetation on desert land near the moun- tains 290 XXY. Irrigated lands in Tempe area 302 XXVI.
    [Show full text]
  • Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998
    GILA TOPMINNOW, Poeciliopsis occidentalis occidentalis, REVISED RECOVERY PLAN (Original Approval: March 15, 1984) Prepared by David A. Weedman Arizona Game and Fish Department Phoenix, Arizona for Region 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico December 1998 Approved: Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions required to recover and protect the species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) prepares the plans, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State and Federal Agencies, and others. Objectives are attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Time and costs provided for individual tasks are estimates only, and not to be taken as actual or budgeted expenditures. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor official positions or approval of any persons or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the Service. They represent the official position of the Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. ii Gila Topminnow Revised Recovery Plan December 1998 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Original preparation of the revised Gila topminnow Recovery Plan (1994) was done by Francisco J. Abarca 1, Brian E. Bagley, Dean A. Hendrickson 1 and Jeffrey R. Simms 1. That document was modified to this current version and the work conducted by those individuals is greatly appreciated and now acknowledged.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2019 to 09/30/2019 Prescott National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2019 to 09/30/2019 Prescott National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact R3 - Southwestern Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) AZ Public Service (APS) ROW - Vegetation management Completed Actual: 04/09/2019 04/2019 Heather Snow Vegetation Management with (other than forest products) 505-842-3445 Herbicides - Special use management [email protected] EA Description: FS must decide whether to allow APS to include using herbicides as a method to manage vegetation on existing *UPDATED* APS transmission ROW within five National Forests in Arizona. Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=45771 Location: UNIT - Kaibab National Forest All Units, Prescott National Forest All Units, Coconino National Forest All Units, Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests All Units, Tonto National Forest All Units. STATE - Arizona. COUNTY - Coconino, Gila, Maricopa, Navajo, Yavapai. LEGAL - Not Applicable. Arizona Public Service Company Rights of Way across the Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, Prescott, and Tonto National Forests. See map on website. Prescott College Academic - Recreation management In Progress: Expected:04/2018 05/2018 Julie Rowe Outfitter and Guide Priority Use - Special use management Scoping Start 02/02/2015 928-203-7516 (2015-2025) [email protected] CE Description: The Forest Service proposes to authorize Prescott College to conduct academic courses including new student orientation, adventure education, biology, human ecology, natural history, physical geography, field ecology, environmental conservation Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=47407 Location: UNIT - Coronado National Forest All Units, Kaibab National Forest All Units, Prescott National Forest All Units, Tonto Basin Ranger District, Coconino National Forest All Units, Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests All Units.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment
    United States Department of Agriculture Supplemental Forest Service Southwestern Environmental Region April 2020 Assessment Proposed Riverbend Placer Mine and Lost Nugget Reclamation Project Bradshaw Ranger District Prescott National Forest In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Fish Restoration in Redrock Canyon
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Final Environmental Assessment Phoenix Area Office NATIVE FISH RESTORATION IN REDROCK CANYON U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southwestern Region Coronado National Forest Santa Cruz County, Arizona June 2008 Bureau of Reclamation Finding of No Significant Impact U.S. Forest Service Finding of No Significant Impact Decision Notice INTRODUCTION In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190, as amended), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), as the lead Federal agency, and the Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), as cooperating agencies, have issued the attached final environmental assessment (EA) to disclose the potential environmental impacts resulting from construction of a fish barrier, removal of nonnative fishes with the piscicide antimycin A and/or rotenone, and restoration of native fishes and amphibians in Redrock Canyon on the Coronado National Forest (CNF). The Proposed Action is intended to improve the recovery status of federally listed fish and amphibians (Gila chub, Gila topminnow, Chiricahua leopard frog, and Sonora tiger salamander) and maintain a healthy native fishery in Redrock Canyon consistent with the CNF Plan and ongoing Endangered Species Act (ESA), Section 7(a)(2), consultation between Reclamation and the FWS. BACKGROUND The Proposed Action is part of a larger program being implemented by Reclamation to construct a series of fish barriers within the Gila River Basin to prevent the invasion of nonnative fishes into high-priority streams occupied by imperiled native fishes. This program is mandated by a FWS biological opinion on impacts of Central Arizona Project (CAP) water transfers to the Gila River Basin (FWS 2008a).
    [Show full text]
  • A Regional Groundwater Flow Model of the Salt River Valley - Phase I
    SDMS DOCID#1142207 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES A REGIONAL GROUNDWATER FLOW MODEL OF THE SALT RIVER VALLEY - PHASE I PBOEN~ AC~ MANAGEMENT AREA HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK AND BASIC DATA REPORT BY EDWIN F. CORKHILL, STEVE CORELL, BRADLEY M. HILL. and DAVID A. CARR HYDROLOGY DIVISION MODELING REPORT NO. 6 Phoenix, Arizona April, 1993 ARIZO~A DEPARTMENT OF \'1ATER RESOURCES A REGIONAL GROUND\VATER FLOW MODEL OF THE SALT RIVER VALLEY ~ PHASE I PHOENIX ACTIVE MANAGEMENT AREA HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK AND BASIC DATA REPORT Final Report by Edwin Corkhilt Steve CorelL Bradley M. HilL and David A. Modeling Report No. 6 Hydrology Division - Groundwater Modeling April 1, 1 Abstract The Phoenix Active :Management Area groundwater flow model focuses on the hydrologic system of the Salt River Valley, the most intensive water use area of the state. The goal of the hydrologic study and modeling effort was to develop a quantitative tool to test various groundwater management scenarios. The predevelopment hydrologic system (circa 1900) of the Salt River Valley is analyzed. Various components of groundwater inflow and outflov,/ are identified. A predevelopment groundviater budget is presented. The total inflows and outflows were in approximate balance and equaled approximately 139J~OO acre-feet per year. The modern hydrologic system (1978-198:-1) is analyzed. The vari.ous components of groundv,:rner inflow and outflov<' are identified. Detailed descriptions of the methodologies used to analyze the components of flow are provided. A groundwater budget for the period 19/X-1 Y88 is presented. The total inflows were approximately 13.5 million acre-feet and the total outflow-, were approximately 14.0 million acre-feet The estimated decrease in the volume of groundwater in storage \\'US 0.5 rnillion acre-feet Various recommendations are provided to improve future data collection and analysis efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Granite Creek Watershed Pollutant Reduction Plan
    Upper Granite Creek Watershed Pollutant Reduction Plan Prepared for Public Works Department 433 N. Virginia Street Prescott, AZ 86301 Prepared by 4600 E. Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034 November 2020 Upper Granite Creek Watershed Pollutant Reduction Plan City of Prescott Public Works Department Prescott, Arizona Submitted to: City of Prescott Prescott, Arizona Submitted by: Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Phoenix, Arizona November 2020 Project No. 3720156008 November 30, 2020 Project No. 3720156008 Contract No. 2015-184 City of Prescott Public Works Department 430 North Virginia Street Prescott, Arizona 86301 Attn: Ben Burns, City of Prescott Matt Killeen, City of Prescott Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that states compile a list of surface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards (WQS). The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) then must develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for waterbodies on the 303(d) List. TMDLs set the amount of the given pollutant(s) that the waterbody can withstand without creating an impairment of that surface water’s designated beneficial use(s). The City of Prescott (City) is named in two TMDLs, identified as: • Watson Lake TMDL: Total Nitrogen, Dissolved Oxygen (DO), pH & Total Phosphorus Targets - Finalized February 2015 (Open File Report OFR-14-03) • Final Upper Granite Creek Watershed Escherichia coli (E. coli) TMDL November 2015 (Open File Report 14-08) Since 2015, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc (Wood), has been supporting the City by performing a wide range of activities. The overall purpose of these activities was to evaluate and model pollutant reduction activities and present recommendations in the Upper Granite Creek Watershed Pollutant Reduction Plan (WPRP) and Watson Lake Reservoir Lake Management Plan (LMP).
    [Show full text]
  • 443 Subpart D—Federally Promulgated Water Quality Standards
    Environmental Protection Agency § 131.33 Subpart D—Federally Promulgated of streams located in Indian country, Water Quality Standards or as may be modified by the Regional Administrator, EPA Region X, pursu- § 131.31 Arizona. ant to paragraph (a)(3) of this section, ° (a) [Reserved] a temperature criterion of 10 C, ex- (b) The following waters have, in ad- pressed as an average of daily max- dition to the uses designated by the imum temperatures over a seven-day State, the designated use of fish con- period, applies to the waterbodies iden- sumption as defined in R18–11–101 tified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section (which is available from the Arizona during the months of June, July, Au- Department of Environmental Quality, gust and September. Water Quality Division, 3033 North (2) The following waters are pro- Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85012): tected for bull trout spawning and rearing: COLORADO MAIN STEM RIVER (i) BOISE-MORE BASIN: Devils BASIN: Creek, East Fork Sheep Creek, Sheep Hualapai Wash MIDDLE GILA RIVER BASIN: Creek. Agua Fria River (Camelback Road to (ii) BROWNLEE RESERVOIR BASIN: Avondale WWTP) Crooked River, Indian Creek. Galena Gulch (iii) CLEARWATER BASIN: Big Can- Gila River (Felix Road to the Salt yon Creek, Cougar Creek, Feather River) Creek, Laguna Creek, Lolo Creek, Queen Creek (Headwaters to the Su- Orofino Creek, Talapus Creek, West perior WWTP) Fork Potlatch River. Queen Creek (Below Potts Canyon) (iv) COEUR D’ALENE LAKE BASIN: SAN PEDRO RIVER BASIN: Cougar Creek, Fernan Creek, Kid Copper Creek Creek, Mica Creek, South Fork Mica SANTA CRUZ RIVER BASIN: Creek, Squaw Creek, Turner Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Outfalls Inspected FY 2020 898997 Northcentral I‐15 9.13 Virgin River
    Outfalls inspected FY 2020 Outfall ID District Route MilePost Receiving water Impaired OAW 898997 Northcentral I‐15 9.13 Virgin River 985778 Southcentral I‐10 289.18 Cienega Creek 986825 Southcentral I‐10 288.82 Cienega Creek 1006202 Southcentral I‐10 284.96 Davidson Canyon 1006204 Southcentral I‐10 284.28 Davidson Canyon 1006274 Southcentral I‐10 284.41 Davidson Canyon 1006380 Southcentral I‐10 284.17 Davidson Canyon 1006409 Southcentral I‐10 284.29 Davidson Canyon 1017172 Southcentral SR 77 71.81 Rillito Creek 1017220 Southeast US 191 153.58 Gila River 1058178 Northcentral I‐17 339.85 Sinclair Wash 1062492 Northcentral SR 89A 382.28 Oak Creek 1069543 Northcentral I‐15 9.3 Virgin River 1069544 Northcentral I‐15 9.31 Virgin River 1069545 Northcentral I‐15 9.35 Virgin River 1069546 Northcentral I‐15 9.36 Virgin River 1069547 Northcentral I‐15 9.37 Virgin River 1069548 Northcentral I‐15 9.43 Virgin River 1069550 Northcentral I‐15 9.46 Virgin River 1485571 Northwest SR 89 306.41 Granite Creek 1486080 Northwest SR 89 306.33 Granite Creek 1486083 Northwest SR 89 306.48 Granite Creek 1488480 Northwest SR 69 287.98 Lynx Creek 1510550 Southcentral SR 77 79.84 Canada del Oro 1510619 Southeast US 191 153.43 Gila River 1512473 Central SR 202L 5.9 Salt River 1512474 Central SR 202L 7.99 Salt River 1512475 Central SR 202L 8.3 Salt River 1512476 Central SR 202L 8.45 Salt River 1512477 Central SR 202L 14.45 Salt River 1512486 Central SR 101L 51.38 Salt River 1512487 Central SR 101L 51.58 Salt River 1512537 Central SR 51 6.99 Salt
    [Show full text]