2011-04-21_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

320 As an MPCA representative and the GLWMO's contact person at the MPCA, Ms. Asleson 321 advised that she was in attendance tonight to see the level of interest the Board had in doing a 322 restoration and protection plan, with the MPCA receiving submission by EOR on behalf of the 323 GLWMO to perform such an exercise for three (3) impaired waters within the GLWMO, 324 exclusive of any political or hydrologic boundaries, and including all water bodies within the 325 GLWMO's political boundaries. 326 327 Ms. Asleson reviewed recent fish sampling completed in the Upper Mississippi Watershed 328 Basin, of which the GLWMO is located, and bio- monitoring being done in conjunction with this 329 protection; with the next step indicating implementation of a project using that data to guide and 330 inform future steps in developing a plan. Ms. Asleson advised that the MPCA would like to 331 partner with the GLWMO to develop a restoration and protection plan, funded with Clean Water 332 Legacy funds, to be initiated in July of 2011, but funded with State FY- 2012 funding. While 333 estimates of anticipated costs of such a project were still being finalized, Ms. Asleson advised 334 that the GLWMO could choose to provide cash or in -kind matching funds to ensure efficient use 335 of taxpayer resources, but were not under any obligation to do so. Ms. Asleson advised that 336 preliminary estimates had been provided by EOR on behalf of the GLWMO for the three (3) 337 possibly impaired water bodies; and now the MPCA would be drafting a cost estimate within the 338 next two (2) weeks for all major water bodies; then could proceed to work with the GLWMO to 339 develop a detailed work plan with tasks to complete TMDL plans for impaired waters and 340 protecting non impaired waters. 341 342 Discussion among Ms. Asleson, EOR representatives in attendance, Board Members and Mr. 343 Ferrington included timing for completion of the MPCA study and impacts to the Ten Year Plan 344 currently being developed and how the two could be incorporated with the MPCA process 345 actually supplementing the Plan, providing more detail for a restoration/protection plan than 346 normally available, providing specific targets based on MPCA modeling, water quality data and 347 assessment; and BMP for specific ponds once the study was completed. Ms. Asleson advised 348 that the GLWMO Plan could be amended once the study was completed and based on that new 349 data. Ms. Asleson advised that the MPCA would like to see their data incorporated into the 350 WMO Plan to ensure everyone was working from the same information. Ms. Asleson 351 recognized that additional resources and information may be necessary prior to making water 352 quality improvements. 353 354 Ms. Correll, representing EOR, concurred with Ms. Asleson's comments and the advantages of 355 incorporating the MPCA study as a minor amendment to the GLWMO's Ten Year Plan. 356 357 Further discussion included advantages of including the two -year study by BARR on Lake 358 Owasso as part of their recommendations for the TMDL study; and advantages to the MPCA of 359 partnering with the GLWMO for connecting local stakeholders and partners in the study process. 360 Ms. Asleson recognized that the GLWMO does not currently have sufficient staff resources to 361 take on the leadership role, and offered the MPCA to serve in that administrative role on the 362 GLWMO's behalf; and the advantage to the MCPA to obtain that type of information. Ms. 363 Asleson noted that the MPCA had a master contract through the State with selected consultants 364 who perform this work; with the option of the money going through the WMO to select 8