DOCSLIB.ORG

Final REPORT Nutrient Tmdls North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final REPORT Nutrient Tmdls North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration, Bureau of Watershed Restoration NORTHWEST DISTRICT • PENSACOLA BASIN Final REPORT Nutrient TMDLs North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) Judges Bayou (WBID 493B) Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) Dissolved Oxygen TMDL Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) Douglas Gilbert June 7, 2013 FINAL TMDL Report: Pensacola Bay Basin; North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA), Judges Bayou (WBID 493B), Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) (Nutrients); Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) (DO); June 7, 2013 Acknowledgments This analysis could not have been accomplished without significant contributions from staff in the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Bureau of Watershed Restoration and Northwest District Office. Light detection and ranging (LiDar) data provided by the Northwest Florida Water Management District allowed for the refinement of basin delineations in the Judges Bayou watershed. Modeling support was provided by Tim Wool with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 and Tetra Tech under contract with the EPA. Editorial assistance was provided by Jan Mandrup-Poulsen and Linda Lord. Map production assistance was provided by Ronald Hughes. For additional information on the watershed management approach and impaired waters in the Pensacola Bay Basin, contact: Stephen Cioccia, Environmental Consultant Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Watershed Restoration Watershed Planning and Coordination Section 2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3565 Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 [email protected] Phone: (850) 245–8618 Fax: (850) 245–8434 Access to all data used in the development of this report can be obtained by contacting: Douglas Gilbert, Environmental Manager Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Watershed Restoration Watershed Evaluation and TMDL Section 2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 3555 Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 [email protected] Phone: (850) 245–8450; Fax: (850) 245–8536 ii Florida Department of Environmental Protection FINAL TMDL Report: Pensacola Bay Basin; North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA), Judges Bayou (WBID 493B), Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) (Nutrients); Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) (DO); June 7, 2013 Contents Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________ 1 1.1 Purpose of Report _______________________________________________ 1 1.2 Identification of Waterbody ________________________________________ 1 1.2.1 Bayou Chico _______________________________________________ 1 1.2.2 Judges Bayou ______________________________________________ 1 1.2.3 North Escambia Bay _________________________________________ 1 1.3 Background ____________________________________________________ 4 Chapter 2: DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY PROBLEM __________________ 5 2.1 Legislative and Rulemaking History _________________________________ 5 2.2 Information on Verified Impairment _________________________________ 5 2.3 Summary of Verified Impairments __________________________________ 6 2.3.1 Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) Impairments __________________ 6 2.3.2 Judges Bayou (WBIDs 493A and 493B) Impairments ________________ 7 2.3.3 Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) Impairments ________________________ 8 2.4 Summary of Verified Period Data ___________________________________ 9 2.4.1 Bayou Chico Watershed (WBIDs 846A, 846B, 846, and 846C) Data ____ 9 2.4.2 Middle Pensacola Bay Watershed (WBID 548D) Data ______________ 19 2.4.3 Judges Bayou Watershed (WBIDs 493A and 493B) Data ____________ 20 2.4.4 North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) Data ________________________ 29 Chapter 3. DESCRIPTION OF APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND TARGETS ____________________________________________ 45 3.1 Classification of the Waterbody and Criteria Applicable to the TMDL ____ 45 3.2 Applicable Water Quality Standards and Numeric Water Quality Target ____________________________________________________ 45 3.2.1 Nutrients _________________________________________________ 45 3.2.2 Chlorophyll ________________________________________________ 46 3.2.3 Nitrogen Total as N (TN) _____________________________________ 46 3.2.4 Phosphorus Total as P (TP) __________________________________ 46 3.2.5 DO Freshwater ____________________________________________ 47 Chapter 4: ASSESSMENT OF SOURCES ________________________________ 48 4.1 Types of Sources _______________________________________________ 48 4.2 Potential Sources of Nutrients in the Impaired Watersheds ____________ 48 4.2.1 Point Sources _____________________________________________ 48 iii Florida Department of Environmental Protection FINAL TMDL Report: Pensacola Bay Basin; North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA), Judges Bayou (WBID 493B), Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) (Nutrients); Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) (DO); June 7, 2013 4.2.2 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permittees _______________ 52 4.2.3 Land Uses and Nonpoint Sources ______________________________ 52 4.2.4 Population ________________________________________________ 64 4.2.5 Septic Tanks ______________________________________________ 64 4.2.6 Sediment Nutrient Release ___________________________________ 71 Chapter 5: DETERMINATION OF ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY_________________ 72 5.1 Determination of Loading Capacity _________________________________ 72 5.2 Overview of Modeling Process ____________________________________ 74 5.2.1 Mechanistic Models _________________________________________ 74 5.2.2 Model Development _________________________________________ 75 5.3 TMDL Development Process ______________________________________ 78 5.3.1 Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) ___________________________ 78 5.3.2 Judges Bayou (WBIDs 493A and 493B) _________________________ 86 5.3.3 North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) ____________________________ 87 5.4 Critical Conditions/Seasonality ___________________________________ 105 Chapter 6: DETERMINATION OF THE TMDL _____________________________ 106 6.1 Expression and Allocation of the TMDL ___________________________ 106 6.2 Load Allocation (LA) ___________________________________________ 108 6.2.1 Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) __________________________ 108 6.2.2 Judges Bayou (freshwater) (WBID 493A) _______________________ 108 6.2.3 North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) and Judges Bayou (marine) (WBID 493B) _____________________________________________ 109 6.2.4 Alabama ________________________________________________ 109 6.3 Wasteload Allocation (WLA) _____________________________________ 109 6.3.1 NPDES Wastewater Discharges ______________________________ 109 6.3.2 NPDES Stormwater Discharges ______________________________ 110 6.4 Margin of Safety (MOS) _________________________________________ 111 Chapter 7: NEXT STEPS: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND BEYOND ________________________________________________ 112 7.1 Basin Management Action Plan __________________________________ 112 7.2 Next Steps for TMDL Implementation _____________________________ 113 References 116 Appendices ________________________________________________________ 121 Appendix A: Background Information on Federal and State Stormwater Programs ________________________________________________ 121 iv Florida Department of Environmental Protection FINAL TMDL Report: Pensacola Bay Basin; North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA), Judges Bayou (WBID 493B), Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) (Nutrients); Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) (DO); June 7, 2013 Appendix B: Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) and Middle Pensacola Bay (WBID 548D) Data Tables/Figures (Separate Document) ______ 122 Appendix C: Judges Bayou (WBIDs 493A and 493B) Data Tables/Figures (Separate Document) _______________________________________ 122 Appendix D: Pensacola Bay (WBIDs 548AA, 548AC, 548B, 548GA, 548GB, 548H, 548C, 548D, 548E, and 915) Data Tables/Figures (Separate Document) _______________________________________________ 122 Appendix E: Pensacola Basin TMDL Model Results: Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) and North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) Figures/Tables (Separate Document) __________________________ 122 Appendix F: Pensacola Basin TMDL Public Comments and Department Reponses: Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C), Judges Bayou (WBIDs 493A and 493B), and North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA) (Separate Document) _______________________________________ 122 v Florida Department of Environmental Protection FINAL TMDL Report: Pensacola Bay Basin; North Escambia Bay (WBID 548AA), Judges Bayou (WBID 493B), Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846C and 846) (Nutrients); Judges Bayou (WBID 493A) (DO); June 7, 2013 List of Tables Table 2.1. Verified Impaired Segments (Nutrients and DO) in the Pensacola Bay Basin _______________________________________ 6 Table 2.2. Assessment Results for Bayou Chico (WBIDs 846 and 846C) ________ 6 Table 2.3. DO Assessment Results for Judges Bayou (Freshwater) (WBID 493A) ___________________________________________________ 7 Table 2.4. DO Impairment in Judges Bayou (Freshwater) (WBID 493A) _________ 8 Table 2.5. Nutrient Impairment in Judges Bayou (marine) (WBID 493B) ________ 8 Table 2.6. Nutrient Assessment Results for North Escambia Bay (Marine) (WBID 548AA) ____________________________________________ 9 Table 2.7. Summary of Annual Average Data for Middle Pensacola Bay (WBID 548D) ____________________________________________ 20 Table 4.1. Point Sources in the Escambia Bay Basin (Florida) _______________ 50 Table 4.2. Classification of Level 1 Land Use Categories in the Bayou Chico Watershed, 2009–10 _________________________________ 54 Table 4.3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Florida Audubon Naturalist Summer 2021
    Naturalist Summer 2021 Female Snail Kite. Photo: Nancy Elwood Heidi McCree, Board Chair 2021 Florida Audubon What a privilege to serve as the newly-elected Chair of the Society Leadership Audubon Florida Board. It is an honor to be associated with Audubon Florida’s work and together, we will continue to Executive Director address the important issues and achieve our mission to protect Julie Wraithmell birds and the places they need. We send a huge thank you to our outgoing Chair, Jud Laird, for his amazing work and Board of Directors leadership — the birds are better off because of your efforts! Summer is here! Locals and visitors alike enjoy sun, the beach, and Florida’s amazing Chair waterways. Our beaches are alive with nesting sea and shorebirds, and across the Heidi McCree Everglades we are wrapping up a busy wading bird breeding season. At the Center Vice-Chair for Birds of Prey, more than 200 raptor chicks crossed our threshold — and we Carol Colman Timmis released more than half back to the wild. As Audubon Florida’s newest Board Chair, I see the nesting season as a time to celebrate the resilience of birds, while looking Treasurer forward to how we can protect them into the migration season and beyond. We Scott Taylor will work with state agencies to make sure the high levels of conservation funding Secretary turn into real wins for both wildlife and communities (pg. 8). We will forge new Lida Rodriguez-Taseff partnerships to protect Lake Okeechobee and the Snail Kites that nest there (pg. 14).
    [Show full text]
  • Pensacola Bay Bridge
    Florida Department of Transportation RICK SCOTT 1074 Highway 90 ANANTH PRASAD, P.E. GOVERNOR Chipley, Florida 32428 SECRETARY July 18, 2011 Ms. Lauren P. Milligan Florida State Clearinghouse Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., Mail Station 47 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 RE: Advance Notification Pensacola Bay Bridge Replacement PD&E Study ETDM #: 13248 From: 17th Avenue in Pensacola to Baybridge Drive in Gulf Breeze Federal Aid Project Number: 4221 078 P Financial Project ID Number: 409334-1-22-02 Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida Dear Ms. Milligan: We are sending this Advance Notification (AN) Package to your office for distribution to State agencies that conduct Federal consistency reviews (consistency reviewers) in accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act and Presidential Executive Order 12372. We are also distributing the AN Package to local and Federal agencies. Although we will request specific comments during the permitting process, we are asking that permitting and permit reviewing agencies (consistency reviewers) review the attached information and provide us with their comments. This is a Federal-aid action and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), will determine what type of environmental documentation will be necessary. The determination will be based upon in-house environmental evaluations and comments from other agencies. Please provide a consistency review for this project in accordance with the State’s Coastal Zone Management Program. www.dot.state.fl.us In addition, please review the project’s consistency, to the maximum extent feasible, with the approved Comprehensive Plan of the local government to comply with Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Pensacola Bay System EPA Report
    EPA/600/R-16/169 | August 2016 | www.epa.gov/research Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation Office of Research and Development 1 EPA/600/R-16/169 August 2016 Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation by Michael A. Lewis Gulf Ecology Division National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Gulf Breeze, FL 32561 J. Taylor Kirschenfeld Water Quality and Land Management Division Escambia County Pensacola, FL 32503 Traci Goodhart West Florida Regional Planning Council Pensacola, FL 32514 National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gulf Breeze, FL. 32561 i Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through its Office of Research and Development (ORD) funded and collaborated in the research described herein with representatives from Escambia County’s Water Quality and Land Management Division and the West Florida Regional Planning Council. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This is a contribution to the EPA ORD Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program. The appropriate citation for this report is: Lewis, Michael, J. Taylor Kirschenfeld, and Traci Goodheart. Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Breeze, FL, EPA/600/R-16/169, 2016. ii Foreword This report supports EPA’s Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COLA
    Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1: HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING ..................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION ............................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.1 Site and Facilities .....................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.2 Hydrosphere .............................................................................2.4.1-3 2.4.1.3 References .............................................................................2.4.1-12 2.4.1-i Revision 6 Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.1-201 East Miami-Dade County Drainage Subbasin Areas and Outfall Structures 2.4.1-202 Summary of Data Records for Gage Stations at S-197, S-20, S-21A, and S-21 Flow Control Structures 2.4.1-203 Monthly Mean Flows at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 2.4.1-204 Monthly Mean Water Level at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 (Headwater) 2.4.1-205 Monthly Mean Flows in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 2.4.1-206 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 (Headwaters) 2.4.1-207 Monthly Mean Flows in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A 2.4.1-208 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A (Headwaters) 2.4.1-209 Monthly Mean Flows in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-210 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-211 NOAA
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey of Escambia County, Florida
    United States In cooperation with Department of the University of Florida, Agriculture Institute of Food and Soil Survey of Agricultural Sciences, Natural Agricultural Experiment Escambia County, Resources Stations, and Soil and Water Conservation Science Department; and the Service Florida Department of Florida Agriculture and Consumer Services How To Use This Soil Survey General Soil Map The general soil map, which is a color map, shows the survey area divided into groups of associated soils called general soil map units. This map is useful in planning the use and management of large areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the map, identify the name of the map unit in the area on the color-coded map legend, then refer to the section General Soil Map Units for a general description of the soils in your area. Detailed Soil Maps The detailed soil maps can be useful in planning the use and management of small areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the Index to Map Sheets. Note the number of the map sheet and turn to that sheet. Locate your area of interest on the map sheet. Note the map unit symbols that are in that area. Turn to the Contents, which lists the map units by symbol and name and shows the page where each map unit is described. The Contents shows which table has data on a specific land use for each detailed soil map unit. Also see the Contents for sections of this publication that may address your specific needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA RESTORE 003 008 Cat1)
    Gulf Coast Gulf-wide Foundational Investment Ecosystem Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA_RESTORE_003_008_Cat1) Project Name: Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program – Planning Cost: Category 1: $2,200,000 Responsible Council Member: Environmental Protection Agency Partnering Council Member: State of Florida Project Details: This project proposes to develop and stand-up a place-based estuary program encompassing one or more of the following bays in Florida’s northwest panhandle region: Perdido Bay, Pensacola Bay, Escambia Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, St. Andrews Bay and Apalachicola Bay. Activities: The key components of the project include establishing the host organization and hiring of key staff, developing Management and Technical committees, determining stressors and then developing and approving a Comprehensive Plan. Although this Estuary Program would be modeled after the structure and operation of National Estuary Programs (NEP) it would not be a designated NEP. This project would serve as a pilot project for the Council to consider expanding Gulf-wide when future funds become available. Environmental Benefits: If the estuary program being planned by this activity were implemented in the future, projects undertaken would directly support goals and outcomes focusing on restoring water quality, while also addressing restoration and conservation of habitat, replenishing and protecting living coastal and marine resources, enhancing community resilience and revitalizing the coastal economy. Specific actions would likely include,
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1
    Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1 Edited by Laura A. Yarbro and Paul R. Carlson Jr. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute St. Petersburg, Florida March 2011 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Table of Contents Authors, Contributors, and SIMM Team Members .................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 31 How this report was put together ........................................................................................... 36 Chapter Reports ...................................................................................................................... 41 Perdido Bay ........................................................................................................................... 41 Pensacola Bay .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Status and Trends in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: 1940–2002
    Seagrass Status and Trends in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: 1940–2002 Edited by L. Handley,1 D. Altsman,2 and R. DeMay3 Abstract Introduction Over the past century, seagrass habitats from the The Gulf of Mexico provides a wide array of valuable bays of Texas to the gulf shores of Florida have decreased. natural resources to the nations that border its shores. As Seagrass beds, which are highly dependent on water quality the value of the gulf coastal environment continues to be and clarity for survival, are home to a multitude of aquatic recognized, it becomes increasingly important to invest in the plants and animals and a source of economic activity through conservation of those resources. Reductions in both abundance commercial and recreational fishing and ecotourism. The U.S. and diversity of various organisms and habitats emphasize a Environmental Protection Agency’s Gulf of Mexico Program critical need to protect these natural assets, many of which (GMP) and its partners have made a commitment to restore, serve important ecological functions. In response to increasing enhance, and protect this important ecosystem. As seagrass trends in habitat degradation, several organizations and habitats decrease, the need for information on the causes and institutions have begun to act together with local residents to effects of seagrass loss, current mapping information, and address these issues. One such effort, facilitated by the U.S. education on the importance of seagrassess becomes greater. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Gulf of Mexico This report is the initial effort of the GMP’s research and Program, will integrate the efforts of a wide range of scientific restoration plan for seagrasses.
    [Show full text]
  • 12. Gulf Islands National Seashore
    The massive fort and surrounding trails cuckoos and hairy woodpeckers along offer a great vantage point for viewing the Chain of Lakes Trail. The Hutton sentinel flycatchers, gray kingbirds, Unit nearby is worth a stop to hear Tennessee, Cape May and magnolia the song of Bachman’s sparrows, and warblers. Fallouts can be seen in April the Three Notch Road site is perfect as migrants reach land for the first time. for sighting a red-headed woodpecker. Photo by David Moynahan 8 a.m. to sunset. Far western end of Free binoculars and field guides Fort Pickens Rd. (850) 934-2600, nps. are available. Dawn to dusk. 7720 org/guis Deaton Bridge Rd., (850) 983-5363, floridastateparks.org 12. Gulf Islands National Feathery Finds Seashore: Naval Osprey: Known as Florida’s fishing Live Oaks. The eagles, osprey have a distinct M wing national park’s shape and make their habitat near visitor center on brackish estuaries where they can scan Santa Rosa Sound the surface for fish. Osprey mate for is also a prime spot life – birds of a feather really do stay for sighting goldeneye, scaup, ducks, together! black-and-white warblers. 8 a.m. to sunset. 1801 Gulf Breeze Pkwy., (850) Brown Pelican: A symbol 934-2600, nps.org/guis of the Gulf Coast, the brown pelican is making A 1.5-mile loop trail 13. Garcon Point. a comeback. These runs through live oaks and picturesque water birds weigh 6-7 wetland. Wet prairie sparrows such as pounds and have a Henslow’s and LeConte’s can be seen 7-foot wingspan.
    [Show full text]
  • Escambia County Design Standards Manual
    Escambia County Design Standards Manual LEGEND Blue Highlight Federally Required Red Highlight State Required - Green Highlight Previously Adopted Ordinances *(concepts/standards unchanged) Yellow Highlight Director’s Recommendations *The overall concept was not changed however revisions were made to the language for clarity. In addition in some cases the process was streamlined. 11/2014 1 Design Standards Manual 2 3 4 Chapter 1, Engineering 5 6 Article 1 Stormwater 7 8 Sec. 1-1 Stormwater Management Systems 9 Sec. 1-1.1 Stormwater Quality (treatment) 10 Sec. 1-1.2 Stormwater Quantity (attenuations) 11 Sec. 1-1.3 Stormwater Ponds and Impoundments 12 Sec. 1-1.4 Conveyance Systems 13 Sec. 1-1.5 Exemptions 14 Sec. 1-1.6 Other Agency Approvals 15 16 Sec. 1-2 Stormwater Management Plans 17 Sec. 1-2.1 Methods 18 Sec. 1-2.2 Content 19 20 Article 2 Transportation 21 22 Sec. 2-1 Roadway Design 23 Sec. 2-1.1 Minimum Right-of-way widths 24 Sec. 2-1.2 Minimum pavement widths 25 Sec. 2-1.3 Intersections 26 Sec. 2-1.4 Slopes 27 Sec. 2-1.5 Roadway Elevations 28 Sec. 2-1.6 Street Layout 29 Sec. 2-1.7 Traffic Control Devices 30 31 Sec. 2-2 Access Management 32 Sec. 2-2.1 Access Location 33 Sec. 2-2.2 Pedestrian Access 34 Sec. 2-2.3 Traffic Control 35 Sec. 2-2.4 Modification of Existing access 36 Sec.2-2.5 internal Site Access Design 37 Sec. 2-2.6 Commercial Traffic in Residential Areas 38 39 Article 3 Parking 40 41 Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan
    Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan November 2017 Program Development Series 17-07 Northwest Florida Water Management District Perdido River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan November 2017 Program Development Series 17-07 NORTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD George Roberts Jerry Pate John Alter Chair, Panama City Vice Chair, Pensacola Secretary-Treasurer, Malone Gus Andrews Jon Costello Marc Dunbar DeFuniak Springs Tallahassee Tallahassee Ted Everett Nick Patronis Bo Spring Chipley Panama City Beach Port St. Joe Brett J. Cyphers Executive Director Headquarters 81 Water Management Drive Havana, Florida 32333-4712 (850) 539-5999 Crestview Econfina Milton 180 E. Redstone Avenue 6418 E. Highway 20 5453 Davisson Road Crestview, Florida 32539 Youngstown, FL 32466 Milton, FL 32583 (850) 683-5044 (850) 722-9919 (850) 626-3101 Perdido River and Bay SWIM Plan Northwest Florida Water Management District Acknowledgements This document was developed by the Northwest Florida Water Management District under the auspices of the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program and in accordance with sections 373.451-459, Florida Statutes. The plan update was prepared under the supervision and oversight of Brett Cyphers, Executive Director and Carlos Herd, Director, Division of Resource Management. Funding support was provided by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund. The assistance and support of the NFWF is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would like to especially recognize members of the public, as well as agency reviewers and staff from the District and from the Ecology and Environment, Inc., team that contributed to the development of this plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Guide to Eating Fish Caught in Florida
    Fish Consumption Advisories are published periodically by the Your Guide State of Florida to alert consumers about the possibility of chemically contaminated fish in Florida waters. To Eating The advisories are meant to inform the public of potential health risks of specific fish species from specific Fish Caught water bodies. In Florida February 2019 Florida Department of Health Prepared in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 2019 Florida Fish Advisories • Table 1: Eating Guidelines for Fresh Water Fish from Florida Waters (based on mercury levels) page 1-50 • Table 2: Eating Guidelines for Marine and Estuarine Fish from Florida Waters (based on mercury levels) page 51-52 • Table 3: Eating Guidelines for species from Florida Waters with Heavy Metals (other than mercury), Dioxin, Pesticides, Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), or Saxitoxin Contamination page 53-54 Eating Fish is an important part of a healthy diet. Rich in vitamins and low in fat, fish contains protein we need for strong bodies. It is also an excellent source of nutrition for proper growth and development. In fact, the American Heart Association recommends that you eat two meals of fish or seafood every week. At the same time, most Florida seafood has low to medium levels of mercury. Depending on the age of the fish, the type of fish, and the condition of the water the fish lives in, the levels of mercury found in fish are different. While mercury in rivers, creeks, ponds, and lakes can build up in some fish to levels that can be harmful, most fish caught in Florida can be eaten without harm.
    [Show full text]