NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER WATERSHED WORKGROUP ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, November 18, 2020 * 1:00pm – 3:00pm

NBWW GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING MINUTES

1. Introductions Brandon Janes, North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) President, welcomed attendees at 1:04 pm to the November 18, 2020 NBWW General Membership Meeting. The meeting was held virtually, and Ashley Strelcheck performed roll call of NBWW members and ask for designated NBWW voting delegates (meeting attendees and roll call sheet below). A total of 26 members (tallying 96 votes) were in attendance, so an NBWW meeting quorum was present. NBWW Executive Board Members in attendance included: Brandon Janes (Village of Deerfield), Matt Ueltzen (Lake County Forest Preserve District, LCFPD), Matt Farmer (Village of Northbrook), Robyn Flakne (Village of Glenview), Al Giertych (Lake County Div. of Transportation, LCDOT), James Bernahl (Village of Winnetka) and Rob Flood (North Shore Water Reclamation District, NSWRD).

2. Public Comment – None

3. Guest Speakers • Brandon Janes, Village of Deerfield, What is a N.A.R.P?

Brandon Janes, Village of Deerfield Water Reclamation Facility Superintendent, gave an introduction presentation of the Nutrient Assessment and Reduction Plan (NARP). Wastewater dischargers are required to have a NARP because they are located upstream of phosphorous related (stream) impairment or risk of eutrophication. Brandon gave an overview of the North Branch Chicago River watershed wastewater dischargers National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements, which specifies that a discharger (or a watershed workgroup) must develop a NARP by December 31, 2024. The NARP requirements include developing your own (science based) watershed specific target levels, determining source(s) of impairments and how to address them, implementation schedule and allows for the possibly nutrient trading for addressing impairments. The NARP has been an impetus for the NBWW since it’s formation in January of 2018. The Illinois EPA NPDES permit deadlines are December 31, 2021 for the NARP Workplan (guidance document to complete the NARP) and December 31, 2024 for submitting the NARP to the Illinois EPA. For more information, Brandon Janes’ presentation can be found below in the attachments.

Questions/Answers Clarification: The NARP will cover the wastewater dischargers in the North Branch Chicago River watershed (NBWW planning area) but since the NBWW is pursuing the NARP, this will cover the entire watershed workgroup? Currently NBWW submits stream monitoring data on behalf of the NBWW NPDES permit holders to satisfy their stream monitoring permit requirements. Currently, MS4 permit holders in Illinois have not seen a NARP requirement but there are other states that do have an MS4 NPDES NARP requirements.

• Deanna Doohaluk, DuPage River Salt Creek Watershed Workgroup, Nutrient Assessment & Reduction Plans (NARPs) Deanna Doohaluk, DuPage River Salt Creek Watershed Workgroup and The Conservation Foundation, gave an in-depth presentation of NARP permitting requirements, what to expect, coordination with the Illinois EPA and examples of NARPs. Deanna went into detail about the coordination efforts between the Illinois EPA and the Nutrient Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) about setting a numeric standard for Illinois and development of a NARP. One of the important points that Deanna mentioned is that the Illinois EPA has a defined deadline for the NARP workplan and completion of the NARP (December 31, 2024), but in conversations with the Illinois EPA, the overall goal is to move forward on eliminating the

impairments and risk and continuing to work on the NARP goals. The NARP methods/process whether it be a model or other tool, can be proposed to the Illinois EPA for review on whether it would be an acceptable method for the NARP prior to starting work. The overall goal of the NARP (the outcomes) are the projects that are identified, the schedules that are set and the target levels set (once approved by the Illinois EPA) will be put into an NPDES permit. Currently, other permitted facilities and dischargers are required to have a NARP but getting their participation may be beneficial because they may be incorporated in the future. Although NARPs do not require non-point source project consideration, if a watershed feels that non-point source projects would have a positive impact on removing impairments then add it in (gives watersheds the power to determine how to improve the water quality). The elements of the NARP should at a minimum include: watershed group members, impairments, phosphorus input sources, stream monitoring, modeling used and findings, goals or target levels of phosphorous reductions, water quality based reductions, water quality trading provisions, point source controls, schedule for phosphorus input reductions or other stream improvements, additional stream monitoring identified and NPDES permit modification to include NARP requirements. Examples of a NARP include the Fox River Study Groups 2015 Fox River Implementation Plan (FRIP) and the DuPage River Salt Creek Watershed Workgroup (DRSCW) Nutrient Implementation Plan (NIP). Deanna went through a couple examples of projects that DRSCW have implemented and the positive results of those projects. The DRSCW focus’ is on biological integrity and biological health is the single largest driver of local NPDES permits and an integrative view of river health. The DRSCW is working on utilizing the Identification ad Prioritization System (IPS) model, QUAL2Kw modeling, NPS feasibility analysis, Nutrient Trading Program, Chloride Reduction and expanded DO monitoring and chlorophyll A monitoring. Deanna gave an overview of the IPS benefits of prioritizing your projects and the other methods for improving water quality in the watershed. Deanna gave some considerations for the NBWW for the NARP development: What are your goals and objectives for your watershed/NARP? • Do you want to accept the NSAC TP recommendation or develop your own watershed-specific target? • Do you want your NARP to focus on nutrient concentrations vs nutrient expression? • What realistically can you do on your permitted timeline? • Do you want to just focus on nutrients or include all your “stressors”? • Local water quality or gulf hypoxia/NLRS goals? For more information, Deanna Doohaluk’s presentation is located at the end of the meeting minutes.

Comments/Discussion The NARP requirements are currently NPDES requirements and given the current pandemic the current deadlines are not automatically waived, that would be subject to negotiations. Extensions of the current deadlines would need a good reasoning for adjusting that deadline. Downstream waters are also an important factor to keep in mind.

4. NBWW Business

a. Approve NBWW August 12, 2020 General Membership Meeting Summary First Motion: James Bernahl, Village of Winnetka Second Motion: Al Giertych, LCDOT Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below)

b. Financial Report Ashley Strelcheck presented the NBWW budget, expenditures and revenues. There were no new revenues or expenditures to ratify. No questions were asked.

c. Monitoring Committee Update

Rob Flood, NSWRD and Monitoring Committee Chair, gave the NBWW Monitoring Committee update to the meeting attendees. Year 3 (Fiscal Year 2020) stream monitoring has been completed by MBI and NSWRD with no known problems with sampling. Year 3 sampling focused on the Skokie River for bioassessment and Tier 3 sampling (last sampling event was October 2020). The stream monitoring data is currently being analyzed for the year. In February, NSWRD will start the FY21 stream monitoring sampling for Year 4 (which will complete the second cycle of data). MBI has submitted the draft 2018-2019 Monitoring Report to NBWW for review and the Monitoring Committee and Executive Board has been reviewing and providing revisions to MBI. The report is considered DRAFT but the NBWW is hoping to have a final product around the end of 2020.

d. Old Business

NARP Preliminary Workplan – Brandon explained the next steps for NBWW pursuing a NARP, which would be to start compiling a preliminary NARP workplan (deadline December 31, 2020). To compile a NARP Workplan a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or a Request for Proposals (RFP) would be needed to work with a consultant to assist NBWW. The explanation between the two approaches is in the meeting minutes below. Ashley drafted a scope of work and sent it to the NBWW Monitoring Committee and Executive Board for their feedback and asked for opinions for an RFP or RFQ. Eight NBWW board and committee members agreed with an RFQ approach and one NBWW member agreed with an RFP approach. Based on the feedback, Brandon recommended an RFQ approach based on the NBWW Board and Monitoring Committee, and staff level of knowledge with the NARP. The RFQ approach would allow NBWW to choose a consultant based on their qualifications, then NBWW would work with the selected consultant to put together a proposal that meets the needs of the NARP, NBWW’s goals and objectives and price points. There were no questions or discussion items. Brandon asked for a motion to pursue an RFQ for the Preliminary NARP Workplan. First Motion: Bob Ells, City of Lake Forest Second Motion: Matt Ueltzen, Lake County Forest Preserve District Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below).

e. New Business Ashley Strelcheck presented the MBI FY21 Contract, NSWRD FY21 Contract and SMC FY21 Contracts for the NBWW’s review and approval. MBI’s FY21 Contract will focus on Year 3 monitoring data analysis and Year 4 sampling for a total of $47,595.05, NSWRD’s FY21 Contract will perform water column chemistry sampling and analysis for a total of $46,327.50 and SMC’s FY21 Administrative and NARP Technical Services contract is a not-to-exceed total of $24,000. No questions were asked. The motions and roll call vote were for all three contract approvals.

First Motion: Ramesh Kanapareddy, City of Highland Park Second Motion: Marc Facchini, Village of Lincolnshire Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below). Ashley Strelcheck, Lake County Stormwater Management Commission and Rob Flood, North Shore Water Reclamation District both abstained from voting since both of their contracts were a part of this combined vote.

5. Watershed Project Updates or Other Announcements/Discussion

a. North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan Update

Ashley Strelcheck, Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) Water Resource Professional, gave a brief overview of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan Update efforts. Over the past few months, SMC has been coordinating with local communities in the North Branch Chicago River and Lake Michigan watersheds to set up meetings to discuss action plan recommendations and update known flood problem areas within the watershed. SMC will continue to compile programmatic (watershed-wide) and site-specific action plan recommendations within the

watershed-based plan, which provides guidance to watershed stakeholders for implementing projects and programs. The next steps include bringing draft NBWW recommendations to the December or January NBWW Monitoring Committee and Executive Board meetings for feedback for the watershed-based plan. The Draft North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan deadline to the Illinois EPA is January 29, 2021.

b. Next NBWW General Membership Meeting: February 10, 2020, 1:00pm – 3:00pm.

6. Adjournment – 2:49pm First Motion: Ramesh Kanapareddy, City of Highland Park Second Motion: Matt Farmer, Village of Northbrook Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below)

North Branch Watershed Workgroup Meeting Attendees

Name Organization Al Giertych Lake County Division of Transportation Albert Ettinger Environmental Law & Policy Center of the Midwest Alvaro Melara Representative of Congressman Schneider Ashley Strelcheck Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Bill Rickert RHMG and Village of Green Oaks Brandon Janes Village of Deerfield Brian Valleskey Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. Caitlin Burke Resource Environmental Solutions Charles Frank Resident Chris Yoder Midwest Biodiversity Institute Christine Davis Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Damon Cederberg Libertyville Township Dave Miller North Shore Water Reclamation District David Souther Resident Deanna Doohaluk DuPage River Salt Creek Workgroup & The Conservation Foundation Edward Rankin Midwest Biodiversity Institute Eric Otto Forest Preserve District of Cook County Erin Pande ERA Consultants Frederick Chung Village of Libertyville George Duberstein Village of Hainesville Jacob Jozefowski Lake County Stormwater Management Commission James Bernahl Village of Winnetka James Tigue Village of Glencoe

Jodi McCarthy Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. representing Villages of Riverwoods, Northfield & Bannockburn

John Quail Friends of the Chicago River Justin Vick Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago Kate Amoruso Village of Wilmette Katherine Andersen Resident Kurt Woolford Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Linda Englund Illinois Sierra Club Mac McKavanagh Resident

Name Organization Marc Facchini Village of Lincolnshire Matt Farmer Village of Northbrook Matt Ueltzen Lake County Forest Preserve District Michael Prusila Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Michael Warner Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Nimrod Warda City of North Chicago Paul Frank Lake County Board Member (District 11) Penny Bouchard Baxter and Woodman Ramesh Kanapareddy City of Highland Park Rebecca Connolly Stantec Rebecca Grill Park District of Highland Park Rob Flood North Shore Water Reclamation District Robert Ells City of Lake Forest Robyn Flakne Village of Glenview Rufus Ajayi Resident Ryan London Lake Forest Open Lands Association Scott Griffith Christopher B. Burke Engineering Stephen McCracken DuPage River Salt Creek Workgroup & The Conservation Foundation Steve Waters North Shore Water Reclamation District Tatiana Papakos Resident Tracy Gastfield Vernon Township

PDHs are self-reporting. If attendees want to apply NBWW meetings towards their professional license, keep the certificate, agenda, and minutes with sign-in sheets. Acceptance of these materials for credit is at the discretion of the licensing authority.

MS4 Program BMP fulfillment. If attendees want to apply NBWW meetings and education towards their MS4 Program BMP Measurable Goals, keep the certificate, agenda and minutes with sign-in sheets. Acceptance of these materials for MS4 program credit is at the discretion of the Illinois EPA.

WHAT   IS   A   N.A.R.P.?

Brandon J. Janes, PE

Village of Deerfield

NUTRIENT ASSESSMENT REDUCTION PLAN

It is an NPDES requirement to address nutrient related impairments in local receiving waters that are located downstream of a discharger.

Requirements Developed by discharger or watershed group. Deadline is 12‐31‐2024 Develop own (science based) watershed specific target levels Determine source(s) of impairment and how to address them Implementation schedule Possibility of nutrient trading

Basically a report/planning document/nutrient loading justification thing

WHY DOES IT MATTER TO NBWW?

The requirement for the NARP was the impetus for the establishment of the NBWW

The nutrient issue in Illinois waters has a long and contentious history. Local impairments ‐ 303d list Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia USEPA/IEPA/Environmental Groups/WWTP/Agriculture/MS4/Industry

DEADLINES FOR THE NARP

NARP Workplan 12‐31‐2021

NARP Completion date 12‐31‐2024

FINANCING

To Be Determined Workplan ~$65,000 NARP ~$200,000 or more

QUESTIONS?

Nutrient Assessment and Reduction Plans (NARPs)Deanna Doohaluk

November 17, 2020

IAWA/IEPA/EAG (Three Party) Agreement‐‐ Focused on the Majors POTWs‐‐Total Phosphorus Effluent Limits‐ 1 mg/L monthly average IMMEDIATELY‐ 0.5 mg/L rolling annual geometric average

‐ 2025 if using chemical treatment‐ 2030 if using BPR‐ 2035 if using BNR

‐‐ NARPs required for plants upstream of waters with nutrient related    impairments or risk of eutrophication

‐‐DRSCW/LDWRC ‘carve‐out’‐‐Not a signed agreement

Nutrient Science Advisory Committee (NSAC)

‐‐NSAC was convened to develop numeric nutrient standards for IL‐‐ Met from 2015‐2019 ‐‐Analyzed and evaluated hundreds of relationships using the IEPA ambient data set from 2006‐15

‐‐ Final Report published in December 2018‐‐ Public Comments were solicited and received by the IEPA‐‐ IEPA has reviewed comments and is still in the process of deciding how to proceed with the recommendations

Nutrient Science Advisory Committee (NSAC)‐‐ Findings for wadable streams (4th Order)

‐‐TP must exceed 110 µg/L and either chlorophyll‐a criteria (5 µg/L sestonic, 79 mg/m2 benthic) to exceed the eutrophication standard‐‐ If TP <110 µg/L and either of the chlorophyll‐a criteria are exceeded, eutrophication standard is violated 

‐TP not presumptively linked to excess chlorophyll‐a‐Would require additional evaluation to identify cause(s) of excess chlorophyll‐a

TP (µg/L) TN (µg/L)Benthic Chl A 

(µg/m2)Sestonic Chl A 

(µg/L)North Ecoregion 113 3979 5.1South Ecoregion 110 901 5

79

Who gets a NARP?Phosphorus Related Impairment

‐‐ The downstream waterbody or segment is listed by the Agency as impaired due to  dissolved oxygen and/or offensive condition (algae and/or aquatic plant growth) impairments related to excessive phosphorus levels.

‐‐ TP impairments identified on 303 (d) List

Risk of Eutrophication ‐‐ Determination based on available information that plant, algal or cyanobacterial   growth is causing or will cause violation of a water quality standard.  

‐ Data from most recent five years, during May – October‐ pH > 9.0; or‐ Median sestonic chlorophyll a > 26 ug/L; or‐ Daily maximum pH > 8.35 and daily maximum DO saturation > 110% on two or more days

Q and A with the IEPA on NARPs

IWEA Watershed Management Committee members had a call with Amy Dragovich, IEPA Permits SectionNovember 12, 2019

Questions from IWEA NARP Survey were presented and discussed

1) Who at the IEPA should questions regarding the NARP be directed to?

Amy Dragovich, or any Permit Section municipal engineer

2) Is there funding available (grants, etc.) from the IEPA, USEPA, or other entity for NARP development?  

Facilities could inquire to IEPA’s 319 or SRF loan program to determine eligibility. 

3) Why are NARPs necessary?  What is the incentive to do a NARP over taking a WQL?

Required because upstream of phosphorus related impairment, or risk of eutrophication. Could accept the NSAC target recommendation, or develop own instream watershed specific target levels.

4) Language included under the permit Special Conditions is very broad.  Will the IEPA be providing clear details on expectations and/or minimum requirements to be included in an “acceptable” NARP?  

The SC is the minimum requirements. Broad to be flexible for different conditions. Suggest looking at what other watershed groups have done. Goal is to determine the target level by 2023. If can’t, define the timeframe to get there and what can be done in the meantime. Goal is to move forward on eliminating the impairment and risk. 

Have given some facilities to 2024. 

5) Will a detailed water quality model be required as a part of a NARP?  If so, please elaborate on this requirement.  If not, what type of study/activity will meet the NARP requirement (see Q 8)?  What does IEPA consider the target for a model or a non–model based NARP?

Model not required, but if no data, would have to model.

The NARP methods/process whether it be a model or other tool, can be proposed to the IEPA for review on whether it would be an acceptable method for the NARP prior to starting work.

6) If the NARPs will be utilized to write future permits, what will be the IEPA’s review process to determine in a NARP is acceptable?

Schedules and target level will be put in a permit after NARP submittal.  Would be reviewed by Permit Section and other IEPA staff. Target level would get public noticed. 

No acceptance letter of NARP, just part of the permitting process.

7) Will the IEPA coordinate with the Environmental Advocacy Groups (EAGs) for review of the NARPs? How will comments from the EAGs be utilized to write future permits?

Not specifically sharing for review, but public notice and FOIA will / could occur. Suggest working with EAG on NARP would be an advantage. 

8) Will the IEPA be able to provide any support or regulatory authority to encourage Minor discharges, Industrial NPDES permit holders, MS4 permit holders and other unregulated contributors (non‐point source, agriculture) to participate in NARP development?

If a permitted facility is not participating in NARP development with a NARP required facility, it may get a permit requirement in the future.  IEPA knows all the dischargers.

9) What guidance does the IEPA have on address non‐point source pollution in the NARP considering the NARP is being developed and paid for by the regulated point source entities?  Will the IEPA require the Point Sources to implement non‐point source projects?

Non‐point source projects are not required.  However, Permittees may want to identify stream improvement measures that will help them remove  the relevant impairment or risk of eutrophication.  

10) Once a NARP is completed and approved by the IEPA, will the recommendations of the NARP be included in all permits within a watershed (Industrial, Minor, MS4, etc.) and other entities in the private sector? 

While the IEPA is not currently including NARP provisions and any other outcomes of NARPs (target levels, projects, schedules, etc.) in permits outside of the Major NPDES permit holders, they could be in future minor, industrial, MS4 permits.  

If a water quality standard is finalized, they would need to comply with the applicable standards at that time.

12) If an agency does not wish to develop a NARP, is there an acceptable alternative?

Accept the NSAC recommendations, or do the reasonable potential analysis to address the impairment and risk. 

NARP Table of Contents? (IEPA)‐‐ Watershed group or participating members

‐‐ Impairments or Risk of Eutrophication factors identified

‐‐ Phosphorus input sources identified, along with land use and acreage‐ Majors‐ Minors‐ MS4s‐ Industrial Stormwater Permittees‐ Non‐point sources

‐‐ Effluent/stream monitoring

‐‐ Modeling used and findings

NARP Table of Contents? (IEPA)‐‐ Goals or target levels of Phosphorus reductions

‐‐ Water Quality based reductions 

‐‐ Water Quality trading provisions

‐‐ Point source controls

‐‐ Schedule for Phosphorus input reductions or other stream improvements

‐‐ Additional stream monitoring identified

‐‐ NPDES permit Modification to include NARP requirements 

Are there any examples of NARPs?

Fox River Implementation Plan (FRIP) prepared by the Fox River Study Group (2015).

‐‐Used as a third party TMDL‐‐Assessment and planning tools‐HSPF‐QUAL 2K‐NPS Phosphorus Load Reduction Screening Tool

‐‐ Focused on loading and load reductions‐‐ Scenarios Considered‐ POTWs:  1 mg/L, 0.5 mg/L, 0.1 mg/L of TP‐MS4s and Agriculture: 1%, 5%, 10%, 20% reductions of P‐Dam removals/modifications

FRIP‐‐ Short Term Implementation Plan

‐ 1.0 mg/L TP at all major plants‐ Development of upstream TMDL‐ Removal of Carpentersville and North Aurora dams (IDNR)‐ No specific NPS reductions

‐‐ Monitoring‐‐ Additional Modeling‐‐ Periodic Review (every 5 years)‐‐ Reporting ‐‐ Public Engagement‐‐ Ten‐Year Action Plan

DRSCW Nutrient Implementation Plan Special Condition The Permittee shall submit a NIP for the DRSCW watersheds that identifies phosphorus input reductions by point source discharges, non‐point source discharges and other measures necessary to remove DO and offensive condition impairments and meet the applicable dissolved oxygen criteria in 35 IL Adm. Code 302.206 and the narrative offensive aquatic algae criteria in 35 IL Adm. Code 302.203.  

The NIP shall also include a schedule for implementation of the phosphorus input reductions and other measures. 

The Permittee may work cooperatively with the DRSCW to prepare a single NIP that is common among DRSCW permittees. 

The NIP shall be submitted to the Agency by December 31, 2023. 

Clean Water Act (CWA) RequirementsStates must identify waters that do not or are not expected to meet applicable water quality standards with current pollution control technologies alone.‐‐ Section 305(b) – List of all assessed waters‐‐ Section 303 (d) – List of all impaired waters

‐ Includes identification of causes and sources 

Illinois Categories of Use Support

Each water in Illinois is assessed based on its designated uses:

‐‐Aquatic Life‐‐ Fish Consumption ‐‐ Public & Food Processing Water Supplies‐‐ Primary Contact Recreation‐‐ Indigenous Aquatic Life‐‐Aesthetic Quality

Simplified Decision Table of Assessment of Aquatic Life in Illinois

You stream is listed as impaired.  Now what?

Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)  are required to be developed for all waters listed  as impaired (aka 303(d) listed waters)‐‐ A TMDL establishes the maximum amount of a pollutant allowed in a  waterbody and serves as the starting point or planning tool for restoring water quality‐‐ Focused on one (1) pollutant‐‐ Include allocations for both point and non‐point sources‐‐ Results typically include stricter permit limits for NPDES point source discharges‐‐ Can be implemented through adaptative management plans

Low Flow DO Conditions on Salt Creek

Adaptative Management for TMDL Implementation

Preserve at Oak Meadows (dam removed in 2016) Fullersburg Woods Forest Preserve (proposed conditions)

The Preserve at Oak Meadows

Why Biological Integrity?‐‐ Is itself a goal of the Clean Water Act‐‐ Biological health is the single largest driver of local NPDES permits ‐‐ Biological monitoring, indices and endpoints provide the most   integrative view of river health

‐‐ Is less influenced by short term variables than other commonly used   water quality indicators ‐‐ Is based in science but is easily understandable by non –technical stakeholders‐‐ Ties together the law, the science, consensus building and cost     effectiveness 

What Influences Biological Integrity?

DRSCW/LDRWC NIP Concepts

‐‐Data Driven‐‐Component of our biodiversity      

approach‐‐ Consistent with our existing  

Adaptive Management approach for TMDL implementation

‐‐ Expanded beyond just nutrients to include all impairments in our watersheds

DRSCW/LDRWC NIP Components‐‐ Identification and Prioritization System (IPS)‐‐QUAL2Kw models for DuPage River and Salt Creek watersheds‐‐NPS Feasibility Analysis

‐ Leaf Litter and Street Sweeping‐‐Nutrient Trading Program 

‐ Point Source to Point Source‐ Stream Restoration Crediting

‐‐Chloride Reduction‐‐ Expanded DO Monitoring & chlorphyll A monitoring

Linking Biological Response to Stressors

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

Des Plaines

Lower Fox

Kishwaukee

Upper Fox

Chicago

Upper Illinois

Middle Rock

Kankakee

Lower Rock

Lake Michigan

Pike-Root

Green

Lower Illinois-Senachwine Lake

Vermilion

Pecatonica

Will

Cook

LaSalle

Kane

Lake

DeKalb

Rock

McHenry

Lee

Ogle

Walworth

Boone

Kendall

DuPage

Grundy

Kenosha

Winnebago

Racine

Kankakee

LegendIEPA Sites selection

DRWW Sites

DRSCW

!( LDPCWC

County Boundarys

IPS Distribution of Sample Points 

Watersheds 

• Des Plaines • Fox River • Kishwaukee 

Sources • IEPA• Lower DuPage Coalition• DRSCW • DRWW 

Stressor FIT Score StressorFIT 

ScoreImpervious Land Use (500m) 0.01 Copper (Wat.) 1.75QHEI Embeddedness Score 0.03 Lead (Wat.) 2.11Urban Land Uses (WS) 0.03 Zinc (Sed.) 2.22QHEI Overall Score 0.04 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2.32QHEI Substrate Score 0.04 Indeno(1,2,3‐cd)pyrene (Sed.) 2.41QHEI Good Attributes 0.04 Copper (Sed.) 2.42Total Phosphorus 0.04 Benzo(b)fluoranthene (Sed.) 2.51Impervious Land Use (30m) 0.04 Turbidity 2.61Impervious Land Use (30m Clipped) 0.04 Nickel (Sed.) 2.67Conductivity 0.05 Manganese (Wat.) 2.74QHEI Channel Score 0.07 Benzo(a)pyrene (Sed.) 2.85QHEI Silt Cover Score 0.07 Pyrene (Sed.) 2.85Developed Land Use (WS) 0.07 Voluble Suspended Solids 2.81Minimum D.O. 0.10 Lead (Sed.) 3.01Total Dissolved Solids 0.10 Nickel (Wat.) 3.26Impervious Land Use (WS) 0.10 Benzo(a)anthracene (Sed.) 3.48Hydro‐QHEI Depth Score 0.11 Chrysene (Sed.) 3.51QHEI Poor Habitat Attributes 0.12 Fluoranthene (Sed.) 3.91Hydro‐QHEI Overall Score 0.13 Strontium (Sed.) 4.44Zinc (Wat.) 0.13 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (Sed.) 4.57Hydro‐QHEI Current Score 0.14 Agricultural Land Use (WS) 4.82TKN 0.14 Anthracene (Sed.) 5.10QHEI Pool Score 0.15 Phenanthrene (Sed.) 5.10Heavy Urban Land Use (WS) 0.17 Arsenic (Sed.) 6.21Chloride 0.17 Chromium (Sed.) 6.29QHEI Cover  Score 0.17 Sulfate 6.49BOD (5‐Day) 0.21 Manganese (Sed.) 7.08QHEI Riffle Score 0.27 Silver (Sed.) 7.11Total Ammonia 0.28 Aluminum (Sed.) 8.26Nitrate 0.29 Barium (Sed.) 8.88Sodium 0.29 Arsenic (Wat.) 9.19QHEI Gradient Score 0.31 Potassium (Wat.) 10.13Total Suspended Solids 0.32 Cadmium (Sed.) 11.00Maximum D.O. 0.94Cadmium (Wat.) 0.93

Arsenic (Sed.) 1.26

NE IL Biological Effect Thresholds ‐Nutrients

ParameterLimiting 

AssemblageNarrative Range

Benchmark (mg/L)

Reference Sites

Median (IQR)

Total Phosphorus

(mg/L)Fish

Excellent 0.106 0.088 mg/L(0.062‐0.115)

N=35Good 0.277

Fair/Poor 1.010

Poor/V. Poor 1.740

Nitrate(mg/L)

Fish

Excellent 3.77 0.37 mg/L(0.29‐1.09)

N=28Good 5.05

Fair/Poor 7.36

Poor/V. Poor 9.69

Max. Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L)

Fish

Excellent 10.36NA

Good 12.20

Fair/Poor 14.26

Poor/V. Poor 16.33

QUAL‐2Kw ModelingObjective:  Simulate the transport and fate of water quality parameters (DO, temp, nutrients, CBOD, algae) in the Upper and Lower DuPage River and Lower Salt Creek.  Models will be used to evaluate and prioritize projects (scenarios) based on their impact on water quality.‐ evaluation of the 0.28 mg/L TP benchmark‐ evaluation of physical projects 

2020 Work Plan‐‐Continue collection of available data and assessment of data needs‐‐Calibration and validation of East Branch DuPage River, Salt Creek and Lower DuPage River models. (West Branch DuPage River is scheduled for 2021)‐‐ Sensitivity analysis of the calibrated models

QUAL2Kw Load Capacity

Nonpoint Source Feasibility AnalysisObjective: To identify and quantify nutrient inputs from nonpoint sources (NPS).  Identify potential projects aimed at the reduction of NPS nutrients and other pollution.   

2020 Work Plan‐‐Assess NPS reductions from leaf litter and street sweeping

‐Member survey of leaf pick‐up and street sweeping programs‐Development of a best management practice checklist for leaf pick‐up and    street sweeping practices

‐‐ Identify and prioritize additional NPS nutrient reduction projects

Nutrient Trading Program

Objective:  To analyze the feasibility (supply‐demand) of nutrient trading that:‐ Focus on nutrient trading viability among POTWs 

‐ Results:  Variation in TP removal costs indicates the potential for trading within and between each subwatershed

‐Completed in 2018/2019

‐Analysis of stream restoration crediting‐To be completed in 2020/21

Expanded DO Monitoring ProgramWater Quality Paramters

5 day BOD5 day CBOD TSSTDSChlorideConductivityTotal Organic CarbonTotal Dissolved CarbonAmmoniaN‐NO2N‐NO3TKNTPOrthophosphateTotal dissolved phosphorusChlorophyll A

Objective:  To evaluate the evaluate the degree of nutrient enrichment effects in streams and calibration/validation of QUAL2Kw models

Program Description:‐‐ 4 day effort per site‐‐Continuous sampling (every 15 minutes) of DO, pH,         conductivity, temperature, chlorophyll A, and turbidity

‐‐Water quality sampling (1 composite samples per site)‐‐ Benthic algae sampling (1 sample per site)‐‐ Flow sampling (1 cross section per site)‐‐ Samples collected immediately downstream of POTWs, headwaters, and major tributaries

Work Plan (coordinated with Bioassessment):2019:  East Branch DuPage River 2020:  West Branch DuPage River2021:  Salt Creek & Lower DuPage River

Considerations for NARP Development‐‐What are your goals and objectives for your watershed/NARP?

‐ Improving biological health?

‐ Reducing phosphorus?‐Other?

‐‐Do you want to accept the NSAC TP recommendation or develop your own watershed‐specific target?‐‐Do you want your NARP to focus on nutrient concentrations vs nutrient expression?‐‐What realistically can you do on your permitted timeline?‐‐Do you want to just focus on nutrients or include all your “stressors”?‐‐ Local water quality or gulf hypoxia/NLRS goals?

Questions?

NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER WATERSHED WORKGROUP ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, August 12, 2020 * 1:00pm – 3:00pm

NBWW GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING MINUTES

1. Introductions Brandon Janes, North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) President, welcomed attendees at 1:03 pm to the August 12, 2020 NBWW General Membership Meeting. The meeting was held virtually, and Ashley Strelcheck introduced meeting attendees via the zoom participant list and ask for designated NBWW voting delegates (meeting attendees below). NBWW Executive Board Members in attendance included: Brandon Janes (Village of Deerfield), Matt Ueltzen (Lake County Forest Preserve District, LCFPD), Jim Baxa (Village of Northbrook), Robyn Flakne (Village of Glenview), Al Giertych (Lake County Div. of Transportation, LCDOT), James Bernahl (Village of Winnetka) and Rob Flood (North Shore Water Reclamation District, NSWRD). An Executive Board quorum was present.

2. Public Comment - None

3. Guest Speaker – Chris Yoder, Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI) Chris Yoder, Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI), gave an overview of the Biological and Water Quality Assessment of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed, Years 1 and 2 (monitoring) Rotation. Chris started by giving an overview of the bioassessment sampling terminology, the importance of monitoring different parameters and the criteria for assessing samples. The different chemical and physical field procedures for different types of sampling included water column grab sampling, depth integrated sampler, automatic composite samplers, time-of-travel dye injection and electrofishing methods. The North Branch Chicago River Watershed Bioassessment Report (currently being developed by MBI) includes a full analysis of all of the 2018 and 2019 monitoring data (all 25 NBWW monitoring sites). Each monitoring site was sampled for fish, macroinvertebrates, and habitat, which makes this report a baseline for water quality for the NBWW. The aquatic life use attainment including causes and sources are enhanced by the new IPS model thresholds and tools that is under review by the local watershed workgroups right now. “Combined” assessment for nutrient enrichment (modified SNAP procedure) and restorability factors are calculated per the Northeastern Illinois IPS model and all the data added to Power BI platform. Chris talked about the Northeastern Illinois IPS model indicating that it allows a user to examine assessed data such as use attainment status and associated causes & sources of impairment. NBWW plans to be a user of this model when it is completed for the North Branch Chicago River watershed. Chris explained that the modified stream nutrient assessment procedure (SNAP) was also utilized to analyze the 25 NBWW monitoring sites, which categorize the results from very poor to excellent per parameter. Several tables were presented that summarize the findings of the 2018-2019 NBWW monitoring data. For more information, Chris Yoder’s presentation can be found below in the attachments. Questions/Answers (took place at the end of the meeting agenda)

1. (Chris mentioned in his presentation) random sampling of macroinvertebrates stop at 300 individuals; is that 300 individuals or 300 individuals of a species? Please explain protocol.

A. 300 Individuals. MBI produces a reduced sample out of the raw sample, which is the protocol (300 individuals) that Illinois has adopted. States vary in this amount.

John Quail, Friends of the Chicago River (FOCR) – presentation moved to the end of the agenda John Quail, Friends of the Chicago River (FOCR), gave an overview presentation of the recently formed Chicago River Watershed Council. The vision for the Chicago River Watershed Council is the collaboration between the public and private sectors for effective nature-based stormwater solutions throughout the watershed. The Chicago River Watershed Council has already recognized local entities past and current stormwater and green infrastructure work, and identifying the community flooding issues and combined

stormsewer systems issues. Climate crisis increased rainfall has had a local impact with increasing property and infrastructure (investments at risk), and community health and resilience. There is a need for equitable investment and environmental justice, which is a major resource consideration for the Watershed Council. FOCR is currently looking at the blue-green corridor and keeping that system (nature-based) in mind moving forward. One of the focus’ of this work is utilizing resources and funding efficiently for nature-based green infrastructure so costs and complexity is reduced and over time more resiliency. FOCR took a look at many opportunities within the river corridors and found 37,000 acres of open space and 28,000 acres are publicly owned. As the Chicago River Watershed Council continues to develop, FOCR and/or SMC will provide updates to the NBWW. John Quail’s presentation is located at the end of the meeting minutes.

4. North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan Update

Ashley Strelcheck, Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) Water Resource Professional, gave a brief overview of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan Update efforts. SMC has completed draft versions of Chapters 1, 2, 3, 5 & 8 (out of 9 chapters), which are at various stages of revisions. Currently, SMC is revising Chapter 3 (Water Resource Inventory) based on Illinois EPA’s suggested revisions and starting work on Chapters 4, 6 & 7. Over the past few months, SMC has been coordinating with local communities in the North Branch Chicago River and Lake Michigan watersheds to set up meetings to discuss action plan recommendations. Ashley asked if any watershed stakeholders had action plan recommendations to add into the watershed-based plans to please contact her in the next two months. SMC will continue to compile programmatic (watershed-wide) and site-specific action plan recommendations within the watershed-based plan, which provides guidance to watershed stakeholders for implementing projects and programs.

5. NBWW Business

a. Approve NBWW February 12, 2020 General Membership Meeting Summary First Motion: Matt Ueltzen, LCFPD Second Motion: Bob Ells, City of Lake Forest Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below)

b. Financial Report Ashley Strelcheck presented the NBWW budget, expenditures and revenues. Motion to ratify revenues/expenditures: First Motion: Matt Ueltzen, LCFPD Second Motion: Al Giertych, LCDOT Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below)

c. Monitoring Committee Update Rob Flood, NSWRD and Monitoring Committee Chair, gave the NBWW Monitoring Committee update to the meeting attendees. NSWRD & MBI have been working on their 2020 water quality sampling, which is considered the Year 3 monitoring sampling. NSWRD has successfully sampled in February, May and July for all the parameters and they have been analyzed. MBI field crews are sampling (focus on the 11 sites on the Skokie River) in July and August this year and have been successful in collecting their samples.

d. Old Business – None

e. New Business Approve the 2020 – 2020 NBWW Executive Board Member nominees. No new nominations were received by Ashley Strelcheck, only minor changes to alternate positions and one Executive Board member/alternate position switch. No discussion or questions were asked. First Motion: James Bernahl, Village of Winnetka

Second Motion: Rob Flood, NSWRD Approved by voice NBWW Membership roll call vote (see results below)

6. Watershed Project Updates or Other Announcements/Discussion

a. Next NBWW General Membership Meeting: November 18, 2020, 1:00pm – 3:00pm.

7. Adjournment First Motion: Matt Ueltzen, LCFPD Second Motion: Rob Flood, NSWRD Approved by unanimous consensus, and the meeting adjourned at 2:29 pm.

North Branch Watershed Workgroup Meeting Attendees

Name Organization Al Giertych Lake County Division of Transportation Amy Call Resident Anitha Dasappa Cook County Ashley Strelcheck Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Austin McFarlane Lake County Public Works Barry Stuedemann Huff & Huff/GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Bill Rickert RHMG and Village of Green Oaks Brandon Janes Village of Deerfield Brian Joyce City of Lake Forest Bud Reed Reed Engineering & East Skokie Drainage District Chris Johnson Resident Chris Yoder Midwest Biodiversity Institute Christine Davis Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Damon Cederberg Libertyville Township Dave Miller North Shore Water Reclamation District Drew Irvin Village of Lake Bluff Dudley Onderdonk Resident Edward Wilmes City of North Chicago Emmanuel Gomez City of Highland Park Eric Otto Forest Preserve District of Cook County Erin Pande ERA Consultants Henrietta Saunders Resident Jacob Jozefowski Lake County Stormwater Management Commission James Bernahl Village of Winnetka James Tigue Village of Glencoe Jeff Edstrom Illinois Coastal Management Program Jeff Nehila Deerfield Park District Jim Baxa Village of Northbrook Jim Jabcon Chicago Botanical Garden Joan O’Shaughnessy Chicago Botanical Garden John Quail Friends of the Chicago River Jonathan Happ Libertyville Township Justin Vick Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

Name Organization Kate Amoruso Village of Wilmette Kurt Woolford Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Larry Bridges East Skokie Drainage District Linda Englund Illinois Sierra Club Lisa Mende Resident Lisa Woolford Integrated Lakes Management Mac McKavanagh Resident Maria Lasday Village of Bannockburn Marion Cartwright Resident Mark Dupree Trotter & Associates, Inc. Matt Ueltzen Lake County Forest Preserve District Melanie Rummel City of Lake Forest Michael Prusila Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Michael Warner Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Mike Adam Lake County Health Department Patty Werner Resident Paula Miller Village of Morton Grove Penny Bouchard Baxter and Woodman Peter Nagle Chicago Botanical Garden Rebecca Connolly Stantec Rob Flood North Shore Water Reclamation District Robert Ells City of Lake Forest Robyn Flakne Village of Glenview Rosemary Heilemann Illinois Sierra Club Ryan London Lake Forest Open Lands Association Scott Griffith Christopher B. Burke Engineering Steven Waters North Shore Water Reclamation District Tatiana Papakos Resident Ted Anderson James Anderson Company Tom Polzin Hey & Associates Vern Witthuhn Strand Associates Wally Dittrich Village of Lincolnshire

PDHs are self-reporting. If attendees want to apply NBWW meetings towards their professional license, keep the certificate, agenda, and minutes with sign-in sheets. Acceptance of these materials for credit is at the discretion of the licensing authority.

MS4 Program BMP fulfillment. If attendees want to apply NBWW meetings and education towards their MS4 Program BMP Measurable Goals, keep the certificate, agenda and minutes with sign-in sheets. Acceptance of these materials for MS4 program credit is at the discretion of the Illinois EPA.

  North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) Budget  Projected Revenue and Expenses

Actual FY2019 Projected FY2020 Actual FY2020 Projected FY2021REVENUE

Dues ‐ Membership dues $127,806.00 $127,806.00 118,731.00$                 $127,806.00WMAG Local Grant ‐ Awarded Jan. 2018Carryover Addition 59,069.58 80,236.27$                   80,236.27$                   $101,956.77Other 26.21$                          

Total Revenue $186,875.58 $208,042.27 $198,993.48 $229,762.77

EXPENSES

Education  $                                ‐   Consultants ‐  Technical Support 3,712.50$                    Consultants ‐  Administrative Services 15,277.35$                  Consultants ‐  MBI Monitoring Compilation and Statistics (2018/2019) 18,339.37$                  Contractuals ‐ NSWRD ‐ Water Column Chemistry Monitoring & Sediment Analysis  46,178.25$                  

Contractuals ‐ MBI ‐ Bioassessment Monitoring/Sediment Collection (2019/2020)14 sites FY19

23,131.84$                  

2020Consultants ‐ Administrative & Technical Support 19,000.00$                   16,211.75$                  Education (Workshops) 300.00$                       Consultants ‐  MBI Year 2, Part 2;  Year 3, Part 1 Contract & IPS Model 54,673.45$                   51,364.08$                  Contractuals ‐ NSWRD ‐ Water Column Chemistry Monitoring  43,166.00$                   25,392.50$                  IPS Model Contribution ‐ DRSCW  7,000.00$                     4,068.38$                    2021Consultants ‐ Administrative & Technical Support 19,000.00$                  IPS & NARP Assistance (if necessary) ‐ separate scope item 5,000.00$                    Education 300.00$                       Consultants ‐  MBI Year 3, Part 2;  Year 4, Part 1 Contract 47,595.05$                  Contractuals ‐ NSWRD ‐ Water Column Chemistry Monitoring & Sediment Analysis  46,327.50$                  NARP Workplan 64,500.00$                 MBI IPS Model ‐ Training 8,000.00$                   

Total Expenses $106,639.31 $124,139.45 97,036.71$                   190,722.55$                

Unexpended Carryover/Reserve $80,236.27 $83,902.82 $101,956.77 39,040$                       

2019

1

REQUEST FOR XXXXXX

for a PRELIMINARY NUTRIENT ASSESSMENT REDUCTION PLAN WORKPLAN DEVELOPMENT

1. INTRODUCTION The North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) anticipates the regulatory need to develop a Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan (NARP) Workplan by December 31, 2021 and a NARP by December 31, 2024. The NARP is a requirement in the Special Conditions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permits for major publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) in Illinois. In addition, Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) in the watershed have nutrient-related conditions in their general permits, specifically requiring that they provide a schedule for implementing wasteload allocation provisions and other nutrients of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). The purpose of the NARP is to identify phosphorus input reductions from point sources, non-point sources and other measures needed in the North Branch Chicago River watershed (See Appendix A for a map of the North Branch Chicago River watershed area) to help ensure that dissolved oxygen and offensive aquatic algae and aquatic plant criteria are met. The NBWW is requesting a XXXXX from qualified interested firms to prepare a Preliminary NARP Workplan. The NBWW intends to utilize the Preliminary NARP Workplan to plan and budget for the multi-year development and completion of a NBWW NARP to meet the regulatory deadline of December 31, 2024.

2. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Preliminary NARP Workplan to be prepared by the selected firm shall include the following elements:

1. Identify necessary components to be incorporated into a NBWW NARP based on requirements currently being promulgated by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA).

2. Review North Branch Chicago River Watershed background data, previous watershed studies and plans, all water quality monitoring data applicable to the development of a NBWW NARP.

3. Identify missing data or components that will be a regulatory requirement for the development of a NBWW NARP.

4. Develop a scope and schedule for the development and completion of a NBWW NARP including milestones for the completion of critical tasks.

5. Develop cost estimates to complete individual tasks associated with development of a NBWW NARP and provide a schedule of estimated fiscal year expenditures to aid the NBWW in budgeting future expenditures needed to develop and complete the NARP.

3. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Interested firms responding to this request for proposals must provide the following information with their proposals:

1. Statement of qualifications and discussion of firm’s specific abilities and project approach to provide the required services to successfully complete the Preliminary NARP Workplan.

2. Resumes of key personnel who may be assigned to the project and their office location.

Preliminary Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan (NARP) Workplan Development Request for XXXXX

2

3. Experience and past record in completing nutrient assessment reduction plans and watershed-based projects of a similar nature.

4. Preliminary schedule outlining completion of key tasks (Section 2, Item 4).

5. Proof that firm is licensed to provide professional engineering services in the State of Illinois.

6. List of tasks if any that firm intends to subcontract to a sub consultant and name(s) and location(s) of sub consultant(s).

7. Three references for which the firm has provided similar professional services; reference information must include: client name, project description, client contact person, address, telephone number, and firm’s key personnel assigned to the referenced project.

8. A statement summarizing the firm’s insurance coverage, including general liability, professional liability, errors and omissions, automobile and workers’ compensation carried by the firm.

9. Description of any legal action brought against the firm in the past five (5) years and the resolution of the action.

10. Other factors that the firm may deem helpful in evaluating its proposal submittal.

4. PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPECTATIONS The selected firm will plan, schedule, and control the activities that must be completed to successfully complete the Preliminary NARP Workplan. This includes:

1. Scheduling of and attendance at a kickoff meeting with the NBWW Coordinator and other, as appropriate, to discuss the workplan outline, review existing information, discuss the project schedule, and establish a working understanding among the parties as to the activities that must be completed to successfully complete the Preliminary NARP Workplan. The selected firm, with assistance from the NBWW Coordinator, will be responsible for scheduling the project kickoff meeting and for notifying attendees thereof.

2. Coordination with the NBWW Coordinator throughout the duration of the project to provide regular updates on the project, including items such as completed and planned work, items requiring clarification or input from the NBWW Coordinator or others, as appropriate, items affecting the project schedule, and any other concerns affecting the completion of the Preliminary NARP Workplan.

3. Scheduling of and attendance of up to four progress meetings with the NBWW Coordinator and others, as appropriate, to discuss the project and review the work completed to date. The selected firm will be responsible for scheduling the progress meetings and for notifying attendees thereof. These progress meetings may be conducted via virtually.

5. NARP WORKPLAN DEADLINES The draft version of the Preliminary NARP Workplan shall be completed no later than August 31, 2021, with a final completion date of November 30, 2021. The firm should expect NBWW to provide comments to the draft Preliminary NARP Workplan that will need to be revised for the final version.

6. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

1. Request for proposal submittals will ONLY by accepted by an electronic bid submission for the Preliminary Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan (NARP) Workplan Development. See the NARP Request for Proposal Cover Sheet for Submittal Instructions through Lake County’s purchasing portal (www.lakecountypurchasingportal.com).

Preliminary Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan (NARP) Workplan Development Request for XXXXX

3

2. Deadline for Submission: 4:00 pm on Monday, December 21, 2020. Late submissions may not be accepted or considered. Please email NBWW Coordinator Ashley Strelcheck at astrelcheck@lakecountyil.gov to receive confirmation that we have successfully received your submissions.

3. All proposal submittals become the property of the DRWW and shall be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

4. The following documents are submitted with and made a condition of this bid: Bidder’s Subcontractor and Supplier Form, Responsible Bidder Affidavit and Vendor Disclosure Form.

7. COMPLIANCE WITH 50 ILCS 510/ Procurement of professional services for the Preliminary Nutrient Assessment Reduction Plan Workplan Development, including public notice, evaluation, selection and contract negotiation shall be performed by the NBWW in compliance with 50 ILCS 510/, the Local Government Professional Services Selection Act.

FY2021 Technical Services Agreement Midwest Biodiversity Institute

1 U:\PLANNING\North Branch Chicago River Workgroup\Agreements-Contracts\MBI\Year 3 Part 2, Year 4 Part 1 Contract\FY21_NBWW.MBI.Contract.docx

TECHNICAL SERVICES AGREEMENT between the NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER WATERSHED WORKGROUP

and MIDWEST BIODIVERSITY INSTITUTE for

BIOASSESSMENT MONITORING

This is an agreement (Agreement) by and between the NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER WATERSHED WORKGROUP, 500 West Winchester Road, Libertyville, Illinois 60048 (NBWW) and MIDWEST BIODIVERSITY INSTITUTE P.O. Box 21567, Columbus, OH 43221-0561 (CONTRACTOR).

PURPOSE

The NBWW wishes to engage the Contractor to provide technical services to assist the NBWW in conducting the monitoring program herein called the bioassessment in the North Branch Chicago River watershed located in Lake and Cook Counties, Illinois. The bioassessment program will satisfactorily implement a biological assessment program, evaluating whether the North Branch Chicago River watershed within the NBWW service area meets biological criteria that support water quality management goals.

SERVICES

The Contractor will be responsible to implement the bioassessment program consisting of the tasks defined in Attachment A, scope of work.

Project Management and Data Analysis: Annually, all data shall be provided electronically to the NBWW and ultimately appended to the project database. This report will be provided electronically and as a hard copy, with chain-of-custody forms and laboratory reports attached. Project management reports for FY2021 will consist of monthly progress reports highlighting work accomplished, work planned for the upcoming month, budget remaining, and any issues and proposed resolution. The Contractor will attend up to two meetings with the NBWW at locations within the project area during the course of the project. Deliverables: electronic data in format specified by NBWW, monthly progress reports.

COMPENSATION

The Contractor agrees to perform the Scope of Services and furnish the items included in the Scope of Services for a fee (Agreement Amount) not to exceed $47,595.05. The NBWW agrees to pay the Contractor for a total project cost not to exceed $47,595.05. The Contractor shall furnish the NBWW with an itemized invoice on a monthly basis. Invoices shall describe the work completed; show the actual number hours worked by team member; amount of budget remaining; and actual travel and other expenses that have occurred. The NBWW Administrative Agent shall pay invoices in compliance with the Illinois Local Government Prompt Payment Act (50 ILCS 505/1, et seq.).

FY2021 Technical Services Agreement Midwest Biodiversity Institute

2 U:\PLANNING\North Branch Chicago River Workgroup\Agreements-Contracts\MBI\Year 3 Part 2, Year 4 Part 1 Contract\FY21_NBWW.MBI.Contract.docx

TERMS and CONDITIONS

1. The NBWW may, by written Order, make changes in the scope of work if such changes are within the general scope of the Agreement. If such changes cause an increase or decrease in the Contractor’s cost or the time required to complete the project, the parties hereto shall agree to an adjustment in the Agreement Amount, prior to issuance of the Change Order. Adjustment of the Agreement Amount shall be based on the estimated change in the number of staff hours required plus any changes in the Contractor’s expense. The Contractor will not be compensated for additional services performed without an approved Change Order.

2. The NBWW may at any time terminate this Agreement in whole or in part by ten day written or

telegraphic notice or verbal notice confirmed in writing. Upon termination for convenience of the NBWW, the NBWW will assume responsibility for services rendered and costs incurred prior to notification. Any and all services, property, publications or materials provided during or resulting from the Contractor shall be the property of the NBWW.

3. On December 1, Contractor shall send a full invoice reconciliation for the calendar year to NBWW. 4. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of Illinois. 5. Certificates of insurance shall be provided naming the North Branch Chicago River Watershed

Workgroup, Lake County Division of Transportation, Lake County Forest Preserve District, and Lake County Stormwater Management Commission named as additionally insured.

6. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties

hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof.

7. This agreement shall not be assigned, altered or modified without the express written consent of both parties except as provided in paragraph one above. The Contractor shall not reject any reasonable change proposed in the best interest of the project by NBWW.

NOTICES AND COMMUNICATION

All notices and communications given to either party by the other relative to this agreement shall be addressed to the respective parties as follows: To the NBWW: North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup 500 West Winchester Road, Libertyville, Illinois 60048 ATTENTION: Ashley Strelcheck, NBWW Coordinator astrelcheck@lakecountyil.gov To the Contractor: Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561, Columbus, OH 43221-0561

ATTENTION: Chris Yoder, Project Manager cyoder@mwbinst.com

FY2021 Technical Services Agreement Midwest Biodiversity Institute

3 U:\PLANNING\North Branch Chicago River Workgroup\Agreements-Contracts\MBI\Year 3 Part 2, Year 4 Part 1 Contract\FY21_NBWW.MBI.Contract.docx

For the NBWW: Attest: ____________________________ ___________________________ Brandon Janes, President NBWW NBWW Date: _______________________ For the Contractor: Attest: ____________________________ ____________________________ Pete Precario, Executive Director Allison Boehler, Administrative Manager Midwest Biodiversity Institute Midwest Biodiversity Institute Date: ____ ___________

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

North Branch Chicago River Watershed Bioassessment Monitoring Scope of Work

Year 3, Part 2 Data Analysis and Reporting Year 4, Part 1 Second Round Monitoring

Integration with NE Illinois IPS December 1, 2020 – November 30, 2021

North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) Lake County Stormwater Management Commission

500 W. Winchester Rd. Suite 201

Libertyville, IL 60048

October 23, 2020

Submitted by:

Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561

Columbus, OH 43221-0561 www.midwestbiodiversity.org

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

1

North Branch Chicago River Watershed Bioassessment Monitoring SOW Year 3, Part 2 Data Analysis and Reporting Year 4, Part 1 Second Round Monitoring

December 1, 2020 – November 30, 2021

Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561

Columbus, OH 43221-0561 www.midwestbiodiversity.org

Chris O. Yoder, Project Manager The Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI) was selected by the North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) to perform a biological and water quality assessment of the North Branch Chicago River watershed in Lake and Cook Co., IL in 2018. Two years of field work completed in 2018 and 2019 supported data analysis and a draft monitoring report submitted in 2020. A third year of field sampling beginning with the Year 3, Part 1 sites was completed in September 2020. This 2021 County Fiscal Year (CFY) Scope of Work (SOW) is based on meeting a schedule of tasks within a project period of December 1, 2020-November 30, 2021 and within a budget (Appendix A) that supports Years 3 and 4 of the rotating monitoring plan1, producing data and results for Year 3, Part 2 and monitoring of Year 4, Part 1 sites. The 2021 budget is aligned with the CFY that begins on December 1, 2020 and ends on November 30, 2021. As a result the project scope for any one project cycle will necessarily straddle two CFYs. This SOW for Year 3, Part 2 (2020) Tasks 3, 4, and 5 totals $20,787.90 and for Year 4, Part 1 (2021) Tasks 1 & 2 (see below) totals $26,807.15.

A. Project Scope of Work (SOW) The SOW includes tasks and subtasks and adheres to the description of the project as depicted in Figure 1. There are five major tasks to be accomplished in CFY 2021 as follows:

Task 1 – Mobilization & Planning Year 4, Part 1 (Fiscal Year 2021) This task is for 2021 mobilization and planning in accordance with the NBWW 2020-21 monitoring rotation that is described in the 2018 NBWW Monitoring Strategy. The CFY 2021 SOW includes Year 4, Part 2 and includes sampling chemical, biological, and habitat parameters at 14 sites on the West and Middle Fork mainstems.

Task 2 – Field Sampling Year 4, Part 1 (Fiscal Year 2021) This task includes all of the activities focused on the collection and processing of the field collected samples and includes three subtasks – 2A Datasonde deployment; 2B – Fish, Habitat, and Sediment Sampling; and 2C – Macroinvertebrate Sampling. All 14 sites will be sampled for

1 2018 Monitoring Strategy for the North Branch Chicago River Watershed, North Branch Watershed Workgroup.

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

2

Figure 1. Flow chart of the schedule and sequence of tasks and subtasks for CFY 2021 including Year 4, Part 1 monitoring (Tasks 1 and 2) and completion of the Year 3, Part 2 data analysis (Tasks 3, 4, and 5).

MBI North Branch Watershed Bioassessment Monitoring Tasks & Schedule: CFY 2021

Task 1 – Year 4, Part 1 Mobilization & Planning

June 1-30, 2021

Task 3 – Year 3, Part 2 Lab Sample Processing

Fish Vouchers (3A)Dec. 1-31, 2021

Macroinvertebrates (3B)Jan. 1-April 30, 2021

Task 2 – Year 4, Part 1 Field SamplingTask 2A – Datasonde

July 15-August 30, 2021 (7 sites)Task 2B – Fish/Habitat/Sediment

SamplingJuly 1-Oct. 15, 2021 (14 sites)

Task 2C – Macroinvertebrate SamplingJuly 1-Sept. 30, 2021 (14 sites)

Task 4 – Year 3, Part 2 Data ManagementJan. 1-May 15, 2021

Task 5 – Year 3, Part 2 Data Production & Analysis

Jan. 1-May 31, 2021SECOND REPORT in CFY 2022

IPS Update in CFY 2022

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

3

biota and habitat, sediment chemistry, and seven (7) sites for Datasonde deployment and benthic chlorophyll a sample collection (Figure 1). Each subtask is described as follows: Task 2A – Datasonde Deployment Datasonde units will be deployed at seven (7) locations in the West and Middle Fork mainstems for 3-4 day periods during low river flow and maximum summer ambient temperatures. Continuously recorded parameters include dissolved oxygen (D.O.), pH, temperature, and specific conductance. Benthic chlorophyll α samples will also be collected at these same locations. Task 2B – Fish/Habitat/Sediment Sampling This includes the sampling of the fish assemblage in accordance with the QAPP and within a seasonal index period of July 1-October 15 at 14 sites with a single sampling pass at each. Habitat will be assessed at the same sites and using the QHEI. Sediment samples for chemical analysis will be collected at all 14 sites following methods prescribed by the NBWW QAPP. The sediment collections will be made in October. Task 2C – Macroinvertebrate Sampling Macroinvertebrate sampling will likewise be conducted under the specifications of the NBWW QAPP and within a seasonal index period of July 1-September 30. A site description that documents the details of the Illinois EPA multihabitat method will be recorded at each of the 14 sites. The collections will precede the fish sampling passes in July or August with one repeat site during the first fish sampling pass.

Task 3 – Biological Laboratory (CFY 2021; Year 3, Part 2 Bioassessment) This task includes all post-field laboratory tasks including the verification of fish identifications (Task 3A) and the processing, sorting, and identification of macroinvertebrates (Task 3B) in accordance with the NBWW QAPP and IEPA multihabitat methods. Raw macroinvertebrate samples will be reduced to a 300 organism subsample and identified to the lowest taxonomic level that is practicable.

Task 4 – Data Management (CFY 2021; Year 3, Part 2 Bioassessment)

This is a post-field and post-laboratory task that includes the organization and logging of field and lab sheets, entering data, and proofing data entry. MBI will utilize its own version of the Ohio ECOS data management system which has been used to support other Illinois surveys.

Task 5 – Data Analysis and Reporting (CFY 2020; Year 3, Part 2 Bioassessment) The final task is the production of the datasets in support of producing a second comprehensive report in CFY 2022 detailing the data and the conclusions based on the analyses of that data. This includes the preliminary analysis of all field collected data including the analysis of the chemical/physical data, POTW loadings data, calculation of the Illinois fish and

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

4

macroinvertebrate IBI scores and metrics, and the preliminary assignment of causes and sources to any documented biological impairments. The SOW allocates all of the data analysis to 2021 after all of the data becomes available following lab processing and data management. The following outline will be used for the second (Part 2) report (in addition to a cover page and table of contents) to be produced in CFY 2022: Executive Summary A brief synopsis of the findings of the watershed monitoring including a quantitative description of impairments, major causes and sources if impairment, opportunities for restoration and protection, and recommendations for future monitoring. Section 1 – Introduction This will describe the purposes of the monitoring and the goals and objectives of the NBWW for using monitoring data to support water quality decision-making. Section 2 – Study Area Description A detailed description of the study area including maps and lists of sites, major pollution sources, dams, and other features that relate to the watershed biological assessment. This will benefit from NBWW input upfront in the process. Section 3 – Methods A description and summary of all chemical, physical, and biological methods used to collect the data, data management, and data analysis including the delineation of impairments, a description of the process used to assign causes and sources, and an approach for conducting use attainability analyses. Section 4 – Results A comprehensive reporting of chemical, physical, and biological quality using tables and graphs to report the results. This will include an assessment of POTW pollutant loadings, chemical water quality criteria exceedances, exceedances of biologically relevant thresholds, sediment chemical threshold exceedances, analysis of habitat attributes, and reporting fish and macroinvertebrate IBI and metrics results. Section 5 – Synthesis of Results This section will report the results of the data analyses and causal assessment conducted under Task 5. This where the conclusions about causes and sources are explained including any patterns observed in the study area such as the differences in results observed between POTW influenced and nonpoint source influenced sites and reaches. Trends over time will also be assessed between the 2018-19 and 2020-21 results along with any changes in the status of IPS factors and variables. The initial reporting of results was included in the assessment of the biological and chemical/physical results and an assessment of aquatic life use support status for the 25 sites sampled in 2018-19 via the first comprehensive report in 2020. This consisted of a draft report for the 2018-19 data at all 25 sites in the North Branch Chicago River watershed that is currently in revision to a final report.

MBI NBWW Bioassessment SOW CFY 2021 October 23, 2020

5

Appendix A. CFY 2021 NBWW Bioassessment Budget Summary

Task Description Quote

Year 3, Part 2 Budget Summary (11 sites)

3 – Biological Laboratory (CFY 2021; Year 3, Part 2 Lab Work)

• Fish vouchers • Macroinvertebrate sample sorting • Macroinvertebrate identifications

$10,202.51

4 – Data Management (CFY 2021; Year 3, Part 2 Data Mgmt.)

• Data entry & retrieval, QA/QC $3,823.42

5 – Data Analysis (CFY 2021; Year 3, Part 2 preliminary analysis)

• Analysis of chemical, biological, and habitat data.

• Pre-report data analysis preparations $6,761.97

Year 3, Part 2 - Tasks 3, 4, & 5 Total: $20,787.90

Year 4, Part 1 Budget Summary (14 biological sites, 11 sediment sites, 7 Datasonde sites)

1 - Mobilization & Planning (CFY 2021; Year 4, Part 1 Field)

• QAPP update • Pre-field planning • Mobilize crews

$3,970.13

2 – Field Sampling (CFY 2021; Year 4, Part 1 Field)

• Datasonde deployment • Benthic chlorophyll α analysis • Fish/habitat sampling • Macroinvertebrate sampling

$22,837.02

Year 4, Part 1 - Tasks 1 & 2 Total: $26,807.15

Year 3, Part 2 & Year 4, Part 1 Grand Total: $47,595.05

NOTES: 1. 2021 costs reflect an annual escalation of 3% for personnel and some direct costs including full mileage to and

from Ohio.

1

2021 TECHNICAL SERVICES AGREEMENT between the NORTH BRANCH WATERSHED WORKGROUP

and NORTH SHORE WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT for

WATER CHEMISTRY MONITORING

1.This is an agreement (Agreement) by and between the NORTH BRANCH WATERSHED WORKGROUP, 500 West Winchester Road, Libertyville, Illinois 60048 (NBWW) and NORTH SHORE WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT, 14770 W.

Wm. Koepsel Drive, P.O. Box 750, Gurnee, Illinois 60031 (DISTRICT).

PURPOSE

The NBWW wishes to engage the District to provide technical services to assist the NBWW in conducting water chemistry monitoring within the North Branch of the Chicago River watershed (Watershed) located in Lake and Cook Counties, Illinois. The water chemistry monitoring consists of the collection and analyses of water column samples and the analyses of sediment samples collected by others within the Watershed. The NBWW has selected 25 sampling locations within the North Branch of the Chicago River watershed in Lake and Cook Counties, Illinois.

SERVICES

The District will perform the water chemistry monitoring by collecting and analyzing water column samples and analyzing sediment samples collected by others and providing the analytical data to the NBWW in accordance with the IEPA-approved NBWW Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). The detailed Scope of Services to be provided by the District to accomplish the NBWW’s objectives for the water chemistry monitoring is further described in Attachment A, 2021 North Branch Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) Water Chemistry Scope of Work.

COMPENSATION

1. The District agrees to perform the Scope of Services and furnish the items included in the Scope of Services for a fee (Agreement Amount) not to exceed $35,302.50 for water column sampling and analysis and $11,025.00 for sediment analysis, for a total not to exceed fee of $46,327.50 in accordance with the unit price rates identified in Attachment B – Project Budget.

2. The District shall bill the NBWW monthly, with net payment due in accordance with the Illinois

Local Prompt Payment Act (50 ILCS 505/1 et seq.). Itemized invoices shall be submitted detailing the work completed during the current billing period.

3. The District will notify NBWW if scope changes require modifications to the Agreement

Amount. Services relative to scope changes will not be initiated without authorization from NBWW.

2

SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES

Generally, sampling will be conducted at the appropriate sites in accordance with the Sampling Schedule below within a single week per month and approximately the same week every month. Sampling Schedule

February 2021

May 2021

July 2021

August 2021

September 2021

October 2021 Project Deliverables:

Electronic data deliverables (EDDs) and the sample results in an editable Microsoft Excel file.

A final report consisting of a pdf file of all analytical results, analytical methods, chain(s) of custody, and a field log. Any sampling or testing observations which may have affected accuracy will be noted in the report narrative. Any applicable data qualifiers (e.g., matrix spike failure) will also be noted in the project specific comments portion of the report narrative page.

TERMS and CONDITIONS

1. The NBWW may, by written Order, make changes in the scope of work if such changes are within the general scope of the Agreement. If such changes cause an increase or decrease in the District’s cost or the time required to complete the project, the parties hereto shall agree to an adjustment in the Agreement Amount, prior to issuance of the Change Order. Adjustment of the Agreement Amount shall be based on the unit price rates identified in Attachment B – Project Budget. The District will not perform additional services without an approved Change Order.

2. Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing thirty (30) day written notice to the other

party. NBWW shall pay District for all expenses incurred prior to the date of termination. Any and all services or deliverables provided to the NBWW by the District shall remain the property of the NBWW.

3. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of Illinois.

4. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties

hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. 5. This Agreement shall not be assigned, altered or modified without the express written consent of

both parties.

4

ATTTACHMENT A

2021 North Branch Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) Water Chemistry

Scope of Work

The North Branch Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) proposes to contract with the North Shore

Water Reclamation District (NSWRD) to perform 2021 water chemistry monitoring in the North

Branch of the Chicago River watershed located in Lake and Cook Counties, Illinois by

collecting and analyzing water column samples and analyzing sediment samples collected by

others and providing the analytical data to the NBWW in accordance with the IEPA-approved

NBWW Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). The water chemistry monitoring plan outlined

in this 2021 Scope of Work (SOW) will support the NBWW’s biological assessment program

and aid the NBWW’s evaluation whether the North Branch Chicago River watershed meets

criteria that support water quality goals.

Sampling Schedule

Tier 1, 2, & 3 Water Column Sampling and Analysis

Water column sampling and analysis will begin in February 2021, after Technical Services

Agreement approval. The North Shore Water Reclamation District’s (NSWRD) Laboratory will

sample twenty-five (25) Tier 1 and 2 sites over a one week period. The sampling will occur

during the following months: February, May, August and October 2021. NSWRD will sample

fourteen (14) Tier 3 sites in July and September. Sample collection will follow methods

outlined in the NSWRD Surface Water Collection Procedures (Attachment C). Samples will be

analyzed for the water quality monitoring parameters listed in Table 1. All sample analyses will

follow methods listed in Table 2 and the NSWRD Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)

outlined in the NSWRD Quality Assurance Project Plan. The reporting limits and the

laboratory method detection limits (MDLs) are listed in Table 2 (Test Methods and Reporting

Limits).

Field QA/QC Samples

For every 20 samples collected, NSWRD will also collect a blank and duplicate samples. The

blank will be made up in the field by pouring deionized water into the same type of sample

containers that are used for the surface water. The deionized water will be NSWRD Lab

reagent grade water. This water will be placed inside a pre-cleaned container.

5

Table 1: Parameters and Frequency of Water Column Sampling 2021

Parameter NBWW Frequency Tier 1 Tier 2

Number of Sample Events

Chloride February, May, August, October 4 4

Conductivity February, May, August, October 4 4

pH February, May, August, October 4 4

TSS February, May, August, October 4 4

Volatile Suspended Solids February, May, August, October 4 4

DO February, May, August, October 4 4

Temperature February, May, August, October 4 4

BOD5 February, May, August, October 4 4

Arsenic August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Calcium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Magnesium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Sodium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Barium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Cadmium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Chromium August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Iron August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Lead August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Mercury low level August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Copper August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Nickel August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Silver August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Zinc August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Ammonia February, May, August, October 4 4

Total Nitrates (NO2+NO3) February, May, August, October 4 4

TKN February, May, August, October 4 4

Total phosphorus February, May, August, October 4 4

Chlorophyll a May, August, October 3 3

E. coli February, May, August, October 4 4

PCBs August, under low flow conditions 1 0

Pesticides August, under low flow conditions 1 0

PNAs August, under low flow conditions 1 0

VOCs August, under low flow conditions 1 0

6

Table 2: Test Methods and Reporting Limits

Tier 3

Parameter NBWW Frequency Number of Sample Events

Chloride July, September 2

Conductivity July, September 2

DO July, September 2

Temperature July, September 2

pH July, September 2

BOD5 July, September 2

Total Nitrates (NO2+NO3) July, September 2

Total phosphorus July, September 2

Chlorophyll a July, September 2

E. coli July, September 2

Parameter Method MDL/Reporting Limit

Demand

BOD5 SM5210B 1 mg/L

DO YSI field meter 0.1 mg/L

Chloride SM 4500-Cl- E 5 mg/L

Conductivity YSI field meter 1 umhos/cm

pH Orion field meter 0.1 units

Temperature 170.1 0.1°C

TSS SM 2450D 1 mg/L

TVSS SM 2540E 1 mg/L

Metals

Arsenic 200.8, EPA 1.0 ug/L

Barium 200.8, EPA 2.5 ug/L

Cadium 200.8, EPA 0.50 ug/L

Calcium SM 3111B 0.0002 mg/L

Chromium 200.8, EPA 5.0 ug/L

Copper 200.8, EPA 2.0 ug/L

Iron 200.8, EPA 100 ug/L

Lead 200.8, EPA 0.5 ug/L

Magnesium SM 3111B 0.0002 mg/L

Mercury (LOW LEVEL) 1631 0.50 ng/L

Nickel 200.8, EPA 2.0 ug/L

Silver 200.8, EPA 0.50 ug/L

Sodium SM 3111B 0.0002 mg/L

Zinc 200.8, EPA 20 ug/L

Nutrients

Ammonia SM4500 NH3 D 0.1 mg/L

Chlorophyll a 445/446, EPA

Phosphorous, Total EPA 365.1, Re. 2.0 0.041 mg/L

7

TKN SM 4500Norg C 0.40 mg/L

Total Nitrates (NO2 + NO3) EPA 353.2 Rev 2.0 0.10 mg/L

Bacteria

E-coli 9223B 1CFU/100ml

Water Organics

PCBs SW846 8082 0.4 ug/L

Pesticides SW846 8081 0.04 ug/L/ 0.08 Tech Chlordane

PNAs SW846 8270 1.0 ug/L

VOCs SW846 8260 0.50 - 100 ug/L

Table 2 (continued) : Test Methods and Reporting Limits

Method MDL/Reporting Limit

Sediment Organics

PCBs SW848 8082 37-96 ug/kg, dry

Pesticides SW848 8081

56-190 ug/kg, dry (toxaphene 550-1900; tech chlordane 200-750)

PNAs/Hexachlorobenzene SW848 8270 220-4000 ug/kg, dry

Herbicides (2, 4, D & 2, 4, 5 TP) SW846 8151 760-2000 ug/kg, dry

VOC's SW848 8260 67 ug/kg, dry

Sediment inorganics

Cyanide (LOW LEVEL) 9014 2.9 mg/kg, dry

Phenols 9066 2.9 mg/kg, dry

Phosphorus 4500 P E 82 mg/kg, dry

TKN 4500 NH3 H 225 mg/kg, dry

Sediment Metals

Aluminum SW846 6010B 110 mg/kg, dry

Arsenic SW846 6010B 5.3 mg/kg, dry

Barium SW846 6010B 5.3 mg/kg, dry

Beryllium SW846 6010B 2.1 mg/kg, dry

Boron SW846 6010B 26 mg/kg, dry

Cadmium SW846 6010B 1.1 mg/kg, dry

Chromium SW846 6010B 5.3 mg/kg, dry

Cobalt SW846 6010B 2.6 mg/kg, dry

Copper SW846 6010B 5.3 mg/kg, dry

Iron SW846 6010B 110 mg/kg, dry

Lead SW846 6010B 2.6 mg/kg, dry

Manganese SW846 6010B 5.33 mg/kg, dry

Mercury SW846 7471B 95 mg/kg, dry

Nickel SW846 6010B 5.3 mg/kg, dry

Potassium SW846 6010B 260 mg/kg, dry

Silver SW846 6010B 2.6 mg/kg, dry

Sodium SW846 6010B 530 mg/kg, dry

8

Strontium SW846 6010B 2.6 mg/kg, dry

Vanadium SW846 6010B 2.6 mg/kg, dry

Zinc SW846 6010B 11 mg/kg, dry

9

Field Parameters

NSWRD shall perform onsite field analysis for the following parameters:

Conductivity

pH

Temperature

Dissolved Oxygen

The results of these parameters will be reported after each sampling event and on the final

report along with the results of the analyses performed in the laboratory. The field meters

shall be calibrated on a daily basis.

Field Reporting

Field Log

A field log will be kept each day that samples are collected. The field log will include:

Name and signature of the person collecting the samples

Location and sampling site

Weather information

Dates and times of sample collection

Field measurements

Descriptions of any unusual conditions at the sample locations

Chains of Custody

Indication of duplicate sample location

Sample Custody and Handling

Labeling and Storage

All samples will be placed in appropriate containers provided by NSWRD. All containers

will be properly labeled. The duplicate sample will be labeled with the sample location and

identified as “duplicate”. When preservation is required, pre-preserved bottles will be

used. Samples will be placed inside a cooler with wet ice until they reach the laboratory.

Chain of Custody

Proper chain of custody documentation will accompany the collected samples. The chain

of custody will contain the sample IDs, analyses to be performed, date and time of

10

collection, type and number of containers, preservatives added, date and time of transfers,

and the signature of each person involved in custody transfer. The chain of custody will be

placed in a water-resistant plastic bag inside each cooler. Indelible ink will be used on the

container labels and chain of custody records. Upon receipt at the laboratory, sample

temperature will be recorded on the chain of custody form. A copy of the chain of custody

form will be included with the final report.

Sample Preservation

When necessary, preservatives will be added to sample bottles prior to sample collection.

The preservative added will be indicated on the sample bottle.

Sediment Analysis

Sediment samples collected by NBWW’s bioassessment contractor will be submitted to

and analyzed by NSWRD one time per year for the parameters listed in Table 3:

Parameters and Frequency of Sediment Sampling. The reporting limits and the laboratory

method detection limits (MDLs) are listed in Table 2 (Test Methods and Reporting Limits).

NSWRD will analyze 14 sediment samples provided by NBWW’s bioassessment

contractor in 2021. NBWW shall be responsible to ensure its bioassessment contractor

complies with all requirements of the QAPP and as specified herein in the collection,

storage, preservation and transfer of sediment samples to NSWRD.

Project Deliverables

Final Report

The final report will consist of a PDF file of all analytical results, analytical methods,

chain(s) of custody and a field log. Any sampling or testing observations which may have

affected accuracy will be noted in the report narrative. Any applicable data qualifiers (e.g.

matrix spike failure) will also be noted in the project specific comments portion of the report

narrative page.

Electronic Data Deliverable

An electronic data deliverable (EDD) which includes the sample results in an editable

Microsoft Excel file will be included for every report.

Turnaround Time

The results for all analytical analyses will be provided no later than 20 business days

following the date of collection.

11

Table 3: Parameters and Frequency of Sediment Sampling 2021

Parameter NBWW Frequency Tier 1 Tier 2

Number of Sample

Events

Sediment Metals

Aluminum Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Arsenic Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Barium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Beryllium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Boron Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Cadmium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Chromium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Cobalt Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Copper Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Flouride Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Iron Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Lead Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Manganese Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Mercury Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Nickel Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Potassium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Silver Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Sodium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Strontium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Vanadium Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Zinc Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Sediment Organics

PCBs Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Pesticides Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

VOCs/Hexachlorobenzene Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

PNAs Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

TKN Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Phosphorus Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Cyanide (low level) Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Herbicide (2, 4, D, 2, 4, 5, TP) Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1

Phenols Concurrent with bioassessment 1 1 *Sediment sampling does not include a Tier 3.

Attachment B

2021 PRICE QUOTATION

Quoted

Price

Proposed

Quantity Total Tier 1

Proposed

Quantity Total Tier 2

Proposed

Quantity Total Tier 3

Demand

Chloride 12.00$ 40 480.00$ 68 816.00$ 32 384.00$

BOD5 25.00$ 40 1,000.00$ 68 1,700.00$ 32 800.00$

Conductivity* 5.00$ 40 200.00$ 68 340.00$ 32 160.00$

pH* 5.00$ 40 200.00$ 68 340.00$ 32 160.00$

TSS 12.00$ 40 480.00$ 68 816.00$ 0 -$

Volatile Suspended Solids 3.00$ 40 120.00$ 68 204.00$ 0 -$

DO* 5.00$ 40 200.00$ 68 340.00$ 32 160.00$

Temperature* 2.00$ 40 80.00$ 68 136.00$ 32 64.00$

Total 2,760.00$ Total 4,692.00$ Total 1,728.00$

Metals

Metals (Ba,Cd,Cr,Pb,Cu,Ni,Ag,Fe,Zn,As,Ca,Mg,Na) 105.00$ 10 1,050.00$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Low Level Hg 94.50$ 10 945.00$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Total 1,995.00$ Total -$ Total -$

Nutrients

Ammonia 18.00$ 40 720.00$ 68 1,224.00$ 0 -$

Total Nitrates (NO2+NO3) 15.00$ 40 600.00$ 68 1,020.00$ 32 480.00$

TKN 20.00$ 40 800.00$ 68 1,360.00$ 0 -$

Total Phosphorus 20.00$ 40 800.00$ 68 1,360.00$ 32 640.00$

Chlorophyll a 52.00$ 30 1,560.00$ 51 2,652.00$ 32 1,664.00$

Total 4,480.00$ Total 7,616.00$ Total 2,784.00$

Bacteria

E. Coli 25.00$ 40 1,000.00$ 68 1,700.00$ 32 800.00$

Total 1,000.00$ Total 1,700.00$ Total 800.00$

Water Organics

PCBs/Pesticides 173.25$ 10 1,732.50$ 0 -$ 0 -$

PNAs 105.00$ 10 1,050.00$ 0 -$ 0 -$

VOCs 94.50$ 10 945.00$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Total 3,727.50$ Total -$ Total -$

* denotes field measurement Sampling Charge 480.00$ Sampling Charge 1,020.00$ Sampling Charge 420.00$

Note 1: Quantity of samples is estimated Analysis Subtotal 13,962.50$ Analysis Subtotal 14,008.00$ Analysis Subtotal 5,312.00$

Grand Total 14,442.50$ Grand Total 15,028.00$ Grand Total 5,732.00$

100.00$

35,202.50$

35,302.50$

Quotation Accepted By:

Signature Title

Name (Print) Date

Note 2: Field Sampling Charge $15 per site visit

Grand Total =

Total for 6 sample events at 25 sites 2021 =

Overnight shipping for chlorophyll analysis (5 events x $20.00) =

Attachment B

2021 YEAR SEDIMENT PRICE QUOTATION

Quoted

Price

Proposed

Quantity Total Tier 1

Sediment Metals

Metals (19) 89.25$ 15 1,338.75$

Mercury 26.25$ 15 393.75$

Total 1,732.50$

Sediment Organics

PCBs/Pesticides 173.25$ 15 2,598.75$

VOC's 94.50$ 15 1,417.50$

SVOC's (PNA's) 105.00$ 15 1,575.00$

TKN 36.75$ 15 551.25$

Phosphorus 21.00$ 15 315.00$

Cyanide (low) 31.50$ 15 472.50$

Herbicides (2,4,D, 2,4,5 TP) 131.25$ 15 1,968.75$

Phenols 26.25$ 15 393.75$

Total 9,292.50$

Note 1: Quantity of samples is estimated Analysis Subtotal 11,025.00$

Grand Total 11,025.00$

Note 3: If Low Level Hg (1631) is needed

$120/sample

Quotation Accepted By:

Signature Title

Name (Print) Date

Note 2: Field Duplicate QC sample billed as

actual sample (14 sites plus one duplicate)

NSSD Procedure Page 1 of 4

Rev. No.

ATTACHMENT C

Procedure FLD-RIV

Revision No. 0

Org. Date: 04/13/18

Rev. Date

______________________________________________________________________________

TITLE:

Surface Water Collection Procedures

______________________________________________________________________________

WRITTEN BY: APPROVED BY:

Robert Flood Antoinette L. Favero

______________________________________________________________________________

The use of this SOP is governed by the North Shore Water Reclamation

District’s Quality Assurance Manual and associated Quality SOPs.

Implementation of this SOP must always comply with the requirements of

the Quality Assurance Manual and the Quality SOPs.

SCOPE AND APPLICATION:

This SOP is applicable to the collection of representative surface water samples from rivers,

streams, lakes or any other surface waters. This procedure is a grab sample method that utilizes a

stainless steel bucket or dip sampler to collect a surface water grab sample.

SUMMARY OF METHOD:

Sampling situations can vary widely depending on the location and characteristics of the water

body. Generally, a surface water grab sample is accomplished through the use of one of the

following techniques:

Dip sampler

Stainless steel or polyethylene bucket (polyethylene not for collection of organic samples)

Direct method

SAFETY PRECAUTIONS:

1. Personal Protection

Work or disposable gloves are recommended. Hip boots or waders may or may not be

required during sample collection.

NSSD Procedure Page 2 of 4

Rev. No.

2. Chemical hazards

Pre-preserved sample containers may contain hazardous chemicals. Handle all samples

carefully to minimize exposure.

3. Biological Hazards

Water samples may contain potential health hazards. Handle all samples carefully to

minimize exposure.

INTERFERENCES:

The two most common interferences in surface water collection include cross contamination and

improper collection technique.

1. Cross contamination can be eliminated through the use of dedicated or disposable sampling

equipment or proper cleaning/decontamination procedures.

2. Improper sample collection can occur when using contaminated sampling equipment or

poor technique. It is important to collect the sample in the most representative area. Care

should be taken to minimize bottom substrate disturbance and avoid surface scum or debris.

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES:

1. Stainless steel bucket with rope or dip sampler

2. Deionized rinse water

3. Decontamination equipment and supplies

3. Appropriate sample bottles

4. Cooler with ice packs

5. Field Instrumentation

5. Field Log Book and Sample Chain of Custody

REAGENTS AND STANDARDS:

Reagents may be used for preservation of samples. Preservatives will be specific to the analysis

and determined by the laboratory. Cleaning solutions may be used for decontamination of

sampling equipment.

SAMPLE PRESERVATION, CONTAINERS, HANDLING AND STORAGE:

Once samples have been collected, the following procedures should be followed:

1. Transfer the sample into a suitable, properly labeled sample container specific for the

analysis to be performed.

2. Preserve the sample, if appropriate. Pre-preserved sample containers are preferred for

simplicity and convenience. Do not overfill containers if they are pre-preserved.

NSSD Procedure Page 3 of 4

Rev. No.

3. Cap the container securely and cool immediately by placing in a sample cooler with wet ice

or reusable ice packs.

4. Record all relevant information in the sample log book and NSWRD Field Collection

Sheets.

5. Deliver samples to the laboratory and follow NSWRD chain of custody procedures. See the

appropriate section of the NSWRD Laboratory QAP for additional guidance.

QUALITY CONTROL:

All personnel involved in the sample collection process must be properly trained and understand

the sampling SOP. Any deviations must be recorded in the field book and/or on the field

collection sheet. The laboratory supervisor must be notified of any deviations from the SOP and

evaluate appropriately.

All field equipment shall be maintained following manufacturers recommendations. All field

equipment shall be inspected, calibrated and tested prior to sampling events and after the

equipment returns from the field. Any problems encountered or maintenance required must be

noted in the equipment maintenance log book.

CALIBRATION AND STANDARDIZATION:

Field meters must be calibrated daily following manufacturers calibration procedures and

documented in the field instrument calibration log book.

PROCEDURE:

Prior to being used for sample collection or holding, all sampling equipment is decontaminated

and cleaned following procedures outlined in the NSWRD Laboratory Quality Assurance Project

Plan.

1. Preparation

a. Determine the sample locations by performing a general site survey if possible. Prior

knowledge of the locations will aid in determining exact equipment needs and safety

considerations. Sample sites may need to be adjusted based on access, property

boundaries or obstructions.

b. Determine the equipment needs and make sure everything is in working order.

2. Sample Collection

a. Take sample at the specified location. If sampling a river or stream, sample at the

middle of the main channel at mid-depth. Collect the sample from a representative site

on the stream. Try to locate an area where the water is well mixed and the velocity of

flow is great enough that the chance of solids settling is minimal. Depending on the site

NSSD Procedure Page 4 of 4

Rev. No.

characteristics, the sampler may use a bucket, pole sampler or wade in and collect the

sample. Lower the sampling device into the stream. When it is properly positioned,

activate the bucket to collect a sample by tipping the bucket gently. Avoid top floating

debris if possible. It is important not to disturb the bottom substrate during the

collection process. If excess dirt, gravel, or other foreign material is collected, discard the

sample, and repeat the sampling. Once the sample has been collected, fill each sample

bottle to the appropriate mark taking care not to overfill pre-preserved bottles.

b. Field measurements should be performed on site after all of the sample bottles have

been filled.

c. Record collection date, time and field measurements in the field book and/or field

collection sheet.

REFERENCES:

1. North Shore Water Reclamation District Quality Assurance Plan

2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22nd ed,2012.

U:\PLANNING\North Branch Chicago River Workgroup\Agreements-Contracts\SMC_Administrative Services\FY21 IGA\FY21_NBWW_SMC_Coordinator_IGA.docx

AGREEMENT between the

NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER WATERSHED WORKGROUP and the

LAKE COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION for providing ADMINNISTRATIVE AGENT & NARP TECHNICAL SERVICES

WHEREAS, the North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup (NBWW) is an organization

formed individually and collectively, pursuant to the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, 5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.; Article VII, Section 10 of the 1970 Constitution of the State of Illinois; the Local Land Resource Management Planning Act, 50 ILCS 805/1 et seq.; the Illinois Drainage Act, 70 ILCS 605/1 et seq.; and other statutory authority, the Environmental Protection Act, 415 ILCS 5 et seq.; The Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act, 415 ILCS 56/1 et seq.; and other applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (“SMC”) formed pursuant to 55 ILCS 5/5-1062 et seq., providing authority to the Stormwater Management Commission; is desirous of acting as the ‘Administrative Agent’ for the NBWW and having related organizational mission and objectives; and

WHEREAS, the Administrative Agent duties provided to the NBWW shall include but are not limited to, communication and coordination, membership development, website management, financial accounting, meeting implementation following the Illinois Open Meetings Act requirements, providing Illinois Freedom of Information Act services per that Act’s requirements, technical support, providing recommendations and support for purchasing and procurement of contractual services following Illinois Professional Services Selection Act and the Lake County Purchasing Policies when applicable; and

WHEREAS, the NBWW will allow membership dues collected and applied to water quality monitoring program costs; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto, by their respective governing boards, find this Agreement to be fair and to the mutual benefit of the parties hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, the NBWW and the SMC agree, by their authorized representatives, to the following:

1) That the recitals above be and are incorporated by reference as a part of this Agreement.

2) Mutual Agreements. NBWW and SMC agree: a) Sub-consultants hired by the NBWW shall be approved by the NBWW Executive Board and invoices

received shall be paid by SMC from the NBWW account as part of the administrative services provided under this agreement.

b) Mutually review the terms of this agreement, at a minimum, within the second fiscal quarter of each calendar year, to ensure both the SMC services rendered are meeting expectations of the NBWW and that SMC staff expenses are being remunerated appropriately.

3) NBWW Agreements. NBWW agrees as follows: a) The NBWW agrees to allow SMC to perform invoice payments to sub-consultants approved per 2.a)

above.

2

4) SMC Agreements. SMC agrees as follows: a) SMC agrees to provide the Administrative Agent services, effectively and efficiently for an amount

not-to-exceed $19,000 annually. i. SMC agrees each year, starting in January 2020 and annually thereafter, to develop a yearly

budget for the NBWW Executive Board approval and three-year budget estimate, based on projected membership dues received and expenses.

ii. SMC agrees to provide financial reporting of revenues and expenditures on a monthly and year-end basis, so that the NBWW may make informed decisions on financial matters, regarding expenses and dues adjustments that may be necessary per the NBWW bylaws.

b) SMC agrees to provide NARP Coordinator services as needed, towards the development of the NARP workplan for an amount not-to-exceed $5,000.

5) Effective date of agreement: The effective date of this Agreement shall be December 1, 2020.

6) Terms of Agreement: a) The terms of this Agreement are valid until November 30, 2021, at which time this Agreement shall

automatically renew each year thereafter on December 1st provided, however, that an event of termination occurs, then the applicable renewal term shall be shortened to the date of the event of termination.

b) Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days written notice to the other party. In the event of such termination, the NBWW shall reimburse the SMC for eligible workgroup coordinator services and NARP technical services made up to the date of notice of termination, up to the maximum not-to-exceed amount of $24,000.

c) All adjustments, additions, and/or deletions to this Agreement are subject to the written approval of both parties.

d) This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of Illinois.

Agreed and executed by the parties hereto, by their duly authorized representatives, on the date first written above.

North Branch Chicago River Watershed Workgroup By:______________________________ President Attest: ___________________________ Vice-President Lake County Stormwater Management Commission By: _____________________________ Executive Director Attest:___________________________ Chief Engineer