DOCSLIB.ORG

CRC FEIS Chapter 3 S14 Water Quality and Hydrology.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CRC FEIS Chapter 3 S14 Water Quality and Hydrology.Pdf FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 3.14 Water Quality and Hydrology Communities depend on a reliable supply of clean water for domestic use, agriculture, industry, and recreation. Fish and many wildlife species depend on clean water habitats to live. In urban areas, pollutants that wash off roadways during storms contribute to poor water quality in rivers and streams. Pollutants from roadways typically include fuel, oil, grease, and other automotive fluids; heavy metals such as copper and zinc; and small particles from erosion or road sanding which can temporarily make waterways more turbid (cloudy). The design and placement of roadways and stormwater systems can affect how stormwater is treated and released into the environment. Placing structures such as bridge piers or roadways in a waterway or its floodplain may increase the height of floods during storm events. Although an individual road or structure may be small in relationship to the volume of a waterway, collectively, all roads, What is the difference structures, and other developments between water quality constructed along a river can have a and hydrology? dramatic effect on the severity of floods. For this reason, construction in streams In this FEIS, hydrology refers to the and rivers or in their floodplains is flow of water—its volume, where it drains, and how quickly the flow rate strictly regulated, and must take into changes in a storm. Water quality refers account any incremental contribution to the characteristics of the water—its toward worsening flood conditions on temperature and oxygen levels, how clear the waterway. it is, and whether it contains pollutants. This section examines the potential effects of the CRC project alternatives on both water quality and hydrology, and relates these potential effects to the existing conditions in the waterways and surrounding areas. A comparison of impacts from the LPA and DEIS alternatives is summarized in Exhibit 3.14-4. A more detailed description of the impacts of the DEIS alternatives on water quality and hydrology is in the DEIS starting on page 3-377. Groundwater and aquifers are discussed in greater detail in Section 3.17, Geology and Soils of this FEIS. This section also discusses a conceptual stormwater treatment design for the LPA that has been developed for analysis purposes and to advance discussions with agencies on regulatory approvals. This design meets regulatory criteria. Agency coordination will continue through the development of the final stormwater design, to be completed as part of future permitting. This section addresses impacts in the main project area, at the Ruby Junction Maintenance Facility, the Steel Bridge, and at casting and staging areas. See Chapter 2 for a map of these areas. More detailed and technical discussions of the information presented in this section can be found in the CRC Water Quality and Hydrology Technical Report, included as an electronic appendix to this FEIS, and the CRC Stormwater Management Memorandum, included as an appendix to the Water Quality and Hydrology Technical Report. Water QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES • 3-333 COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING 3.14.1 New Information Developed Since the Draft EIS Since publication of the DEIS, additional information has been gathered and analyzed in order to better assess and avoid adverse effects. The additional information includes: • The preparation of a Troutdale Sole Source Aquifer (TSSA) report that confirms previous assumptions about existing conditions and potential project impacts. For further information in regards to potential effects of the project on the TSSA, refer to Section 3.17 (Geology and Soils). The TSSA report is also included as Appendix E of the Hazardous Materials Technical Report. • More information on existing conditions, developed through field work, research, and agency coordination. In addition to new information developed since the DEIS, the FEIS includes refinements in design, impacts and mitigation measures. Where new information or design changes could potentially create new significant environmental impacts not previously evaluated in the DEIS, or could be meaningful to the decision-making process, this information and these changes were applied to all alternatives, as appropriate. However, most of the new information did not warrant updating analysis of the non-preferred alternatives because it would not meaningfully change the impacts, would not result in new significant impacts, and would not change other factors that led to the choice of the LPA. Therefore, most of the refinements were applied only to the LPA. As allowed under Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU [23 USC 139(f )(4)(D)], to facilitate development of mitigation measures and compliance with other environmental laws, the project has developed the LPA to a higher level of detail than the other alternatives. This detail has allowed the project to develop more specific mitigation measures and to facilitate compliance with other environmental laws and regulations, such as Section 4(f ) of the DOT Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. FTA and FHWA prepared NEPA re-evaluations and a documented categorical exclusion (DCE) to analyze changes in the project and project impacts that have occurred since the DEIS. Both agencies concluded from these evaluations that these changes and new information would not result in any new significant environmental impacts that were not previously considered in the DEIS. These changes in impacts are described in the re-evaluations and DCE included in Appendix O of this FEIS. Relevant refinements in information, design, impacts and mitigation are described in the following text, including a revised conceptual stormwater treatment design. 3.14.2 Existing Conditions The surface water features studied for the CRC project are determined by the potential for water quality and hydrology impacts to these features from the project. Four major surface water features may receive stormwater runoff from the LPA: the Columbia Slough, the Columbia River (which includes the North Portland Harbor), Burnt Bridge Creek, and Fairview Creek. For the surface water features located in the main project area, their locations and designated watersheds are identified in Exhibit 3.14-1. 3-334 • CHAPTER 3 Water QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY 9 9 Y A W H G I B E H R N IE 68TH 63RD MINNEHAHA S N F H R U JO I T T V S A S L E L M E Y JA T S 54TH N ROSS L O C Burnt Bridge Creek N I L !` H T Watershed 5 1 49TH 45TH B u r n t B r 44TH i d g e LO 39TH C WE R RIV r ER e e A¬ k N A M F F 33 U RD A A I K B M U L O Q LO C WE D R N N R I I A VE A R R M G F A L K FOU N RT H PLAIN O S P N M Y I L A S O W C D 20 N TH I A L O R R E B V 18TH U O C N 15TH A V P T O R MCLOUGHLIN R O F T 13TH N 9 9 O Y T A W C G H FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT T G I N B D H I E R N H N IE 68TH A S E A V R B W R Exhibit 3.14-1 E MILL PLAIN 8TH S E 63RD Main Project Area Watersheds and Water Features R MINNEHAHA S N 9 F 9 H R Columbia River Y U JO A 6TH I T T W EVERGR EEN S V H A S G I L E B L H M E E R Y JA Watershed N IE 68TH T S D 54TH R O N ROSS L F O D 63RD C Burnt Br5iTdge Creek N H N I L !` A MINNEHAHA H L T Watershed S B 5 N 1 F H R 49TH U JO I T C T V S A S L E 45TH L O M E Y B JA u r n L T t S B E 44TH r HOUS U 54TH i UMBIA CdOgL N ROSS E L e V O M E 39 R C Burnt BridLge Creek TH OW C G N I ER R L !` R ?£ r B IV E E H R e E T Watershed e N 5 COLUMBIA 1 I k 49TH A A¬ N 45TH A M F B u r F 33 U RD n A t A I K B B 44TH R r M i U d I L O Q g V C LO e WE D N N R E I R L 39TH I A O C VE A W R R E R M R G F RI r VE A R e L e K A¬ k FOU N RT H PLAIN O N S A P M N M Y I L F A F S M 33 O U RD W A C A A I D 20 R N TH I K B I A N L M E O U R R L E B V 18TH O U Q O LO C C W D N E 15TH A N N R I V R P A IV A T E O MCLO R R R UGHLIN M R O G F F T A 13TH N L K O T C G T N D I N FO H U A N RT S H PLA E A IN R O V B S W R P E MILL PLAIN N S M 8T Y H I L E A S O R W D C D 20 N TH I Columbia River A N L N 6TH A O EVERGREEN R R L E B V o 18TH T U Watershed O R C r D N 15TH A O V R P t P T O O R MCLOUGHLIN h F R O 5 D F TH N T 13TH A N P L O B T o C G T r C N D I t N H l O A S a E A R n V L B d W R HOUSE E H BIA MILL PLAIN U a OLUM C S r b o r 8TH E E M VE R R ?£ GR B E Columbia River EN 6 I COLUMBIA TH EVERGREEN A Watershed MARINE D R R O F I 5TH D V N E A L R C B O L EU MA BIA HOUS N R U COLUM INE IO EV M ER ?£ N GR B EE I A COLUMBIA N R C D I N N C o V A O L L E T o 3 U l R M R r 3 O B u P t I M h A P R m L o r D b K t l a n d MA H a r b o r RI i NE a !` MARINE S l C o OL U u U MB Columbia Slough N D IA g IO N N N A L T o h R r O P t h R C C P E O o o LU l 3 r M Watershed 3 B V u I M t l A R a n m L D d N H a r b o r b K E i a D S !` MARINE l CO o LUM u Columbia Slough BIA g h R E Watershed U V N IO N N E D C C OL o UM l 3 B u 3 IA M R m L D b i K a !` S l CO o LUM u Columbia Slough BIA g h E CO R T LU A E MB Watershed T V IA S N R E E E C D T O T N L D I U R A M B LOMBARD 3 3 T IA S R Exhibit 3.14-1 E T Main Project Area and Hydrology N ² D Main Project Area Project Footprint I R 0 LOM0.2B5 ARD 0.5 3 Watershed 3 Miles E CO T LU A MB T IA S Analysis by J.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON and INCORPORATED AREAS Federal Emergency Management Agency
    MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON Multnomah County AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER FAIRVIEW, CITY OF 410180 GRESHAM, CITY OF 410181 MULTNOMAH COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 410179 TROUTDALE, CITY OF 410184 *WOOD VILLAGE, CITY OF 410185 *No Special Flood Hazard Areas Identified PRELIMINARY Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Study Number 41051CV000B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. Selected Flood Insurance Rate Map panels for the community contain information that was previously shown separately on the corresponding Flood Boundary and Floodway Map panels (e.g. floodways, cross sections). In addition, former flood hazard zone designations have been changed as follows: Old Zone New Zone A1 through A30 AE B X (shaded) C X (unshaded) Part or all of this may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by a Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. This FIS report was revised on (add new effective date). User should refer to Section 10.0, Revision Descriptions, for further information. Section 10.0 is intended to present the most up-to-date information for specific portions of this FIS report.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Willamette River Environmental Dredging and Ecosystem Restoration Project
    LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT INTEGRATED FEASIBILITY STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DRAFT FINAL REPORT March 2015 Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc. 1020 SW Taylor St. Suite 530 Portland, OR 97205 This page left blank intentionally EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Integrated Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment (FS-EA) evaluates ecosystem restoration actions in the Lower Willamette River, led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the non-Federal sponsor, the City of Portland (City). The study area encompasses the Lower Willamette River Watershed and its tributaries, from its confluence with the Columbia River at River Mile (RM) 0 to Willamette Falls, located at RM 26. The goal of this study is to identify a cost effective ecosystem restoration plan that maximizes habitat benefits while minimizing impacts to environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic resources. This report contains a summary of the feasibility study from plan formulation through selection of a recommended plan, 35% designs and cost estimating, a description of the baseline conditions, and description of impacts that may result from implementation of the recommended plan. This integrated report complies with NEPA requirements. Sections 1500.1(c) and 1508.9(a) (1) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (as amended) require federal agencies to “provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact” on actions authorized, funded, or carried out by the federal government to insure such actions adequately address “environmental consequences, and take actions that protect, restore, and enhance the environment." The Willamette River watershed was once an extensive and interconnected system of active channels, open slack waters, emergent wetlands, riparian forests, and adjacent upland forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Conveyance Systems
    Table of Contents Preface Section 1 Overview of Required Elements 1-4 A. History B. Reporting Requirements Fig 1-1 Map of Watershed Boundaries Section 2 Gresham and Fairview Environmental Monitoring Program Summary 5-8 A. History B. Required Elements C. Summary of Monitoring Program Results D. Adaptive Management Gresham and Fairview Monitoring Program Raw Data (Tables and Figures) 9-33 Section 3 City of Gresham Summary of Stormwater Management Plan Program Monitoring 35-76 Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) Implementation Status Reports Component #1 BMP No. RC1: Stormwater System Maintenance Program BMP No. RC2: Planning Procedures BMP No. RC3: Maintain Public Streets BMP No. RC4: Retrofit & Restore System for Water Quality BMP No. RC5: Monitor Pollutant Sources for Closed or Operating BMP No. RC6: Reduce pollutants from Pesticides, Herbicides and Fertilizers Component #2 BMP No. ILL-1: Non-Stormwater Discharge Controls BMP No. ILL-2&3: Illicit Discharges Elimination Program BMP No. ILL-4: Spill Response Program BMP No. ILL-5: Facilitate Public Reporting/Respond to Citizen Concerns BMP No. ILL-6: Facilitate Proper Management of Used Oil & BMP No. ILL-7: Limit Sanitary Sewer Discharges Component #3 BMP No. IND1&2: Industrial Inspection & Monitoring Component #4 BMP No. CON1&2 Construction Site Planning & Controls BMP No. CON-3: Construction Site Inspection & Enforcement Component #5 BMP No. EDU-1: Stormwater Education Program Component #6 BMP No. MON-1: Annual Report Writing BMP No. MON-2: Legal Authority & Code Review BMP No. MON-3: Program
    [Show full text]
  • Gresham/Fairview Trail Photo Map
    Acknowledgments CITY OF GRESHAM CITY OF GRESHAM STAFF COOPERATING PARTICIPANTS MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Bonnie R. Kraft, City Manager Transportation Division Charles J. Becker, Mayor Dave Rouse, Department of Environmental Services Wastewater Services Division Vicki Thompson, Council President Director Stormwater Division Jack Horner, Councilor Don Robertson, Parks & Recreation Division Manager Department of Environmental Services Chris Lassen, Councilor David Lewis, Landscape Architect & Project Manager Community and Economic Development Cathy Butts, Councilor Phil Kidby, Landscape Architect Department Jack Hanna, Councilor John Dorst, Transportation Division Manager Police and Fire Departments Larry Havercamp, Councilor Rebecca Ocken, Senior Transportation Planner City of Gresham Metro Greenspaces Planning Staff PLANNING COMMISSION Dick Anderson, Chair PLANNING CONSULTANTS Carl Culham, Vice Chair Otak, Incorporated TECHNICAL A DVISORY COMMITTEE Wes Bell Trail Planners, Landscape Architects, and Civil Dave Rouse, Former Gresham Transporta- Rob Cook Engineers tion Division Manager Dick Ehr Ron Heiden, Project Manager Marianne Zarkin, Landscape Architect Dennis Ogan Jerry Offer, Planner Cindy Bee, Park Planner Shannon Schmiitt Tim Simons, Civil Engineer Darlene Maddux, Oregon Department of Pat Speer Don Hanson, Principal-in-Charge Transportation Mike Whisler John Dorst, Former Multnomah County Vicki Thompson, Council Contact Transportation Planner Ann Pytynia, Staff Liaison DKS Associates, Inc. Doug Strickler, Multnomah County Transpor-
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Plan
    FAIRVIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JUNE 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Council Mike Weatherby, Mayor James R. Raze Sherry Lillard Larry Cooper Steve Owen Darrell Cornelius Jim Trees Planning Commission Steve Kaufman, Chairman Carol Glasgow Maureen Zehendner Jan Shearer Patricia Martin Sam Asbury Ken Heiner Gary Stonewall (alternate) Staff Melissa K. Slotemaker AICP, Associate Planner and Lead Comprehensive Plan Planner John Andersen FAICP, Community Development Director Eric Underwood, Economic Development Specialist Connie Hansen, Administrative Assistant Carole Connell, AICP, Consulting Planner “In that city, man lives in civilization and yet in nature, where the maximum comforts of the city and the beauties of rural life are perfectly blended and preserved, where as in the ideal city, man finds both stimulation for his mind and repose for his soul.” From Moment in Peking By Lin Yutang Comprehensive Plan - City of Fairview Revised January 2017 i TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... xi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 A Historial Perspective Early History Incorporation 50 Years That Changed Fairview The 21st Century Summary of the Community Vision Old Town The Town Center Sandy Blvd The Lakes Sources Used CHAPTER 2 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT ............................................................................................. 10 Goal
    [Show full text]
  • A Performance Assessment of Two Multi-Component Water Quality Facilities in the Columbia Slough and Fairview Creek Watersheds
    Portland State University PDXScholar Master of Environmental Management Project Environmental Science and Management Reports 6-2012 A Performance Assessment of Two Multi-component Water Quality Facilities in the Columbia Slough and Fairview Creek Watersheds Christopher Robinson Portland State University Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/mem_gradprojects Part of the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Robinson, Christopher, "A Performance Assessment of Two Multi-component Water Quality Facilities in the Columbia Slough and Fairview Creek Watersheds" (2012). Master of Environmental Management Project Reports. 23. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/mem_gradprojects/23 This Project is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master of Environmental Management Project Reports by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract Title: A Performance Assessment of Two Multi-component Stormwater Management Facilities in the Columbia Slough and Fairview Creek Watersheds We examined the treatment trains at the Columbia Slough (CSWQF) and Fairview Creek Water Quality Facilities (FCWQF) in Gresham, OR and assessed their effectiveness at removing pollutants including nutrients, TSS, metals, pesticides, PAHs, and VOCs. Time-paced, fixed volume composite samples were collected during storm events at the inlets and outlet of the CSWQF and at the inlets and outlet of each treatment train component of the FCWQF. In addition, long-term data collected at the FCWQF was analyzed. Composite data collected during November 2-3, 2011 and March 5-6, 2012 showed that the treatment trains can measurably reduce the event mean concentration (EMC) of most pollutants present in stormwater.
    [Show full text]
  • Submittal to NOAA Fisheries for Coverage Under Limit 10 of the 4(D) Rules for Routine Road Maintenance
    Submittal to NOAA Fisheries for Coverage under Limit 10 of the 4(d) Rules for Routine Road Maintenance Multnomah County Department of Community Services Land Use and Transportation Division – Road Services May 2010 Table of Contents I. ROAD MAINTENANCE PROGRAM SUMMARY ............................................................................ 4 Program Area Description ........................................................................................................................ 4 Program management and legal authority ................................................................................................ 5 II. DESCRIPTION OF LISTED SPECIES AFFECTED BY THE PROGRAM ................................... 7 Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) – Lower Columbia River ESUU ...................................................... 8 Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) – Lower Columbia River ESUU ......................................... 9 Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) – Upper Willamette River ESUU ........................................ 9 Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) – Lower Columbia River ESUU ........................................................... 10 Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) – Upper Willamette River ESU ......................................................... 11 Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) – Middle Columbia River ESUU.......................................................... 11 Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) – Columbia River ESUU ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Insurance Study Number 41051CV000B
    MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON Multnomah County AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER FAIRVIEW, CITY OF 410180 GRESHAM, CITY OF 410181 *MAYWOOD PARK, 410068 CITY OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 410179 TROUTDALE, CITY OF 410184 *WOOD VILLAGE, CITY OF 410185 *No Special Flood Hazard Data Preliminary: March 28, 2016 Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Study Number 41051CV000B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. This preliminary FIS report does not include unrevised Floodway Data Tables or unrevised Flood Profiles. These Floodway Data Tables and Flood Profiles will appear in the final FIS report. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: December 18, 2009 Revised Countywide Date: To Be Determined TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Retrofit Strategy
    Multnomah County NPDES MS4 Phase I Permit Stormwater Management Program Stormwater Retrofit Strategy Submitted to: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality November 2014 Submitted in Accordance with the Requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number 103004, File Number 120542 Submitted by: Water Quality Program Department of Community Services Multnomah County Prepared by Harper Houf Peterson Righellis Inc and Multnomah County Multnomah County (This page left intentionally blank) 2 Multnomah County Stormwater Retrofit Strategy November 2014 Multnomah County I. Introduction Multnomah County manages stormwater runoff under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Stormwater System Phase I Permit (NPDES MS4 Phase I). One of the requirements of the permit includes developing a strategy for retrofit projects and improvements to existing stormwater infrastructure to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. This requirement is outlined in Schedule A.6 of the NPDES permit issued December 30, 2010. Multnomah County is a unique jurisdiction with NPDES permit areas composed of several discrete urban pockets and road right-of-ways. Multnomah County’s jurisdiction contains diverse topographic features, stormwater drainage systems, and roadway infrastructure that require consideration for development of the stormwater retrofit strategy. The purpose of this document is to outline the strategy for improving water quality within Multnomah County’s NPDES Permit Areas by providing stormwater treatment for existing impervious area within the County’s right-of-way that lack stormwater quality controls. The NPDES Permit Areas are comprised of unincorporated urban pockets along the County’s borders, and arterial roadways in Fairview, Troutdale, and Wood Village (See Appendix for County Permit Area Maps).
    [Show full text]
  • Consolidated Stormwater Master Plan Update Prepared for City of Fairview, Oregon August 9, 2016
    Consolidated Stormwater Master Plan Update Prepared for City of Fairview, Oregon August 9, 2016 6500 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97239 Phone: 503.244.7005 Fax: 503.244.9095 Table of Contents Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction .........................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Objectives and Approach........................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Approach .................................................................................................................................1-1 1.3 Recommendations..................................................................................................................1-2 1.4 Related Reports ......................................................................................................................1-2 2. Project and Program Recommendations ..........................................................................................2-1 2.1 2007 CSMP Project Review ...................................................................................................2-1 2.2 2016 Project Identification ....................................................................................................2-7 2.3 Asset Management Initiatives................................................................................................2-8
    [Show full text]
  • Total Maximum Daily Load and 303(D) List Pollutant Reduction Analyses
    Multnomah County NPDES MS4 Phase I Permit Stormwater Management Program Total Maximum Daily Load and 303(d) List Pollutant Reduction Analyses Submitted to: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality November 2014 Submitted in Accordance with the Requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number 103004, File Number 120542 Submitted by: Water Quality Program Department of Community Services Multnomah County Multnomah County Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Permit area .................................................................................................................................. 3 Summary of pollutants and TDMLs ........................................................................................... 3 1. 303(d) Listed Pollutant Evaluation .......................................................................................... 4 Nutrient-related impairments ...................................................................................................... 4 Biological impairment ................................................................................................................ 5 Arsenic ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Parameters associated with the Portland Harbor Clean up ......................................................... 7
    [Show full text]
  • (Tmdls) Have Been Developed for the Mainstem of the Willamette River Which Require Reductions in Loading from Several Land Use Sectors Throughout the Basin
    Willamette Basin TMDL: Bacteria September 2006 CHAPTER 2 : WILLAMETTE BASIN BACTERIA TMDL TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW......................................................................................................................... 2 Water Quality Summary.................................................................................................................................................. 2 BACTERIA TMDL............................................................................................................... 3 Pollutant Identification .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Beneficial Uses .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Target Identification......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Water Quality Limited Waterbodies .............................................................................................................................. 5 Current Conditions........................................................................................................................................................... 8 Summer Data.................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]