HomeMy WebLinkAbout24-03 RESOLUTION• •
RESOLUTION NO. 24-03
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO SUBMIT THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE'S "STORM
WATER PHASE 11" PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS*
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby authorizes the Mayor or his designee to submit the City of Fayetteville's
"Storm Water Phase II" permit application to the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality.
PASSED and APPROVED this 18th day of February, 2003.
{
•
E`ertAPPROVED:
e \big ., ; DAN COODY, M
�laatsi:
By: _AO
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
FAYETTE* LLE
TNT CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
•
To: Jim Beavers
Engineering
From: Clarice Buffalohead-Pearman
City Clerk Division
Date: February 25, 2003
Re: Res. No. 24-03
Attached is a executed copy of the above resolution authorizing the mayor or his designee to
submit Storm Water Phase II permit application to the ADEQ.
If anything else is needed please let the clerk's office know.
/cbp
Nancy Smith, Internal Auditor
STAFF REVIEW FORM
x AGENDA REQUEST
CONTRACT REVIEW
GRANT REVIEW
For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of February 18, 2003
FROM:
•
Jim Beavers Engineering CPE Services
Name Division Department
ACTION REQUIRED:
Approval of a Resolution authorizing the Mayor or his designee to submit the City of
Fayetteville's "Storm water Phase II" permit application to the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Such permit application shall be submitted no later than March
10, 2003. Compliance shall be phased over a time period of up to five years according to a
schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying with all Federal and State requirements.
COST TO CITY:
$ TBD
Cost of this Request
4470-9470-5817.00
Account Number
02097
Project Number
$200,000
Category/Project Hudget 2003
Funds Used To Date 2003
$200,000
Remaining Balance 2003
Bridge and Drainage
Category/Project Name
Drainage & Phase II
Program Name
Sales Tax
Fund
BUDGE REVIEW:
udgeiManager �—
x Budgeted Item
Budget Adjustment Attached
Finance and Internal Services Director
CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW:
'1941/1,464 //2y/o3
Accounting Manager l Date
GRANTING AGENCY:
c-Snti, /49 103
Internal RQditor
Date
• •
City � Date ADA Coordinator Date
Purchasing Officer
I [3 11a -s
Date
Grant Coordinator Date
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested resolution
fi/,rto O/ -?7 O 3
ivision Head
Department Director
Date Cross Reference
08-o3
Date
New Item: Yes_ No x
Prev Ord/Res it: 102-02
Fihiance and Internal Services Director Date July 2 2002
Orig Contract Date:
Orig Contract No:
• •
STAFF REVIEW FORM Page 2
Description Storm water Phase II
Meeting Date Februaryl8 2003
Comments:
Budget Manager
Reference Comments:
Accounting Manager
City Attomey
Purchasing Officer
ADA Coordinator
Internal Auditor
Grant Coordinator
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Engineering Division
To: Dan Coody, Mayor
Fayetteville City Council
Thru: Staff Review //''
From. Jim Beavers, Engineering-
Date: January 27, 2003
Re: City Council Meeting February 18, 2003, Storm water "Phase 1I NPDES"
Requirements, Request for the City Council to Authorize the Mayor to submit the City's
application to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).
1. Background
The City of Fayetteville, in compliance with Federal Law, is required to submit an initial
application to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) no later than March
10, 2003 for the "Phase 11" National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm
Water requirements. The application should be approved and signed by the Mayor or his
specified designee. Specific background information is included in an accompanying
memorandum (Enclosure 1) and attachments (Enclosures 2 — 8).
2. Current Status
The Phase 11 Rule requires that affected entities submit a permit application by March 10, 2003.
The City will have up to 5 years to implement the plan. The EPA Fact Sheets recommend 4 year
schedules to prepare and implement the requirements. Additional guidance concerning the time
line and submittal requirements is anticipated from the Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality (ADEQ) in 2003. (The EPA and ADEQ are late in providing general submittal
recommendations and requirements, ADEQ guidance is not anticipated prior to the submittal
deadline).
3. Recommendation/Request
A. Immediate help from the City Council:
Page 1 of 2
• •
Staff requests that the City Council approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor or his designee
to submit thc City of Fayetteville's "Storm water Phase II" permit application to the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Such permit application shall be submitted no
later than March 10, 2003. Compliance shall be phased over a time period of up to five years
according to a schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying with all Federal and State
requirements.
Please note as of this date (January 27, 2003) the submission has not been drafted. Two possible
drafts are included as Enclosures 5 and 6. The final submittal will be developed by staff with
assistance from Administration, the City Attorney's Office and guidance from the City Council.
The submission will be standard and generic in nature and allow the City additional time to
formulate specific actions and/or future ordinances.
13. Further guidance and opportunities:
As the program and plan is developed and implemented, the City Council, Administration and
the public will have opportunities to provide guidance. Such guidance may include input on the
plan, the new and/or revised ordinances, and policy decisions. One very important policy
decision to be made will be the City of Fayetteville's definition and application of "Maximum
Extent Practicable". Competing interests within the community and the region have expressed
differing views on "Maximum Extent" and "Practicable".
Enclosures.
1. Memorandum dated January 24, 2003, Storm Water Phase 11 Requirements, Jim Beavers.
2. Copies of the power point presentations from the January 23, 2003 Phase 11 meeting held at
thc Fayetteville Town Center: A. Brent Larson (EPA), B. Findlay Edwards (U of A Professor),
C. Richard Mays (Environmental Attorney).
3. Copies of EPA Phase 11 Facts Sheets 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10,
3.0, 3.1, 4.0.
4. Population for Storm Water Entities as Defined by the 2000 Census and published by the
EPA.
5. Draft model permit (EPA).
6. Draft model permit Asist, Inc. (under review by the NWARPC focus group).
7. Environmental storm water structure lid.
8. Informational brochure developed by the University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension
Service.
Page 2 of 2
• •
Enclosure 1
Memorandum dated January 24, 2003, Storm Water Phase II Requirements, Jim Beavers
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Engineering Division
To: Dan Coody, Mayor
Fayetteville City Council
From. Jim Beavers, Engineering. i... �
Date: January 24, 2003
Re: City Council Meeting February 18, 2003,
Storm water "Phase]] NPDES" requirements - Supplemental information.
1. Introduction:
A. March 10, 2003 application deadline.
The City of Fayetteville, in compliance with Federal Law, is required to submit an initial
application to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) no later than March
10, 2003 for the "Phase II" National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm
Water requirements.
B. Background.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, more commonly known as "The
Clean Water Act" (CWA) was enacted October 18, 1972 (PL 92-500). This law required and
enabled Local, State and Federal water quality programs and requirements. Goals of the CWA
include the elimination of discharged pollutants to Waters of the U.S. and to restore all waters to
"fishable and swimable".
Polluted storm water runoff, including chemicals, nutrients, sediments and siltation, has been
cited as a cause of impairment for waterways and water bodies. This impairment contributes to
loss of aquatic habitat, loss of aesthetic value, loss of recreational waterways and potential threats
to public drinking water supplies and public health.
The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorized the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to regulate non -point source discharges including storm water discharges. The
regulation has been implemented through a phased program using the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
Page 1 of 9
• •
The "Phasc I" NPDES Storm water rule was implemented in November 1990. This rule
addressed storm water discharges from Medium and Large municipal Separate Storm Sewer
Systems (MS4's) for urbanized areas with a population greater than 100,000, for all construction
sites with disturbed areas greater than 5 acres and ten categories of industrial activities. The City
of Little Rock is the only "Phase I" city within Arkansas. The "Phase I" requirements included
regulation of the construction activities disturbing 5 acres or greater, certain industrial storm
water runoff, mandatory monitoring, permit specific requirements and permit specific activities.
The "Phase II" Storm water Final Rule was approved October 1999 and published in the Federal
Register on December 8, 1999 (64FR96722). "Phase II" NPDES will regulate Small MS4's
within urbanized areas, construction sites with disturbances of 1 - 5 acres and certain industrial
activities. "Phase II" requirements will differ from "Phase I" in that monitoring is to be
established by the "Permitting Authority", the Small MS4's are required to formulate a storm
water management plan based upon "best management practices", develop measurable goals
based upon reducing pollution to the "maximum extent practicable" and develop a time frame of
up to five years to implement the program.
2. Phase 11 Final Rule Requirements.
A. Affected Municipalities and Urbanized areas.
Urbanized areas have been defined by the EPA as a central place (or places) and the adjacent
densely settled surrounding area that together have a minimum population of 50,000 and an
average density of 1,000/square mile in the core area plus a band with an average density of
500/square mile. The MS4's include the urbanized areas and interconnected systems.
Area Municipalities affected by the Phase II requirements include Fayetteville, Springdale,
Rogers, Bentonville, Elkins, Farmington, Johnson, and Greenland. Please refer to Enclosure 4
for specific locations listed in Arkansas by the EPA.
The Permitting Authority (ADEQ), has the authority to phase in the requirements or exempt from
the requirements those municipalities with a population of less than 10,000 where ADEQ can
provide documentation of "no potential for significant water quality impairment".
B. Specific Requirements of the Rule.
The Phase II Final Rule (law) includes six specific requirements:
1. Public education and outreach
2. Public involvement and participation
3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination
4. Construction site storm water runoff control
5. Post construction storm water management in new development and redevelopment
Page 2 of 9
6. Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
Each of the six specific requirements noted above have detailed and specific requirements which
include:
1. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
2. Measurable goals
3. Schedule of action(s)
4. Responsible person (s)
5. Record keeping
6. Reporting
Other requirements to implement the program will include:
1. System Inventory and designation of outfalls.
2. Operation and maintenance of the drainage system.
3. An ordinance prohibiting illicit discharges.
4. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans may be required for construction sites
including individual residential lots that are a part of the overall development plan
(awaiting final decision by ADEQ).
5. Note that monitoring is not required in Phase II by the EPA but may be added by the
Permitting Authority (ADEQ) or the local municipality.
(source: EPA/40 CFR Parts 9,122,123 and 124; EPA Region 6/Brent Larson)
C. Delegation of Authority and Responsibility:
EPA >> ADEQ» Municipalities (MS4's)
FPA:
* Oversight of program/regulation
* Referrals (problems that the municipalities and States cannot resolve)
* Evaluations
State ADEQ:
* Administration of program/regulation
* Enforcement
* Reviews of reports and actions of permittees
* Data entry
• Evaluation of program
Page 3, of 9
Municipalities/MS4's/Permittees:
• Implementation of the regulation specifics
* Inspection
• Enforcement
• Reporting
The EPA is delegating the responsibility for inspections and compliance to the Permitting
Authority (ADEQ) which is in tum delegating the responsibility to the City. Currently all
construction activities which disturb 5 acres or greater are permitted by the State. The City does
not enforce the specifics of the State's requirements. The City does enforce the City's "Grading"
and "Drainage" Ordinances.
As the Storm Water Phase 11 Rule is implemented, the disturbed area requirements drops to I
acre or greater and the municipalities arc the enforcement agency. The EPA and State
requirements for storm water pollution prevention plans arc currently more stringent than the
City's. The City and ADEQ must verify the requirements as the plan is implemented over the
next five years.
3. The City of Fayetteville.
a. Representatives from the Engineering Division have attended seminars concerning Phase II
sponsored by the EPA, American Public Works Association, the University of Arkansas and
manufacturing representatives.
b. We participate with other local representatives and citizens in the NWA Regional Planning
Commission's Storm Water Focus group.
c. The City of Fayetteville is ahead of most municipalities in that we have, and enforce,
ordinances to control grading and drainage including construction site erosion control and post
construction water quantity. The City's existing ordinances are good starting positions but do not
fully develop the requirements for Phase II water quality.
d. On May 2, 2002 Engineering amended the City of Fayetteville's Drainage Criteria Manual to
require the use of a Phase II environmental message on all new storm water structure lids. A
copy of the requirement is attached as Enclosure 7.
e. The City will continue to develop the plan and time schedule in compliance with EPA
guidelines, ADEQ directives and the City Council's guidance.
f. The City of Fayetteville's submittal for March 10, 2003 deadline will be developed by staff
with assistance from Administration and the City Council as applicable. The submitted
plan/permit will be standard and generic in nature in that it will allow the City additional time to
Page 4of9
• •
formulate any specific actions and/or future ordinances. Such plan or permit shall be phased over
a time period of up to five years according to a schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying
with all Federal and State requirements. There will be many opportunities and challenges to
formulate the City's plan. Such opportunities include public education and public participation.
Challenges include new policies on drainage maintenance including channels and detention
ponds and the struggle to balance Phase II water quality standards with the goals of a developer
friendly region.
4. NWARPC storm water focus group.
The NWA Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) Storm Water Focus Group has been
meeting regularly since May 2002 to develop Public Education and Public participation tools,
share information and knowledge and to further work together on the plan/permit application.
The focus group includes representatives from Regional Planning, the University, the
Cooperative Extension Service, Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission (ASWCC),
the Cities of Bentonville, Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, Farmington, Greenland, Bethel
Heights, Washington County and interested private citizens. The Focus Group's objective is to
formulate BMP's and Tools which may be applied cohesively across the Northwest Arkansas
(NWA) region. 1t is desired that all NWA communities adopt a general standard set of BMP's
and requirements to protect the watersheds, to provide a common set of requirements for
developers and builders and to help to provide a level competitive atmosphere between NWA
municipalities. Further the cooperation within the NWARPC focus group should reduce the
planning and permit development costs to any given entity.
The NWARPC focus group also promotes the potential cooperation with the University, the
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, and other municipalities; and opens for
discussion the potential for Watershed or Regional storm water districts.
It is noted that the NWARPC has no regulatory powers and each municipality may enact
requirements that are different from or more stringent than the base BMP's and Tools developed
by the focus group.
Congressman Boozman's Office, The Cooperative Extension Service and the NWARPC Focus
Group hosted the NWA Regional Storm water Phase II meeting held this past January 23 at the
Town Center. Elected officials from NWA communities were invited. Copies of the
presentations ("Overview of the Storm water Program", Brent Larson; "What do the New Storm
water NPDES Regulations mean for Northwest Arkansas?", Dr. Findlay Edwards; "Municipal
Storm water Management Enforcement Considerations", Richard Mays), from the January 23
meeting are attached (Enclosure 2).
Page 5 of 9
5. Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.
The EPA has delegated the Permitting Authority to the Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality.
Although, ADEQ had previously committed to providing additional information to the affected
urbanized areas in January or February 2003, ADEQ reported on January 23, 2003 that the
information would not be available until after the permit submittal deadline of March 10, 2003.
ADEQ reports that the EPA has been late in providing information to ADEQ and thus ADEQ
will be late in providing information to the Cities and other MS4's.
Lacking specific guidance from the Permitting Authority (ADEQ) the City's submittal must be
standard and generic in nature such that it will allow the City additional time to formulate any
specific actions and/or future ordinances
6. Estimated costs and Funding source.
A. Estimated costs to implement and administer the program.
Implementation. Fayetteville will develop the program 'in-house" within the City's Engineering
Division cooperating with other applicable Divisions which may include Transportation and
Water/Sewer. Other municipalities which do not have in-house engineering may find it
necessary to hire consultants to establish their program and obtain their permit. The cooperation
within the NWARPC focus group should lessen the costs to any one entity.
The EPA estimates that the first year costs of the program will range from S1.39 to S7.83 per
capita. For a City of 50,000 this will be $69,500 to $391,500. (Source: EPA Region 6/Brent
Larson)
Administration. Additional staff may be required to perform the functions and requirements
noted in the regulations. Staffing requirements will be formulated over the next 1 — 4 years as
the plan specifics are determined and implemented. The additional staff may include engineers,
scientists, inspectors and maintenance workers. Portions of such work may be contracted to area
providers in lieu of additional staffing.
The EPA estimates that the annual costs to administer the program will range from $1.23 to
55.73 per capita. For a City of 50,000 this will be $61,500 to $286,500. (Source: EPA Region
6/Brent Larson)
The Regulation (Rule) lists the national average annual costs as $9.16 per household. Please
note that we understand that the estimates given represent a significant range of values. Plan
reviews, reporting, inspections and maintenance will be key elements of the permit. Certain
Page 6 of 9
• •
Phase I municipalities have found it necessary to add maintenance crews dedicated to additional
maintenance of inlets, boxes, catch basins, ponds, ditches, channels ... A more accurate
determination of the costs will be determined as the plan is implemented over the next 1 — 4
years.
B. Funding.
The Regulation is an "unfunded mandate".
Potential sources for funding include:
* General Funds
* Sales Tax
' General Obligation Bonds
* Impact and Service Fees
* Special Assessment Districts
* Storm Water Utility
Based upon presentations at EPA seminars, the Storm Water Drainage Utility appears to be a
popular approach for Phase 1 Cities in Oklahoma and Texas. Average charges for residential
properties are $2.00 -3.00 per month. Commercial and Industrial charges are based upon
measured impervious arca.
The Arkansas Legislature approved regulations in 2001 (Bill 1737) to allow the formation of
storm water utilities and regional storm water utilities.
Advantages of a Storm Water Utility:
* Does not take General Funds or Sales tax funds away from existing programs or
projects.
* Fees based upon the measured or averaged amount or percentage of impervious
coverage.
* Stable source of income.
* Allows for increased maintenance of the drainage system including flood prevention.
* Must be equitable and fair and conform to State law.
* Potential credits for on-site improvements.
* Can use existing billing system (water bill, solid waste, etc.)
The City of Fayetteville has budgeted Sales Tax (Capital Improvement Program) money for the
design and initial implementation of the program. Storm drainage maintenance is a regularly
budgeted item with the Transportation (Street) Division's budget. The City of Fayetteville may
be interested in investigating a Storm Water Drainage utility for the perpetual administration of
the program. Such investigation of forming a utility will include guidance from the citizens and
elected officials.
Page 7 of 9
• •
7. Phase 11 Proposed Time Line/Schedule.
The City of Fayetteville will have time to complete and implement the plan.
The Rule requires that the affected entities submit the general plan or permit by March 10, 2003.
The City will have up to 5 years to implement the plan.
The EPA Fact Sheets recommend 4 year schedules to prepare and implement the requirements.
Copies of the EPA Fact Sheets are attached as Enclosure 3.
Additional guidance concerning the time line and submittal requirements are anticipated from
ADEQ in 2003.
8. Requested Resolution and Authorization.
A. Immediate help from the City Council:
Engineering requests that the City Council approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor or his
designee to submit the City of Fayetteville's "Storm water Phase II" permit application to the
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Such permit application shall be
submitted no later than March 10, 2003. Compliance shall be phased over a time period of up to
five years according to a schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying with all Federal and
State requirements.
Please note as of this date (January 24, 2003) the submission has not been drafted. Two possible
drafts are included as Enclosures 5 and 6. The final submittal will be developed by staff with
assistance from Administration, the City Attorney's Office and guidance from the City Council.
The submission will be standard and generic in nature in that it will allow the City additional
time to formulate specific actions and/or future ordinances.
B. Further guidance and opportunities.
As the program and plan is developed and implemented, the City Council, Administration and
the public will have opportunities to provide guidance. Such guidance may include input on the
plan, the new and/or revised ordinances, and policy decisions. One very important policy
decision to be made will be the City of Fayetteville's definition and application of "Maximum
Extent Practicable". Competing interests within the community and the region have expressed
differing views on "Maximum Extent" and "Practicable".
Page 8 of 9
• •
9. Additional resources.
There are numerous public and private resources including texts, model ordinances, BMP's, and
websites available to help plan and implement the "Phase II" requirements. Some of the best
have been produced by the EPA and are available at EPA and related websites. Such resources
include the EPA Fact Sheets for Storm Water Phase II (Enclosure 3).
Other excellent local resources include Findlay Edwards, P.E., PhD, University of Arkansas,
Katie Teague, University Cooperative Extension Service, Bob Morgan, ASWCC, NWARPC
and the Focus Group.
The efforts of the University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service deserve special
recognition for their ongoing public education programs for young people and adults in
Fayetteville and NW Arkansas.
10. Enclosures.
1. This memorandum dated January 24, 2003, Storm Water Phasc 11 Requirements, Jim Beavers
(presented as an enclosure to the cover memorandum dated January 27, 2003).
2. Copies of the power point presentations from the January 23, 2003 Phase II meeting held at
the Fayetteville Town Center. A. Brent Larson (EPA), B. Findlay Edwards (U of A Professor),
C. Richard Mays (Environmental Attorney).
3. Copies of EPA Phase Il Facts Sheets 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10,
3.0, 3.1, 4.0.
4. Population for Storm Water Entities as Defined by the 2000 Census and published by the
EPA.
5. Draft model permit (EPA).
6. Draft model permit Asist, Inc. (under review by the NWARPC focus group).
7. Environmental storm water structure lid.
8. Informational brochure developed by the University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension
Service.
Page 9 of 9
Enclosure 2
Copies of the power point presentations from the January 23, 2003 Phase 11 meeting held at
the Fayetteville Town Center.
A. Brent Larson (EPA), "Overview of the Storm water Program"
B. Dr. Findlay Edwards (U of A Professor), "What do the New Storm water NPDES
Regulations mean for Northwest Arkansas?"
C. Richard Mays (Environmental Attorney) "Municipal Storm water Management
Enforcement Considerations"
What Do States Identify as the
Leading Causes and Sources
Affecting Impaired Waters?
• Leading Causes: Siltation, nutrients,
bacteria, metals (primarily mercury), and
oxygen depleting substances
• Leading Sources: Pollution from urban
and agricultural land that is transported by
precipitation and runoff
Why is Storm Water a
Problem?
• Developed and disturbed land contributes to
problems
— Quality
— Quantity
• Other pollutants enter storm sewer systems
and pollute storm water
- Illicit discharges
— Illicit connections
Sources of Impairment
• According to 2000 305b report, of the 32% of the
nations waters that wee assessed, 40% were
impaired:
- Riven di Shoes: 19% assessed, 39% impaled.
11%of impalement the to urban nano®storm sewers
- rib & Pends: 43% assessed, 45% impaired,
1S% of impairment Ate to urban nmoWstorm sewers
- Emu sloe: 36% assessed 51% impaired,
32% of impairment doe to urban nmofVstorm sewers
- >50% of impaired shoreline mile art impaired die to
urban nmotnstoem sewers
Storm Water Pollutants
• Sediment
• Nutrients
• Bacteria
• Oxygen Demand
• Oil and Grease
• Trace Metals
• Toxic Chemicals
• Chlorides
• Thermal Impacts
Potential Impacts from Storm
Water
• Destruction/Degradation of aquatic habitat
• Accelerated loss of storage in lakes/reservoirs
• Diminished water rcCrcatina experieaeea
• Reduced aesthetic and preservation values
• Increased hydroelectric facility impairment
• Accelerated scream bank erosion
• Increased flood damages
• Reduced infiltratioa/grotmdwater recharge
Some Impaired Waters in
Arkansas and White River Basins
• Stone Dam Creek— nutrients
• Whig Creek — nutrients
• Poteau River —metals
• Clear Creek — siltation/turbidity
• Town Branch — nutrients
• Hicks Creek — nutrients
• White River— siltation
• Holman Creek- nutrients