Working with Stakeholders in Working with Stakeholders in Developing Watershed and Water Developing Watershed and Water
Quality Models: Quality Models: The Dos and Don’tsThe Dos and Don’ts
Well, at least some of them!Well, at least some of them!
Presented by:Presented by:Brian J. Watson, PE, PHBrian J. Watson, PE, PH
05 September 201305 September 2013
2727thth Annual Alabama Water Resources Annual Alabama Water Resources Conference and SymposiumConference and Symposium
Orange Beach, AlabamaOrange Beach, Alabama
I 64
I 26
5
I 65
I 71
I 264 I 64
I 65
I 64I 64
I 65
I 71
I 71
I 65
Floyds Fork Watershed: LocationMaps produced by M.Akasapu, 11-8-2011
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
Henry
Oldham
Louisville
La Grange
ShelbyvilleSimpsonville
Peewee Valley
Middletown
Jeffersontown
Shepherdsville
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Long
Run
Floyds Fork
Ch
enow
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Cu
rrys
For
k
Metropolitan area
Highways
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Legend
Background of Floyds Fork TMDLBackground of Floyds Fork TMDL Segments of the Floyds Fork Watershed are on
Kentucky’s 303(d) list for: Nutrients (organic enrichment), Dissolved Oxygen & Pathogens
At KDOW’s Request, EPA Started to Develop the 1st Nutrient TMDL in 2007
EPA priorities shifted and work was delayed EPA Receives Notice of Intent in 2011
EPA issues RFP for TMDL Support Contract awarded to Tetra Tech for the development
of watershed and water quality models to be used in a TMDL determination
Period of Performance: May 2011 – November 15, 2012 Modified during the process
Immediately initiated a Stakeholder Group Contract initially called for 6 public outreach meetings
Floyds Fork Watershed:Segments of InterestMaps produced by M.Akasapu, 11-8-2011
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
Henry
Oldham
Waterways
Watershed Delineation
County
Ashers Run 0.0 to 4.8
Brooks Run 0.0 to 2.7
Brooks Run 2.7 to 4.4
Brooks Run 4.4 to 6.4
Cane Run 0.0 to 7.3
Cedar Creek 4.3 to 11.1
Chenoweth Run 0.0 to 2.5 (Upper)
Chenoweth Run 0.0 to 5.25 (Lower)
Chenoweth Run 5.25 to 9.2 (Lower)
Currys Fork 0.0 to 4.8
Floyds Fork 0.0 to 11.7
Floyds Fork 11.7 to 24.2
Floyds Fork 24.2 to 34.1
Floyds Fork 34.1 to 45.7
Floyds Fork 45.7 to 48.0
Floyds Fork 48.0 to 61.9
Long Run 0.0 to 9.9
North Fork Currys Fork 0.0 to 6.0
Pennsylvania Run 0.0 to 3.3
Pope Lick 0.0 to 2.1
Popelick 2.1 to 5.5
South Fork Currys Fork 0.0 to 6.1
South Long Run 0.0 to 3.35
UT to Brooks Run 0.0 to 2.0
UT to South Fork Currys Fork 0.0 to 1.8
Legend
Segments of Interest
Lessons Learned Stakeholders are Valuable Resources
Site Specific Knowledge Engaged in the Process Have Individual Concerns
Regulatory Decision Making Process Proposal Final
EPA is using a stakeholder process in the development of the Floyds Fork TMDL Status of the Model Development is presented
meetings Models have been made available for outside
technical review Have encouraged involvement
Stakeholder ProcessStakeholder Process
Purpose of the TAC Should Focus on Technical Issues, not
implementation Build a consensus in the development of the
models Technical review of reports and models Provide guidance in model assumptions Provide guidance on sensitivity/uncertainty
scenarios
Technical Advisory CommitteeTechnical Advisory Committee
Timeline and Timeline and Scheduling of MeetingsScheduling of Meetings
Floyds Fork TMDL MilestonesFloyds Fork TMDL Milestones• June 13, 2011 – Award of Support Contract to Tt
• August 30, 2011 – Stakeholder Meeting #1
• November 15, 2011 – Stakeholder Meeting #2
• December 30, 2011 – Initial Release of Watershed Modeling Report (REV0)
• January 31, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV1)
• February 21, 2012 – Stakeholder Meeting #3
• May 4, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV2)
• May 15, 2012 – Initial Release of Instream Modeling Report (REV0)
• July 13, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV3)
• July 24, 2012 – Stakeholder Meeting #4
• July 26, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1
Floyds Fork TMDL MilestonesFloyds Fork TMDL Milestones• August 30, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV4) and Instream
Modeling Report (REV1)
• September 6, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2
• November 28, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #3
• February 8, 2013 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV5)
• February 20, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #4
• March 15, 2013 – Instream Modeling Report (REV2)
• March 27, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #5
• April 24, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #6
• May 14, 2013 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV6) and Instream Modeling Report (REV3)
• May 14, 2013 – End of Tt Support Contract
Presentation of Modeling Presentation of Modeling Results to both the Results to both the
Technical and Non-TechnicalTechnical and Non-Technical
Hydrology CalibrationHydrology Calibration Calibration period
January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2010
7 USGS Stations 3 Main Stem 4 Tributaries
70+ sets of plots/figures! Quantitative Calibration
Miscellaneous Plots Summarized by Statistics
Qualitative Calibration Analyzed Statistics Developed Qualitative Calibration
Floyds Fork Watershed: Hydrology Calibration StnsMaps produced by M.Akasapu, 11-8-2011
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
Henry
Oldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Long
Run
USGS ID: 03297900
USGS ID: 03298000
USGS ID: 03298135
USGS ID: 03298150
USGS ID: 03298200
Floyds Fork
Low
er
Ch
enow
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Cu
rrys
For
k
USGS ID: 03298300
USGS ID: 03298250
Legend
Hydrology Calibration Stations
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed: Hydrology Calibration Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 11-8-2011
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
Henry
Oldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Long
Run
USGS ID: 03297900
USGS ID: 03298000
USGS ID: 03298135
USGS ID: 03298150
USGS ID: 03298200
Floyds Fork
Ch
enow
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Cu
rrys
For
k
USGS ID: 03298300
USGS ID: 03298250
Legend
Flow Calibration
VG (80-75)
G (74-55)
F (54-35)
P (34-20)
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Water Quality CalibrationWater Quality Calibration Calibration period
January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2010
26 USGS Stations 8 Main Stem 18 Tributaries
5 MSD Stations 3 Main Stem 2 Tributaries
320+ sets of plots/figures Quantitative Calibration Qualitative Calibration
Floyds Fork Watershed:USGS WQ Calibration, TNMaps produced by M.Akasapu, 07-02-2012
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Pope Lick
USGS ID: 03297930USGS ID: 03298150
USGS ID: 03298138
USGS ID: 03298250
USGS ID: 03298300
USGS ID: 03297830
USGS ID: 03297850
USGS ID: 03297855
USGS ID: 03297860
USGS ID: 03297950
USGS ID: 03297975
USGS ID: 03297980
USGS ID: 03298020
USGS ID: 03298000
USGS ID: 03298005
USGS ID: 03297875
USGS ID: 03297880
USGS ID: 03297900 USGS ID: 03297845
USGS ID: 03298110
USGS ID: 03298100
USGS ID: 03298135
USGS ID: 03298120
USGS ID: 03298160
USGS ID: 03298200
USGS ID: 03298470
Legend
Water Quality Calibration
TN Score
VG (< 30)
G (31 - 70)
F (71 - 120)
P (121 - 180)
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:USGS WQ Calibration, TPMaps produced by M.Akasapu, 07-02-2012
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Pope Lick
USGS ID: 03297930USGS ID: 03298150
USGS ID: 03298138
USGS ID: 03298250
USGS ID: 03298300
USGS ID: 03297830
USGS ID: 03297850
USGS ID: 03297855
USGS ID: 03297860
USGS ID: 03297950
USGS ID: 03297975
USGS ID: 03297980
USGS ID: 03298020
USGS ID: 03298000
USGS ID: 03298005
USGS ID: 03297875
USGS ID: 03297880
USGS ID: 03297900 USGS ID: 03297845
USGS ID: 03298110
USGS ID: 03298100
USGS ID: 03298135
USGS ID: 03298120
USGS ID: 03298160
USGS ID: 03298200
USGS ID: 03298470
Legend
Water Quality Calibration
TP Score
VG (< 30)
G (31 - 70)
F (71 - 120)
P (121 - 180)
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Nutrient TargetsNutrient Targets
Size categoryTN targetC
(mg/L)TN maxD
(mg/L)TP targetC
(mg/L)TP maxD
(mg/L)
Headwater (<5 sq mi)A 0.7 1.0 0.09 0.12
Wadeable (5-100 sq mi)B 1.1 1.6 0.15 0.25
Transitional/Boatable (>100 sq mi)B 2.2 2.4 0.20 0.66
Proposed Nutrient TargetsProposed Nutrient TargetsDeveloped by KDOWDeveloped by KDOW
A – Annual Geometric MeanA – Annual Geometric MeanB – Growing Season (April through October) Geometric MeanB – Growing Season (April through October) Geometric MeanC – Target may not be exceeded more than 1 time in 3 yearsC – Target may not be exceeded more than 1 time in 3 yearsD – Maximum Geometric MeanD – Maximum Geometric Mean
Floyds Fork TMDL MilestonesFloyds Fork TMDL Milestones• June 13, 2011 – Award of Support Contract to Tt
• August 30, 2011 – Stakeholder Meeting #1
• October 26, 2011 – KDOW submits Nutrient Targets to EPA/Tt
• November 15, 2011 – Stakeholder Meeting #2
• December 30, 2011 – Initial Release of Watershed Modeling Report (REV0)
• January 31, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV1)
• February 21, 2012 – Stakeholder Meeting #3 (1st Presented to Stakeholders)
• May 4, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV2)
• May 15, 2012 – Initial Release of Instream Modeling Report (REV0)
• July 13, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV3)
• July 24, 2012 – Stakeholder Meeting #4
• July 26, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1
Floyds Fork TMDL MilestonesFloyds Fork TMDL Milestones• August 30, 2012 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV4) and Instream
Modeling Report (REV1)
• September 6, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2
• November 28, 2012 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #3 (2nd times mentioned to Stakeholders. Mentioned each subsequent meeting)
• February 8, 2013 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV5)
• February 20, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #4
• March 15, 2013 – Instream Modeling Report (REV2)
• March 27, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #5
• April 24, 2013 – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #6
• May 14, 2013 – Watershed Modeling Report (REV6) and Instream Modeling Report (REV3)
• May 14, 2013 – End of Tt Support Contract
• May 2013 to Present – Still discussing Nutrient Targets!!
SummarySummary
Timelines and Scheduling Meetings Do: Get TAC involved early Don’t: Vet technical issues to general
Stakeholders
Presentation of Technical Results Do: Present results in a easy to read fashion Don’t: Present numbers/graphs and allow
interpretation
Nutrient Targets Do: Educate Stakeholders about Targets and get
buy-in Don’t: Glaze over the obvious
Questions?Questions?
Brian J. Watson, PE, PH
Tetra Tech
Director, Water Resources Group
2110 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 202
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
770-738-6030
Madhu Akasapu-Smith
Tetra Tech
Environmental Engineer
2110 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 202
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
770-738-6044
Development of Scenario ListDevelopment of Scenario Listandand
Presentation of ScenariosPresentation of Scenarios
Scenarios Suggested and Scenarios Suggested and EvaluatedEvaluated
Scenario Number Scenario Name0 Baseline (Calibrated Model)1 All Forested2 Point Sources Removed3 Septics Removed4 SSOs Removed5 Current Permit Condition for the NPDES facilities6 Agricultural to Low Intensity Residential Land Use Change7 Increase in Agricultural Animals by 50%8 Direct Discharge of Septic Systems 9 Directing Septic Load to NPDES facilities
10 Removal of Septic Systems from Small Watersheds11 Increase of Urban Land Use by 25% 12 Removal of all NPDES facilities13 Removal of all NPDES facilities except Lagrange14 Half the Current Permit Limits15 Specified Permit Limits16 Future Diversion/Elimination of the NPDES facilities17 Septic Decay Rate decreased from 60 to 6 days18 KDOW’s Diversion/Elimination of the NPDES facilities19 50 foot Buffer around the streams
Scenario 0 – Baseline Scenario 0 – Baseline (Calibration)(Calibration)
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 0Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 1: BaselineResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 0Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 0: BaselineResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Salt River
Watershed Boundary
County
Scenario 1 – All ForestedScenario 1 – All Forested
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 1Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 1: All ForestedResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 1Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 1: All ForestedResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Scenario 2 – Point Sources Scenario 2 – Point Sources RemovedRemoved
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 2Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 1: Point Sources RemovedResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 2Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 1: Point Sources RemovedResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Scenario 4 – SSOs RemovedScenario 4 – SSOs Removed
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 4Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 4: SSOs RemovedResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 4Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 4: SSOs RemovedResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Scenario 5 – Current Permit Scenario 5 – Current Permit LimitsLimits
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 5Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 5: Current Permit ConditionResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 5Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 5: Current Permit ConditionResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Scenario 18 – KDOW Div/Elim of Scenario 18 – KDOW Div/Elim of NPDESNPDES
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 18Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 18: KDOW's Diversion/EliminationResults for TNAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
Floyds Fork Watershed:Scenario # 18Maps produced by M.Akasapu, 04-17-2013
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N0 3 61.5
Miles
0 3 61.5Kilometers
Jefferson
Bullitt
Spencer
Shelby
HenryOldham
Salt River
Floy
ds F
ork
Ced
ar C
reek
Floyds Fork
Che
now
eth
Run
Pen
nsyl
vani
a R
un
Currys F
ork
Asher
s Run
Pope Lick
Long
Run
LSPC Watershed Model Revision # 6, 04-12-2013WASP Water Quality Model Revision # 3, 04-17-2013
Legend
Scenario # 18: KDOW's Diversion/EliminationResults for TPAnnual/ Growing Season Geometric Mean
Exceeds the Endpoint
Meets the Endpoint
Waterways
Watershed Boundary
County
SummarySummary Timelines and Scheduling Meetings
Do: Get TAC involved early Don’t: Vet technical issues to general Stakeholders
Presentation of Technical Results Do: Present results in a easy to read fashion Don’t: Present numbers/graphs and allow
interpretation
Nutrient Targets Do: Educate Stakeholders about Targets and get buy-
in Don’t: Glaze over the obvious
Scenarios Do: Assist Stakeholders in determining “good”
scenarios Don’t: Present numbers/reductions right away