Town of NederlandSource Water Protection Plan

Boulder County, ColoradoJanuary 2015

Written by: Mark Weritz, P.E.Project Manager

Town of Nederland

Coordinated by: Dylan EilerSource Water Specialist

Colorado Rural Water Association

For the Community Water Provider:Town of NederlandPWSID: CO0107538

Cover Photo: Photo of Middle Boulder Creek Valley looking east from Eldora Mountain Resort access road (August2014). Photo by Mark Weritz.

This Source Water Protection Plan for the Town of Nederland was developed using the Colorado Rural WaterAssociation’s Source Water Protection Plan Template.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTSACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................... ...... 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 6

Purpose of the Source Water Protection Plan............................................................................ 6

Protection Plan Development..................................................................................................... 7

Stakeholder Participation in the Planning Process ..................................................................... 7

Steering Committee.................................................................................................................... 8

Development and Implementation Grant .................................................................................. 9

WATER SUPPLY SETTING............................................................................................................... 10

Location and Description .......................................................................................................... 10

Physical Characteristics............................................................................................................. 11

Hydrologic Setting..................................................................................................................... 12

Water Quality Standards....................................................................................................... 13

Impaired Waters ................................................................................................................... 13

Water Quality Data ............................................................................................................... 14

Drinking Water Supply Operations ........................................................................................... 15

Water Supply and Infrastructure .......................................................................................... 15

Water Supply Demand Analysis............................................................................................ 18

OVERVIEW OF COLORADO’S SWAP PROGRAM............................................................................ 20

Source Water Assessment Phase.............................................................................................. 21

Source Water Protection Phase................................................................................................ 21

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT................................................................... 23

Source Water Assessment Report Review................................................................................ 23

Defining the Source Water Protection Area ............................................................................. 23

Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Other Issues of Concern .................................. 26

Priority Strategy ........................................................................................................................ 29

Susceptibility Analysis of Water Sources .................................................................................. 31

DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES AND ISSUES OF CONCERN..................... 32

Forest Fire ............................................................................................................................... .. 32

On Site Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS) .................................................................... 34

Flood and Stormwater Runoff .................................................................................................. 36

Road Maintenance.................................................................................................................... 38

2

Abandoned Mines/Mine Tailings.............................................................................................. 39

Pesticide Application................................................................................................................. 40

Illegal Dumping ......................................................................................................................... 41

Mines and Mineral Resources .................................................................................................. 41

Lake Eldora Water & Sanitation District ................................................................................... 41

Storage Tanks (Regulated and Unregulated)............................................................................ 42

Public Recreation (Fourth of July and Hessie Trailheads)......................................................... 43

Nederland Middle/Senior High School ..................................................................................... 43

Eldora Mountain Resort Operations......................................................................................... 44

Road Spills ............................................................................................................................... .. 44

SUPPLEMETARY DISCUSSION........................................................................................................ 46

Tertiary Zone............................................................................................................................. 46

Integration with the Town Master Infrastructure Plan ............................................................ 47

Municipal Watershed Ordinance.............................................................................................. 47

Integration with the City of Boulder Source Water Master Plan ............................................. 47

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION MEASURES ................................................................................... 49

Best Management Practices ..................................................................................................... 49

Evaluating Effectiveness of Best Management Practices ......................................................... 49

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... ... 56

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... ... 58

3

ACRONYMS

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BMP Best Management Practice

CDOT Colorado Department of Transportation

CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

CRWA Colorado Rural Water Association

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FRS Facility Registry Service

GIS Geographic Information System

MRDS Mineral Resources Data System

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

PSOC Potential Source of Contamination

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SWAA Source Water Assessment Area

SWAP Source Water Assessment and Protection

SWPA Source Water Protection Area

SWPP Source Water Protection Plan

TOT Time of Travel

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

USFS United States Forest Service

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There is a growing effort in Colorado to protect community drinking water sources frompotential contamination. Many communities are taking a proactive approach to prevent thepollution of their drinking water sources by developing a source water protection plan. Asource water protection plan identifies a source water protection area, lists potentialcontaminant sources and outlines best management practices to decrease risks to the watersource. Implementation of a source water protection plan provides an additional layer ofprotection at the local level beyond drinking water regulations.

The Town of Nederland values a clean, high quality drinking water supply and decided to workcollaboratively with area stakeholders, including the City of Boulder, to develop a Source WaterProtection Plan. The source water protection planning effort consisted of public planningmeetings and individual meetings with water operators, government, and agencyrepresentatives during the period between July 2013 and December 2014 at meetings held inNederland. During the development of this Plan, a Steering Committee was formed to developand implement this Source Water Protection Plan. Colorado Rural Water Association wasinstrumental in this effort by providing technical assistance in the development of this SourceWater Protection Plan.

The Town of Nederland obtains its drinking water directly from Middle Boulder Creek at the siteof the water treatment plant (WTP) intake. The Town’s water system and WTP is defined as acommunity water system with the following Public Water System Identification: (PWSID) CO0107538. The first components of the Town’s water system were installed in 1979. The WTPhas been recently updated with the installation of microfiltration treatment equipment in 2010.The Nederland WTP is designed to treat and produce up to 400,000 gallons per day.

The Steering Committee conducted an inventory of potential contaminant sources andidentified other issues of concern within the Source Water Protection Area. Through thisprocess, it was determined that the highest priority potential contaminant sources and/orissues of concern are: Forest Fire, On Site Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS),Flooding/Stormwater Runoff, and Road Maintenance. Other noted water quality threatsinclude: past and future mining activities, fuel storage tanks, public recreation, and thesnowmaking and other operations of the Eldora Mountain Resort.

The Steering Committee developed several best management practices that may help reducethe risks from the potential contaminant sources and other issues of concern. The bestmanagement practices are centered on the themes of building partnerships with communitymembers, businesses, and local decision makers; raising awareness of the value of protectingcommunity drinking water supplies; and empowering local communities to become stewards oftheir drinking water supplies by taking actions to protect their water sources.

The following list highlights best management practices which pertain to the highest prioritypotential contaminant sources and other issues of concern.

5

Forest Fire Partner with the Nederland Fire Protection District, the US Forest Service,and Boulder County to continue fire mitigation around the distribution system andcomplete other mitigation projects in the watershed.Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Cross referral process with the Town ofNederland and Boulder County Public Health on upstream OWTS permitting.Flood and Stormwater Runoff Partner with the Boulder County Department ofTransportation and the USFS to identify erosion mitigation opportunities on or nearroadways and restoration opportunities adjacent to water bodies.Abandoned Mines / Mine Tailings Create and maintain an inventory of abandonedmines within the SWPA and cross reference with the CDPHE and DRMS to determinewhich mines are impaired.Public Recreation Coordinate with the USFS to discuss recreational activities,downstream water quality concerns and management strategies that could be appliedto minimize effects on water quality.

The Steering Committee recognizes that the usefulness of this Source Water Protection Plan liesin its implementation and will begin to execute these best management practices uponcompletion of this Plan. Furthermore, the Town of Nederland and the City of Boulder willcoordinate on mutually beneficial water quality protection efforts since the Town’s SourceWater Protection Area and Tertiary Zone overlap the City’s source waters.

This Plan is a living document that is meant to be updated to address any changes that willinevitably come. The Steering Committee will review this Plan at a frequency of once every 1 to2 years or if circumstances change resulting in the development of new water sources andsource water protection areas, or if new risks are identified.

Middle Boulder Creek looking east (downstream) near Hessie Trailhead.

6

INTRODUCTION

The Town of Nederland operates a community water supply system designed to supply drinkingwater for up to 2000 residents. Drinking water is currently obtained from a surface waterintake area constructed in Middle Boulder Creek. The Town of Nederland recognizes thepotential for contamination of the source of their drinking water, and realizes that it isnecessary to develop a protection plan to prevent the contamination of this valuable resource.Proactive planning and implementing contamination prevention strategies are essential toprotect the long term integrity of their water supply and to limit their costs and liabilities.1

Table 1. Primary Contact Information for Town of Nederland

PWSID PWSName Name Title Address Phone Website

CO0107538

Town ofNederland

AlishaReis

TownAdministrator

P.O. Box 396Nederland, CO

80466

(303) 2583266 www.nederlandco.org

Purpose of the Source Water Protection Plan

The Source Water Protection Plan (SWPP) is a tool for the Town of Nederland to ensure a cleanand high quality drinking water source for current and future generations. This Source WaterProtection Plan is designed to:

Create an awareness of the community’s drinking water sources and the potential risksto surface water and/or groundwater quality within the watershed;

Encourage education and voluntary solutions to alleviate pollution risks;

Promote management practices to protect and enhance the drinking water supply;

Provide for a comprehensive action plan in case of an emergency that threatens ordisrupts the community water supply.

Developing and implementing source water protection measures at the local level (i.e. countyand municipal) will complement existing regulatory protection measures implemented at thestate and federal governmental levels by filling protection gaps that can only be addressed atthe local level.

1 The information contained in this Plan is limited to that available from public records and the Town of Nederland at the time that the Plan waswritten. Other potential contaminant sites or threats to the water supply may exist in the Source Water Protection Area that are not identifiedin this Plan. Furthermore, identification of a site as a “potential contaminant site” should not be interpreted as one that will necessarily causecontamination of the water supply.

7

Protection Plan Development

The Colorado Rural Water Association’s (CRWA) Source Water Protection Specialist, Dylan Eiler,helped facilitate the source water protection planning process. The goal of the CRWA’s SourceWater Protection Program is to assist rural and small communities served by public watersystems to reduce or eliminate the potential risks to drinking water supplies through thedevelopment of Source Water Protection Plans, and provide assistance for the implementationof prevention measures.

The source water protection planning effort consisted of development of a steering committeeand a series of public planning meetings and individual meetings. Information discussed at themeetings helped the Town of Nederland develop an understanding of the issues affectingsource water protection for the community. The Steering Committee then maderecommendations for management approaches to be incorporated into the Source WaterProtection Plan. In addition to the planning meetings, data and other information pertaining toSource Water Protection Area was gathered via public documents, internet research, phonecalls, emails, and field trips to the protection area. A summary of the meetings is representedbelow.

Table 2. Planning Meetings

Date Purpose of Meeting

July 31, 2013First Planning Meeting Presentation on the process of developing a Source WaterProtection Plan for the Town of Nederland. Review of the State’s Source WaterAssessment for Town of Nederland.

August 20, 2013Second Planning Meeting – Delineate Source Water Protection Area for the Town ofNederland. Inventory Potential Sources of Contamination for the Town of NederlandSWPA.

October 29, 2013 Third Planning Meeting – Review and update previous work. Develop bestmanagement practices (BMPs) for the Town of Nederland SWPA.

December 4, 2014 Fourth Planning Meeting – Review and update previous work. Review and discuss DraftSource Water Protection Plan and develop Action Plan

Stakeholder Participation in the Planning Process

Local stakeholder participation is vitally important to the overall success of Colorado’s SourceWater Assessment and Protection (SWAP) program. Source water protection was founded onthe concept that informed citizens, equipped with fundamental knowledge about their drinkingwater source and the threats to it, will be the most effective advocates for protecting thisvaluable resource. Local support and acceptance of the Source Water Protection Plan is morelikely where local stakeholders have actively participated in the development of theirProtection Plan.

8

The Town of Nederland’s source water protection planning process attracted interest andparticipation from more than 20 stakeholders including local citizens and landowners, privatebusinesses, water operators, local and state governments, and agency representatives. Duringthe months of July 2013 through December 2014, four stakeholder meetings were held inNederland to encourage local stakeholder participation in the planning process. Stakeholderswere notified by letters, emails, and phone calls. To allow public review and comment, a draftof this document was posted to the official Town website (www.nederlandco.org) and, a papercopy was made available at Nederland Town Hall. Public review comments have beenincorporated in the final draft of this plan. Input from these participants was greatlyappreciated.

Steering Committee

During the development of this Plan, a volunteer Steering Committee was formed from thestakeholder group to develop and implement this Source Water Protection Plan. Specifically,the Steering Committee’s role in the source water protection planning process was to advisethe Town of Nederland in the identification and prioritization of potential contaminant sourcesas well as management approaches that can be voluntarily implemented to reduce the risks ofpotential contamination of the untreated source water. All members attended at least oneSteering Committee meeting and contributed to planning efforts from their areas of experienceand expertise. Their representation provided diversity and led to a thorough Source WaterProtection Plan. The Town of Nederland and the Colorado Rural Water Association are veryappreciative of the participation and expert input from the following participants.

Table 3. SWPP Stakeholders

Stakeholder Title AffiliationSteering

CommitteeMember

Alisha Reis Town Administrator Town of Nederland X

Jason Morrison Public Works Manager Town of Nederland X

Mark Weritz Project Manager Town of Nederland X

Mark Williams Water Quality ProgramCoordinator Boulder County Public Health X

Kristen Hughes Source Water ProtectionSpecialist CDPHE X

Sylvia Clark District Chief US Forest Service X

Eric Schroeder Soil Scientist/Air QualityProgram Coordinator US Forest Service X

Jim Shelley Source Water Manager City of Boulder X

Michelle Wind Drinking Water ProgramSupervisor City of Boulder X

Paul Zilis Water Attorney Vranesh & Raisch, LLP X

9

Greg Davis StormWater Program Coord. EPA Region 8 X

Dylan Eiler Project Manager CRWA X

David Hunter Director of Operations Eldora Mountain Resort X

Kayla Evans Owner Arapaho Ranch X

Ted Plank Road Supervisor Boulder County Road Maintenance X

Rick Dirr Chief Nederland Fire Protection District X

Joel Price Engineer JVA, Inc. X

Eric Johnson Water Source OperationsManager City of Boulder X

Cindy McCollum Owner McCollum Excavating X

Chris Pelletier Public Works UtilitiesSupervisor Town of Nederland X

Nicole Bratsos Utilities Coordinator Town of Nederland X

Mark Van Nostrand Senior Project Manager JVA Inc. X

Development and Implementation Grant

The Town of Nederland was awarded a $5,000 Development and Implementation Grant fromthe Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). This funding is availableto public water systems and representative stakeholders committed to developing andimplementing a source water protection plan. A one to one financial match (cash or in kind) isrequired. The Town of Nederland was approved for this grant in December 2012, and it expiresDecember 2016. The Town of Nederland intends on using sixty percent of the funds to developthe Source Water Protection Plan, and the remaining funds will be used to implementmanagement approaches that are identified in this Plan.

10

WATER SUPPLY SETTING

Location and Description

Nederland, Colorado (elevation 8,300 feet) is a small mountain town, with municipalboundaries encompassing an area of about 1.6 square miles. Nederland is located 17 mileswest of Boulder, Colorado (County Seat of Boulder County). Primary access to Nederland isthrough Colorado State Highways 72 and 119. The Peak to Peak Scenic Byway connectsNederland to Ward, Estes Park, and Rocky Mountain National Park to the north, and IdahoSprings and Central City to the south. The town seasonally attracts tourists and is a popularjumping off point to nearby outdoor recreational activities.

Prior to occupation of settlers of European descent, Native Americans hunted in the mountainsand meadows of the Nederland area. It was not until the late 1800s that Nederland began as asettlement for gold and silver, and later tungsten, miners. The Town was incorporated in 1874,grew through successive mining booms, and drew thousands of residents to the area in the late1800s and early 1900s. Nederland had around 3,000 residents at its peak (twice its presentpopulation). In the 1920s, tourism helped Nederland recover from the bust that followed thetungsten boom of World War I. Nederland currently has about 750 households, a population of1,450 residents, and its own unique small mountain town culture. Future projections estimatethat the population will increase slightly over the next ten years. Municipal affairs aregoverned by the Nederland Board of Trustees.

SWPA Vicinity

11

Physical Characteristics

The watershed of the Nederland Public Water Supply consists of the portion of the MiddleBoulder Creek watershed that is upgradient of the public water supply intake, which is locatedjust less than a mile southwest of downtown Nederland. The water supply watershedencompasses about 30 square miles ranging in elevation from 13,397 feet at the ContinentalDivide to 8,390 feet at the Middle Boulder Creek water intake. The Nederland Public WaterSupply watershed includes the Town of Eldora, as well as numerous smaller settlements. Thewatershed is predominantly federal land (Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests), withnumerous private holdings. The watershed boundaries are approximated by TennesseeMountain Bryan Mountain Guinn Mountain to the south, the Continental Divide from Rollinspass to South Arapaho Peak to the west, and Bald Mountain Caribou Hill Mineral MountainEldorado Mountain Park Hill to the north. The Indian Peaks Wilderness occupies the westernportion of the watershed. Directly east of downtown Nederland, Middle Boulder Creek flowsinto Barker Reservoir, a water supply reservoir for the City of Boulder.

Geology of the watershed is composed primarily of Precambrian siliceous metamorphic andgranitic rock. These rocks consist of gneisses and schists (1800 million years old) that wereintruded by the Boulder Creek Granodiorite (1700 million years old) and the Silver PlumeGranite (1400 million years old). In addition, early and middle Tertiary (30 to 60 million yearsold) deposits of metallic ores associated with intrusive dikes and sills are found throughout the

12

watershed. Deposits of gold, silver, tungsten, copper, lead, zinc, tin and uranium were minedbeginning in 1859.

Tungsten, a steel hardening alloy metal, was milled at the Caribou Mill beginning in 1905. TheCaribou Mill was subsequently replaced with the Wolf Tongue Mill, the building of which stillexists, but the mill has not operated since the early 1970s. During the turn of the century(around 1900), the Caribou District in the Middle Boulder Creek Valley was active with heavymining for gold and silver. However, the majority of mining operations have since beenabandoned. The watershed includes over 30 historical mining operations, including aquarry/gravel pit mine on Middle Boulder Creek between Eldora and Nederland.

Annual precipitation is dominated by winter and spring snowfall and summer convectivethunderstorms. Snow accumulation begins anytime from early October to late November, andspring runoff normally begins in May or early June. Seasonal temperature variations are relatedto elevation, with shorter summer and longer winter periods at higher elevations. TheContinental Divide commonly experiences extreme weather conditions with temperaturesbelow –30°F and winds in excess of 100 mph. Variation in topography leads to differentclimatic zones in the watershed, including alpine, subalpine, and montane. Temperatures varywidely across the climatic zones. In general, as elevation decreases, temperature increases, andthe difference between daily minimum and maximum temperatures increases. The majority ofprecipitation in the watershed falls as snow, especially at the higher elevations.

Alpine, subalpine, and montane climatic zones consist primarily of forests, shrubs, and ice. Thealpine tundra (elevations above 11,500 feet) is above tree line and is sparsely vegetated withlichen and low growing herbaceous plants. The subalpine zone (11,500 to 8,900 feet) primarilycontains Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) forests,meadows, willow carrs, and peat fens. The montane zone (8,900 to 7,900 feet) is dominated bylodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), ponderosa pine (Pinusponderosae scopulorum) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii).

Hydrologic Setting

Middle Boulder Creek is the principal source of drinking water for the Town of Nederland,Colorado. The entire Middle Boulder Creek watershed drains approximately 40 square milesand is part of the St. Vrain Creek basin (Hydrologic Unit Code 10190004), tributary to the SouthPlatte River. The headwaters of Middle Boulder Creek originate immediately east of theContinental Divide, which is approximately 10 miles west of Nederland. The upper sections ofMiddle Boulder Creek (North and South Forks of Middle Boulder Creek) join at approximateelevation 9000 feet near the old townsite of Hessie to form the main stem of Middle BoulderCreek, which then continues to flow eastward through the towns of Eldora and Nederland, andeventually into Barker Reservoir. After Barker Reservoir, Middle Boulder Creek continues toflow eastward, joins with North and South Middle Boulder creeks to become Boulder Creek,and joins with St. Vrain Creek just west of the City of Longmont, Colorado. Further downstreamthe St. Vrain Creek then flows into the South Platte River approximately four miles northwest of

13

Platteville, Colorado. The South Platte River Basin is part of Colorado Water Division One withthe office of the Division Engineer in Greeley.

Water Quality StandardsUnder the Clean Water Act, every state must adopt water quality standards to protect,maintain and improve the quality of the nation’s surface waters. The CDPHE’s Water QualityControl Commission has established water quality standards that define the goals and limits forall waters within their jurisdictions. Colorado streams are divided into individual streamsegments for classification and standards identification purposes (Table 4). Standards aredesigned to protect the associated classified uses of the streams (Designated Use). Streamclassifications can only be downgraded if it can be demonstrated that the existing useclassification is not presently being attained and cannot be attained within a twenty year timeperiod (Section 31.6(2)(b)). A Use Attainability Analysis must be performed to justify thedowngrade.

Impaired WatersDownstream of Nederland and Barker Reservoir, stream segments within the Middle BoulderCreek watershed are listed on the 2010 State’s 303(d) list of impaired waters. Segments ofMiddle Boulder Creek that are located upstream of the Nederland intake watershed are notlisted as impaired. States are required under the Clean Water Act to submit to Congress theirlist of impaired waters that do not meet the state’s water quality standards for their designatedand existing uses. States are also required to develop a watershed restoration action plan calleda “Total Maximum Daily Load” for each impaired water body.

Table 4. Stream segments within the Middle Boulder Creek Watershed and their Designated Uses and ImpairmentStatus (Source: EPA “Water Quality Assessment and TMDL Information,” 2013)

WaterbodyName Waterbody ID Location Designated Use Status

Boulder Creek COSPBO03_0800

Mainstem Of MiddleBoulder Creek, IncludingAll Tributaries, LakesAnd Reservoirs, FromThe Source To TheOutlet Of BarkerReservoir.

Aquatic Life Cold Water Class 1,Recreation Primary Contact,Domestic Water Source,Agriculture

Good

BarkerReservoir COSPB014_0801

All Lakes and Reservoirstributary to BoulderCreek to a pointimmediately aboveSouth Boulder Creekconfluence, except asspecified in Segment 13.This segment includesBarker Reservoir.

Aquatic Life Cold Water Class 1,Recreation Primary Contact,Domestic Water Source,Agriculture

Good

14

Water Quality Data

The City of Boulder routinely monitors water quality in Middle Boulder Creek and BarkerReservoir. The City has performed monthly monitoring in the watershed for over 15 years.Prior to the City’s purchase of Barker Reservoir in 2000, City staff was only able to monitor thereservoir once per year. The City now monitors Barker Reservoir one to two times per month.The City uses the watershed and reservoir data to gain an understanding of the backgroundwater quality, treatment capabilities, and temporal and spatial changes in water quality. TheCity of Boulder previously tested and sampled Middle Boulder Creek at the WTP intake;however, WTP test results compared with samples obtained at the weir were found to beconsistently similar. Therefore, the City of Boulder discontinued sampling at the NederlandWTP. The City of Boulder currently monitors the following locations:

North Beaver Creek at Middle Boulder Creek confluenceMiddle Boulder Creek at WeirNederland Wastewater Treatment Plant EffluentBarker Reservoir

As reported in the 2002Middle Boulder Creek Water Source Management Work Plan, the waterquality of Middle Boulder Creek is relatively good, with low alkalinity and low hardness. Waterquality test data can be routinely obtained by contacting the City of Boulder. Mean test resultsof 2001 sampling and testing2 are summarized in the table below:

2 2001 is the last year the City of Boulder monitored just below Nederland’s intake. The Town of Nederland is currently evaluating whether ornot they should begin monitoring at the same location.

15

Drinking Water Supply Operations

Nederland Water Intake Area in Middle Boulder Creek. Aerial photo from Denver Regional Council ofGovernments GIS Department (2012).

Water Supply and InfrastructureThe Town of Nederland’s water supply is diverted from Middle Boulder Creek as permitted byits water rights and plan for augmentation. The public water intake for the Town of Nederlandis located at the end of a double bend in Middle Boulder Creek, approximately 0.8 milessouthwest of downtown Nederland, at 39.955117 latitude and 105.525817 longitude.Access to the intake area is off of County Highway 130 (Eldora Road). The Nederland WaterTreatment Plant and Nederland Junior/Senior High School are both located directly acrossEldora Road and southeast of the creek intake area. The intake catchment area is located atthe outside portion of a bend in the creek in which a longitudinal diversion berm constructedalong the creek bed splits a portion of the creek’s flow into a catchment area. Once creekwater enters the catchment area, water can then gravity flow through two stabilization/

16

detention ponds connected in series. Water in the second pond is then available to bedelivered to the water treatment plant via the intake pumping station.

Water Intake Area in Middle Boulder Creek. Primary creek flow is over boulders and to left. Diverted intake flow isto the right into catchment area.

The augmentation plan enables the Town to divert water rights year round and to replace outof priority depletions using Nederland’s senior water rights. Nederland has an agreement withthe City of Boulder to store up to 39.6 acre feet of water in Barker Reservoir.

The Water Treatment Plant was originally constructed in 1979 with a capacity of 300,000gallons per day (gpd). During 2010, several improvements were completed and the designcapacity was increased to 400,000 gpd. Raw water is pumped from the raw water pumpstation, enters into the plant, and passes through inline screening equipment. Water is thendosed with caustic soda and sumaclear polymer and then pumped into a vertical flocculationtank. Caustic soda is used to adjust the raw water pH to within an optimal range for sumaclearpolymer addition. The sumaclear polymer is used to coagulate dissolved particulates and helpremove turbidity, total organic carbon (TOC), and color from the influent raw water. The wateris then distributed to two separate Siemens microfiltration skids, which filter the screened and

17

chemically adjusted raw water, removing the remaining colloidal particles, turbidity, and somepathogenic microorganisms. After microfiltration, the membrane permeate (filtered water) isdirected to the clearwell for disinfection with sodium hypochlorite and subsequent distribution.Three vertical turbine pumps send the filtered water to the High School Water Storage Tank(High School Tank) for chlorine contact time and pressurized distribution to the Town forconsumption, and to other storage tanks throughout Town for finished water storage. Thestorage tanks allow the Town to manage the delivery of water, drawing from the tanks in timesof high demand and filling the tanks when demand is low.

RawWater Pump Station. Pump Station (dark green building) receives water from intake structure at edge ofpond. Pump station sends water to water treatment plant (beige building) at left side of photo.

The High School Tank is a buried, cylindrical concrete tank located southwest of the Town’s Jr.and Sr. High School, and was built in 1979. This tank has the capacity to hold 400,000 gallons offinished water, and it pressurizes the water distribution system. The Hilltop Water StorageTank is a buried, cylindrical concrete tank located near the intersection of Navajo Trail and TejasLane. It was installed in 1964 and has the capacity to hold 225,000 gallons of finished water.The Caribou Ridge Tank is a buried, rectangular concrete tank located in the Caribou Ridgedevelopment area. This tank was installed in 1989 and has the capacity to hold 225,000 gallonsof finished water. The Big Springs Tank is a buried, cylindrical steel tank located at the end of

18

Wildwood Lane. This tank was installed in 1966 and has the capacity to hold 225,000 gallons offinished water. Altogether, the water storage tanks can hold about 1.1 million gallons.

High School Water Tank Site (buried tank) looking north.

Water Supply Demand Analysis

Nederland serves an estimated 800 connections and approximately 1,450 residents and otherusers in the service area annually. The water system currently has the capacity to produce400,000 gpd, but the Town’s water rights allow maximum diversions of 1.17 mgd. As recordedin recent water treatment plant influent logs, the average daily demand in summer isapproximately 181,000 gpd, and the average daily demand in winter is 160,000 gpd. Theaverage peak daily demand is approximately 250,000 gpd. Using these estimates, the watersystem has a surplus average daily demand capacity of 364,000 gpd and a surplus average peakdaily demand capacity of 285,000 gallons per day.

The Town is currently positioned to meet the Town’s customers’ demands on the water system,although it may not be able to meet the average daily demand or the average peak dailydemand of its customers if its only water source becomes disabled for an extended period.

19

Table 5. Surface Water Supply Information

The potential financial and water supply risks related to the long term disablement of thecommunity’s water source is a concern to the Steering Committee. As a result, the SteeringCommittee believes the development and implementation of a source water protection planfor the Town of Nederland can help to reduce the risks posed by potential contamination of itswater source. Additionally, The Town of Nederland has developed an emergency response planor contingency plan (Appendix A) to coordinate rapid and effective response to any emergencyincident that threatens or disrupts the community water supply. The Town has also recentlyconstructed a ground filtered water intake at the existing surface water intake (to reducevolume of treatment chemicals), and plans to develop a reservoir upstream of the existingintake area for which it holds a water right decreed in Case No. W 9476 78 on July 29, 1980.

3 This is the maximum volume available under the Town’s water rights if they were in priority all year.

Water System FacilityName

WaterSystemFacilityNumber

Surface WaterSource

ConstructedDate

AppropriationDates

MaximumAppropriation

Amount(af/yr)

Town of Nederland CO 0107538 Middle BoulderCreek 1979 6/1/1862 –

5/19/1975 13103

20

OVERVIEW OF COLORADO’S SWAP PROGRAM

Source water assessment and protection came into existence in 1996 as a result ofCongressional reauthorization and amendment of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The 1996amendments required each state to develop a source water assessment and protection (SWAP)program. The Water Quality Control Division, an agency of the Colorado Department of PublicHealth and Environment (CDPHE), assumed the responsibility of developing Colorado’s SWAPprogram. The SWAP program protection plan is integrated with the Colorado WellheadProtection Program that was established in amendments made to the federal Safe DrinkingWater Act (SDWA, Section 1428) in 1986.

Colorado’s SWAP program is an iterative, two phased process designed to assist public watersystems in preventing potential contamination of their untreated drinking water supplies. Thetwo phases include the Assessment Phase and the Protection Phase as depicted in the upperand lower portions of the figure below, respectively.

Source Water Assessment and Protection Phases

21

Source Water Assessment Phase

The Assessment Phase for all public water systems consists of four primary elements:

1. Delineating the source water assessment area for each of the drinking water sources;2. Conducting a contaminant source inventory to identify potential sources of

contamination within each of the source water assessment areas;3. Conducting a susceptibility analysis to determine the potential susceptibility of each

public drinking water source to the different sources of contamination;4. Reporting the results of the source water assessment to the public water systems and

the general public.

The Assessment Phase involves understanding where Nederland’s source water comes from,what contaminant sources potentially threaten the water sources, and how susceptible eachwater source is to potential contamination. The susceptibility of an individual water source isanalyzed by examining the properties of its physical setting and potential contaminant sourcethreats. The resulting analysis calculations are used to report an estimate of how susceptibleeach water source is to potential contamination. A Source Water Assessment Report wasprovided to each public water system in Colorado in 2004 that outlines the results of thisAssessment Phase.

Source Water Protection Phase

The Protection Phase is a voluntary, ongoing process in which all public water systems havebeen encouraged to voluntarily employ preventative measures to protect their water supplyfrom the potential sources of contamination to which it may be most susceptible. TheProtection Phase can be used to take action to avoid unnecessary treatment or replacementcosts associated with potential contamination of the untreated water supply. Source waterprotection begins when local decision makers use the source water assessment results andother pertinent information as a starting point to develop a protection plan. As depicted in thelower portion of the figure above, the source water protection phase for all public watersystems consists of four primary elements:

1. Involving local stakeholders in the planning process;2. Developing a comprehensive protection plan for all of their drinking water sources;3. Implementing the protection plan on a continuous basis to reduce the risk of potential

contamination of the drinking water sources; and4. Monitoring the effectiveness of the protection plan and updating it accordingly as future

assessment results indicate.

22

The water system and the community recognize that the Safe Drinking Water Act grants nostatutory authority to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment or to anyother state or federal agency to force the adoption or implementation of source waterprotection measures. This authority rests solely with local communities and local governments.The source water protection phase is an ongoing process. The evolution of the SWAP programis to incorporate any new assessment information provided by the public water supply systemsand update the protection plan accordingly.

23

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT

Source Water Assessment Report Review

The Town of Nederland has reviewed the Source Water Assessment Report along with theSteering Committee. These assessment results were used as a starting point to guide thedevelopment of appropriate management approaches to protect the source water of the Townof Nederland from potential contamination. A copy of the Source Water Assessment Report forthe Town of Nederland can be obtained by contacting the Town of Nederland or bydownloading a copy from the CDPHE’s SWAP program website located at:http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDPHE WQ/CBON/1251596793639.

Defining the Source Water Protection Area

A source water protection area is the surface and subsurface areas from which contaminantsare reasonably likely to reach a water source. The purpose of delineating a source waterprotection area is to determine the recharge area that supplies water to a public water source.Delineation is the process used to identify and map the drainage basin that supplies water to asurface water intake. The size and shape of the area depends on the characteristics of thewatershed. The source water assessment area that was delineated as part of the Town ofNederland’s Source Water Assessment Report provides the basis for understanding where thecommunity’s source water and potential contaminant threats originate, and where thecommunity has chosen to implement its source water protection measures in an attempt tomanage the susceptibility of their source water to potential contamination.

After carefully reviewing their Source Water Assessment Report and the CDPHE’s delineation ofthe Source Water Assessment Area for the Town of Nederland’s source, the SteeringCommittee chose to modify it before accepting it as their Source Water Protection Area for thisSource Water Protection Plan.

Primary Zone – The Primary Zone encompasses an area estimated to be 12.04 square miles andis defined as a 1,000 foot wide band on either side of the streams and reservoirs, upstream ofNederland’s intake on Middle Boulder Creek. The Primary Zone includes NederlandJunior/Senior High School and the Town of Eldora. The area within the Primary Zone is mostlyundeveloped woodland with considerable amounts of under brush and fallen timber.

Secondary Zone – The Secondary Zone encompasses an area estimated to be 29.85 squaremiles and is defined as the entire watershed, upstream of the Middle Boulder Creek IntakeStructure. All of the Primary Zone is contained within the Secondary Zone.

Tertiary Zone – The Tertiary Zone encompasses an area estimated to be 6.81 square miles andis defined as the area of the Middle Boulder Creek watershed between the west end of BarkerReservoir and the Nederland public water intake. The Tertiary Zone includes the entire

24

watershed of North Beaver Creek (aka Caribou Creek), which flows through the Town ofNederland and empties into Middle Boulder Creek immediately upgradient of Barker Reservoir.The Tertiary Zone has been delineated in this study to highlight the portion of the MiddleBoulder Creek watershed immediately local to, and flowing through the Town of Nederland.The Town of Nederland recognizes that the Tertiary Zone is outside the watershed of theNederland public water intake, and does not contribute to Nederland’s drinking water. TheTertiary Zone has been included in the delineation of the overall source water protection zonesfor the collection and presentation of environmental data normally collected for a watershedstudy; however, the Tertiary Zone environmental data, provided as a reference in the Appendix,is for informational purposes only, and has not been included in the development of thisparticular Source Water Protection Plan.

The Source Water Protection Area is illustrated in the following map.

25

26

Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Other Issues of Concern

Many types of land uses have the potential to contaminate source waters: spills from tanks,trucks, and railcars; leaks from buried containers; failed septic systems, buried or injection ofwastes underground, use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, road salting, as well as urbanand agricultural runoff. While catastrophic contaminant spills or releases can wipe out a waterresource, groundwater degradation can result from a plethora of small releases of harmfulsubstances. According to the USEPA, nonpoint source pollution (when water runoff moves overor into the ground picking up pollutants and carrying them into surface and groundwater) is theleading cause of water quality degradation (GWPC, 2008).

Schematic drawing of the potential source of contamination to surface and groundwater

In 2001 – 2002, as part of the Source Water Assessment Report, a contaminant sourceinventory was conducted by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment toidentify selected potential sources of contamination that might be present within the sourcewater assessment areas. Discrete4 contaminant sources were inventoried using selected stateand federal regulatory databases including: mining and reclamation, oil and gas production,above and underground petroleum tanks, Superfund sites, hazardous waste generators, solidwaste disposal, industrial and domestic wastewater dischargers, and water well permits.Dispersed contaminant sources were inventoried using then recent land use / land cover andtransportation maps of Colorado, along with selected state regulatory databases. Thecontaminant inventory was completed by mapping the potential contaminant sources with theaid of a Geographic Information System (GIS).

4 The WQCD’s assessment process used the terms “discrete” and “dispersed” potential sources of contamination. A discrete source is a facilitythat can be mapped as a point, while a dispersed source covers a broader area such as a type of land use (crop land, forest, residential, etc.).

27

The State’s contaminant source inventory consisted of draft maps, along with a summary of thediscrete and dispersed contaminant sources inventoried within the source water assessmentarea. The Town of Nederland was asked, by CDPHE, to review the inventory information, fieldverify selected information about existing and new contaminant sources, and provide feedbackon the accuracy of the inventory. Through this Source Water Protection Plan, the Town ofNederland is reporting its findings to the CDPHE.

After much consideration, discussion, and input from local stakeholders, the Town of Nederlandand the Steering Committee have developed a more accurate and current inventory ofcontaminant sources located within the Source Water Protection Area. Upon completion ofthis contaminant source inventory, the Town of Nederland has decided to adopt it in place ofthe original contaminant source inventory provided by the CDPHE.

Table 6. Prioritized PSOC’s5

Potential Sources of Contamination Score

Forest Fire 20

Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (including vaults and Arapaho Ranch) 15

Flood and Stormwater Runoff (including specific permits) 15

Road Maintenance 10

Abandoned Mines / Mine Tailings 6

Pesticide Application (Eldora, but specifically private landowners) 6

Illegal Dumping (including marijuana cultivation byproducts) 5

Mines and Mineral Resources 4

Lake Eldora Water and Sanitation District (Lagoon) 4

Storage Tanks (Regulated and Unregulated) 4

Public Recreation (4th of July and Hessie Trailheads) (including potential campground parking lot anddispersed camping)

4

Nederland Junior/Senior High School (stormwater, operations, etc.) 3

Eldora Mountain Resort Operations (including stormwater) 2

Road Spills 2

Total 100

5 See pp. 30 31 for an explanation of the Priority Strategy used.

28

In addition to the discrete and dispersed contaminant sources identified in the contaminantsource inventory, the Steering Committee has also identified other issues of concern that mayimpact Nederland’s drinking water source.

Table 7. Issues of Concern

Issues of Concern Score

Municipal Watershed Ordinance mid term

Integration with the Town Master Infrastructure Plan short term

Integration with the City of Boulder Source Master Plan mid term

Integration with the Boulder County water master planning efforts mid term

Issues in Tertiary Zone mid term

The following is a map which identifies the location of some of the Town’s Potential Sources ofContamination. Please see the following section titled, “Discussion of Potential Sources ofContamination and Issues of Concern” for explanations.

29

Priority Strategy

After developing a contaminant source inventory and list of issues of concern that is moreaccurate, complete, and current, the Steering Committee began the task of prioritizing thisinventory for the implementation of the Best Management Practices outlined in this SourceWater Protection Plan (see Table 9).

The strategy which the Town of Nederland and Steering Committee used is based on fourcriteria.

1. Migration Potential or Proximity to the Water Source The migration potentialgenerally has the greatest influence on whether a contaminant source could providecontaminants in amounts sufficient for the source water to become contaminated atconcentrations that may pose a health concern to consumers of the water. Shortermigration paths and times of travel mean less chance for dilution or degradation of thecontaminant before it reaches water sources. The proximity of a potential contaminantsource of contamination to the Nederland’s water source was considered relative tothe three sensitivity zones in the Source Water Protection Area (i.e. Primary Zone,Secondary Zone, and Tertiary Zone).

2. Contaminant Hazard The contaminant hazard is an indication of the potential humanhealth danger posed by contaminants likely or known to be present at the contaminantsource. Using the information tables provided by CDPHE (see Appendices E to H), theSteering Committee considered the following contaminant hazard concerns for eachcontaminant source:

Acute Health Concerns Contaminants with acute health concerns includeindividual contaminants and categories of constituents that pose the mostserious immediate health concerns resulting from short term exposure to theconstituent. Many of these acute health concern contaminants are classified aspotential cancer causing (i.e. carcinogenic) constituents or have a maximumcontaminant level goal (MCLG) set at zero (0).

Chronic Health Concerns Contaminants with chronic health concerns includecategories of constituents that pose potentially serious health concerns due tolong term exposure to the constituent. Most of these chronic health concerncontaminants include the remaining primary drinking water contaminants.

Aesthetic Concerns Aesthetic contaminants include the secondary drinkingwater contaminants, which do not pose serious health concerns, but causeaesthetic problems such as odor, taste or appearance.

3. Potential Volume The volume of contaminants at the contaminant source isimportant in evaluating whether the source water could become contaminated at

30

concentrations that may pose a health concern to consumers of the water in the eventthese contaminants are released to the source water. Large volumes of contaminantsat a specific location pose a greater threat than small volumes.

4. Likelihood of Release The more likely that a potential source of contamination is torelease contaminants, the greater the contaminant threat posed. The regulatorycompliance history for regulated facilities and operational practices for handling,storage, and use of contaminants were utilized to evaluate the likelihood of release.

In addition to the aforementioned criteria, the Steering Committee considered the value andeffect of mitigating the impacts that potential contaminant sources would have on the SWPA. Itwas determined that implementation of cost effective mitigation measures would not onlysignificantly reduce the potential impact the contaminant would have on the water supply, butalso reduce the costs associated with responding to and dealing with a potential contaminant.

To facilitate the ranking process, the Steering Committee performed an exercise where they setaside a total of 100 “resource units” to be used to mitigate the potential impact ofcontaminants and possibly prevent contamination all together. Those 100 units were thendivided among the potential contaminant sources and issues of concern based upon thefollowing factors:

The potential overall impact of performing mitigation vs not performingmitigation or not addressing the issue of concern.The overall ability to perform the mitigation.The actual costs associated with the mitigation efforts.

The results of this exercise can be seen in Tables 6 and 7 above.

31

Susceptibility Analysis of Water Sources

The Town of Nederland’s Source Water Assessment Report contained a susceptibility analysis6

to identify how susceptible an untreated water source could be to contamination frompotential sources of contamination inventoried within its source water assessment area. Theanalysis looked at the susceptibility posed by individual potential contaminant sources and thecollective or total susceptibility posed by all of the potential contaminant sources in the sourcewater assessment area. The CDPHE developed a susceptibility analysis model for surface watersources and ground water sources under the influence of surface water, and another model forgroundwater sources. Both models provided an objective analysis based on the best availableinformation at the time of the analysis. The two main components of the CDPHE’s susceptibilityanalysis are:

1. Physical Setting Vulnerability Rating – This rating is based on the ability of the surfacewater and/or groundwater flow to provide a sufficient buffering capacity to mitigatepotential contaminant concentrations in the water source.

2. Total Susceptibility Rating – This rating is based on two components: the physicalsetting vulnerability of the water source and the contaminant threat.

Upon review of CDPHE’s susceptibility analysis, the Steering Committee determined that boththe Physical Setting Vulnerability Rating and the Total Susceptibility Rating for the Town ofNederland’s source are accurate and should remain the same (see table below).

Table 8. Updated Susceptibility Analysis

Source ID # Source Name Source Type Total SusceptibilityRating

Physical SettingVulnerability Rating

107538 002 Middle Boulder Creek Surface Water Moderate Moderate

6 The susceptibility analysis provides a screening level evaluation of the likelihood that a potential contamination problem could occur ratherthan an indication that a potential contamination problem has or will occur. The analysis is NOT a reflection of the current quality of theuntreated source water, nor is it a reflection of the quality of the treated drinking water that is supplied to the public.

32

DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES AND ISSUES OF CONCERN

Forest Fire

2011 Nederland CWPP Fuel Model Map of Eastern Portion of Nederland Intake Watershed

Fuel Model Description100s (GR) Grasses; fire carrier is grass120s (GS) Grass shrub; primary fire carrier is grass & shrubs combined140s (SH) Shrub; fire carrier is live and dead shrub twigs and foliage160s (TU) Timber understory; fire carrier is forest litter and herbaceous or shrub fuels180s (TL) Timber litter; fire carrier is dead and down woody fuel

The Town of Nederland’s Source Water Protection Area sits in the upper Middle Boulder CreekBasin and has a considerable risk of damage from wildfire. In describing the risk of wildfire tothe area, the term “low frequency, high consequence” may be appropriate. The general area isfire prone to the various conditions shown in the fuels model map above. Numerous wildfireshave occurred within a five mile radius of Town in the recent past under a variety of conditionsand circumstances. Nationally, wildfires are primarily naturally caused (i.e., lightning);however, a significant percentage of wildfires in the area have been human caused.

33

There is mixed ownership and jurisdiction in the area of concern, including private and federallands, along with two Fire Protection Districts having responsibility for initial attack, which cancomplicate dispatch and initial attack effectiveness, allowing a potential fire to escape control.In addition, access and egress to the area is limited to one road, Eldora Road, which couldcomplicate suppression efforts. In fact, suppression may be delayed while responders assistthe evacuation of area residents and recreational users.

Fire season, traditionally described as May through early July, is now considerably longer, withwildfires occurring state wide in virtually any month in the calendar. Fire weather anddangerous fuel conditions in the area have historically risen to extreme levels many days peryear, with the number of such periods likely to increase along with the longer fire season.Mitigating the wildfire danger using fuel reduction techniques like tree thinning may havelimited short term benefit, as much of the vegetation in the creek bed and surrounding slopesis fast growing. Other fuels are located on steep slopes, some on private lands and others onfederal lands. These factors can lead to a high rate of wildfire. A comprehensive approach tofuels treatment that would provide long term protection to Middle Boulder Creek seemsunlikely.

A large hot fire in the creek bed and surrounding lands can have an impact on source waters byremoving vegetation and decreasing infiltration during rain events. This can result in soilerosion and sediment and ash pollution in drinking water. Large rain events can producemudslides, and debris flow capable of destroying water infrastructure and altering clarity andpH of the source waters.

The Nederland Fire Protection District Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), completedin 2011, identified the Nederland Water Treatment Plant as “the most significant criticalinfrastructure in the Nederland area.” The Nederland FPD CWPP report is available on line atthe Nederland FPD CWPP website:http://www.nfpd.org/Documents/Full_NFPD_CWPP_5_20_11.pdf. As a result of the studiesincluded in the 2011 CWPP, the following strategies have been recommended:

Establish a Firewise Council, which is to ensure that recommendations of the CWPP arerevisited, modified as necessary, and updated to its fullest capacity.Develop a Continuous Funding Source, which is often the biggest hurdle to overcomewhen trying to implement the recommendations of a CWPP. More funding sourcesbecome available just by mere virtue of developing an official CWPP. Funding sourcesincludes federal, state and county programs.Projects to Implement have been specifically recommended in the 2011 CWPP.Projects typically include thinning and patch cutting to reduce biofuels and to providefirebreaks. One of the recommended projects is that the “Town of Nederland shouldwork collaboratively with USFS and BVSD to establish a fuel break in this region toprotect both the water treatment plant and the high school.”

34

Forest Fire Best Practices Recommendations:1. Partner with the Nederland Fire Protection District, the US Forest Service, and Boulder

County to continue fire mitigation around the distribution system and completemitigation around the Arapaho Reservoirs once they are complete and operational.

2. Explore opportunities to work with private landowners for landscape scale fuelreduction and defensible space projects.

3. Coordinate with the City of Boulder on opportunities to participate in the City’s Pre andPost Wildfire Planning.

4. Assess post wildfire conditions to identify potential threats to drinking waterinfrastructure and/or water quality (similar to the USFS BAER process).

5. Share maps, GIS shapefiles, and Emergency Notification Cards with the USFS andBoulder County and coordinate with them on fuels reduction opportunities.

On Site Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS)

Within the source water protection areas there arenumerous properties (e.g. Town of Eldora properties) thatrely on septic systems to dispose of their sewage. A septicsystem is a type of onsite wastewater system consisting ofa septic tank that collects all the sewage and a leach fieldthat disperses the liquid effluent onto a leach field for finaltreatment by the soil.

Septic systems are the second most frequently cited sourceof groundwater contamination in our country.Unapproved, aging, and failing septic systems have a largeimpact on the quality and safety of the water supply. Thefailure to pump solids that accumulate in the septic tankwill also eventually clog the lines and cause untreatedwastewater to back up into the home, to surface on theground, or to seep into groundwater. If managedimproperly, these residential septic systems can contributeexcessive nutrients, bacteria, pathogenic organisms, andchemicals to the groundwater.

In Boulder County individual sewage disposal systems are permitted by the Public HealthDepartment. The County administers and enforces the minimum standards, rules, andregulations outlined in the state of Colorado’s Revised Statutes (CRS 25 10 105). It is unknownat this time the number of septic systems within Boulder County, the number of unapprovedsystems currently in use and the age of all septic systems in the county. The absence ofeffective monitoring and education increases the risk of contaminants from septic systemsentering the groundwater.

Schematic of a septic system

35

The number of septic systems and corresponding spatial locations within the study area are toogreat to describe in detail in this section of the report. Septic systems within the definedprotection zones (primary, secondary, and tertiary) that are recorded with Boulder CountyPublic Health are summarized in the appendix.

There are six categories of the Boulder County Public Health classification system of OWTS thatfall within Nederland’s SWPA:

Approved – inspected, permitted and approved through BCPH.Final Approval Pending – System meets regulations, but must complete process (maybe notconnected to a house, etc.).Unapproved – undocumented system that has not been permitted or approved with BCPH.Permit Only No Final Approval – system was permitted, but no final inspection took place toensure the system was installed according to the permit. System is therefore consideredunapproved.Approval Revoked – properties with old systems that were sold and that never went throughBCPH’s property transfer process despite notification from BCPH.Active Permit – permits that are currently going through BCPH process for final approval.

36

Boulder County has recently begun to administer a “Septic Smart” program, which enforcesimplementation of new operating septic system standards for properties containing a septicsystem during property transfer of title.

Septic System Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Partner with Boulder County Public Health and the City of Boulder to develop a GIS layer

with septic systems identified along with prioritizing which septic systems are the mostimmediate threat (within Primary Zone, or 1,000 feet, for 5 miles upstream may beconsidered).

2. Share GIS layer with the county to identify sensitivity areas, buffer zones, and protectionareas related to septic systems.

3. Use public outreach to educate specific septic systems owners about how to maintainand check their systems. Consider sending this information out in the water utility billing(ex: Are you aware that not operating your septic system properly could affect yourdrinking water quality?)

4. Cross referral process with the Town of Nederland on upstream OWTS permitting.5. Implement active managerial controls and outreach on unapproved/unpermitted OWTS

within the SWPA.6. Partner with BCPH to implement a renewable permit process.7. Identify in Town property files and Eldora property files which properties are on OWTS

so that they are flagged any time permits are pulled.

Flood and Stormwater Runoff

The Town of Nederland infrastructure experiences detrimental effects of stormwater runofffrom increasing trends in population growth and land development. Development dramaticallyalters the local hydrologic cycle. During construction, trees and meadow grasses that interceptand absorb rainfall are removed and natural depressions that temporarily pond water aregraded to a uniform slope. Cleared and graded sites are often severely compacted whichreduces storm water from infiltrating into the ground surface. Construction and developmentalso results in an increase in impervious surfaces like roof tops, driveways, parking lots, andstreets which prevents the stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground. Stormwaterrunoff occurs when water from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground over streets, lawns, andother construction and industrial sites. Urban runoff can pick up fertilizers, dirt, pesticides, oiland grease, and many other pollutants and flow into water bodies used for swimming, fishingand providing drinking water.

Runoff can affect the stream hydrology, morphology, water quality and aquatic ecology. Waterquality problems include turbid water, nutrient enrichment, bacterial contamination, organicmatter loads, metals, salts, temperature increases, and increased trash and debris. Landdevelopment affects stormwater runoff by increasing the following:

37

The volumes and rates of surface runoff,The concentrations and the types of pollutants,The amount of pollutants carried to receiving waters.

Within the Town of Nederland, activities that contribute to the detrimental effects of runoffinclude: construction and use of transportation corridors; filling of the creek channels andfloodplain; degradation and removal of natural vegetation; property development; increasedresidential and commercial improvements along the creek; and a growing number ofcontributors to non point source pollution runoff.

SOURCE: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYAn increase in impervious coverage increases stormwater runoff

Addressing Stormwater ConcernsThe Town of Nederland, along with JVA Engineering, Inc., developed a Master InfrastructurePlan (MIP) to evaluate runoff sources and to provide recommendations of Best ManagementPractices. The MIP was completed in August 2014 and outlines the current assessment andrecommendations for public works improvements in the Town of Nederland (Nederland, 2014).The MIP helped to define the physical characteristics of stormwater runoff in Nederland and todevelop strategies for evaluating and improving runoff water quality. Recommendationsincluded the use of retention ponds, detention ponds, disconnecting impervious surfaces, useof wetland and riparian buffer systems, and isolating potential contaminants from mixing withstormwater. The MIP can be reviewed on the Town website at:http://nederlandco.org/government/town documents/.

Urban Stormwater Runoff Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Arapaho Ranch Reservoirs will allow Nederland to shut off intake in a flood or fire event

to keep operations running.2. Overlay FEMA floodplain layers on SWPA to identify areas of high risk and volatile

operations.3. Coordinate with Boulder County to notify Nederland of new construction permits within

the SWPA.

38

4. Partner with the Boulder County Department of Transportation and the USFS to identifyerosion mitigation opportunities on or near roadways and restoration opportunitiesadjacent to water bodies.

Road Maintenance

The source water protection area is located west of Town limits and is primarily accessed byEldora Road (Boulder County Highway 130), which is maintained by Boulder County RoadMaintenance. Several stretches of Eldora Road lie closely adjacent to Middle Boulder Creek.Eldora Road and lesser use unpaved roads in the source water protection area are generallyused for residential and recreational access.

Contaminant PathwaysMotor vehicles, roads and parking facilities are a major source of water pollution to bothsurface and groundwater. An estimated 46% of US vehicles leak hazardous fluids, includingcrankcase oil, transmission, hydraulic, and brake fluid, and antifreeze, as indicated by oil spotson roads and parking lots, and rainbow sheens of oil in puddles and roadside drainage ditches.Lubricating oils used in automobiles are either burned in the engine or lost in drips and leaks,and are disposed of improperly onto the ground or into sewers. Runoff from roads and parkinglots has a high concentration of toxic metals, suspended solids, and hydrocarbons, whichoriginate largely from automobiles (Gowler and Sage, 2006). Storm water runoff over theseroads can deliver contaminants from the road surface into the nearby ground and surfacewater.

Vehicular spills may occur along the transportation route within the source water protectionareas from trucks that transport fuels, waste, and other chemicals that have a potential forcontaminating the source waters. Chemicals from accidental spills are often diluted with water,potentially washing the chemicals into the soil and infiltrating into the groundwater. Roadwaysare also frequently used for illegal dumping of hazardous or other potentially harmful wastes.

Road Maintenance Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Install “Source Water Protection Area” signage at strategic locations throughout SWPA.2. Meet with CDOT, USFS, and the County Transportation Department to provide them

with an Emergency Notification Card along with GIS shapefiles. Encourage them tocontinue the use of their road Best Management Practices to prevent road materialsfrom entering the source waters. Recommendations for application of road deicing anddust abatement materials include:

applying minimum amounts necessary;apply only when removal of snow and ice cannot be accomplished by blading,plowing or sanding;minimize use of chemicals in and adjacent to streams, aquifers, and flood proneareas;

39

and avoid dumping or storing chemically treated or sanded snow where it canmelt and infiltrate groundwater or flow into surface waters.

Abandoned Mines/Mine Tailings

Abandoned Mine LandMining practices during the early days allowed the mine owners to simply abandon their mineswithout consideration of the impact on streams, water quality, slope stability and safety. Manyold mining properties contain abandoned mine workings, mine waste and/or mill tailings.Active and inactive mining operations have a potential to contaminate drinking water suppliesfrom either point source discharges (i.e. mine drainage tunnels or flowing adits) or nonpointsource discharges from run off over waste rock or tailing piles. Acidic, metal laden wateremanating from inactive mines and waste rock piles has a potential to impair aquatic life inMiddle Boulder Creek upstream from the Town’s drinking water intake, and to a lesser degreethreaten human drinking water. The Town of Nederland is not currently aware of anyimpairment to the drinking water source but the Town wants to work with other agencies tocontinue to observe and monitor for any potential contamination.

Mine Openings/Tailings Piles within SWPA and adjacent areas.

40

Abandoned Mines/Mine Tailings Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Partner with the City of Boulder to create and maintain an inventory of abandoned

mines within the SWPA and cross reference with the CDPHE and DRMS to determinewhich mines are impaired.

2. Develop notification procedures with organizations that might first notice the problems(e.g. Boulder County Open Space)

3. Evaluate actions that might mitigate and protect the source waters and be prepared toimplement as appropriate.

4. Actively participate in the review process for mining activity permits at the State andCounty level and in mine land reclamation activities.

5. Work with Cindy McCollum and the USFS’s Abandoned Mine Lands Program Manager,Trez Skillern, to determine which mines are of highest priority and coordinate onremediation opportunities.

Pesticide Application

Pesticides are widely used by property owners and government agencies in the local area toprotect forests, grasslands and meadows from damage or loss due to insects, weeds, anddiseases. The major groups of pesticides include insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides.Because herbicides are the most widely used class of agricultural and urban use pesticides, theyare the pesticides most frequently found in ground and surface water. However, to combat therecent pine beetle epidemic within the region, insecticides such as carbaryl (Sevin), permethrin(Astro), and bifenthrin (Onyx) have also been widely used in the vicinity.

Improper pesticide use has led to human illness, wildlife losses, and water quality degradation.The development of extremely sensitive detection methods has led to the discovery thatcommonly used management practices may lead to small amounts of pesticide thatcontaminate ground and surface water supplies. Since we depend on these water supplies fordrinking water, pesticide users need to exercise a high level of care and sound pesticide usemanagement to avoid contamination.

Pesticide Application Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Implement education program and notification program for spraying by general public

within SWPA. Education outreach may include: mailings and personal communication topromote watershed stewardship to minimize water quality impacts.

2. Begin monitoring at the intake for pesticides (specifically Carbaryl).3. Review and monitor the BMP’s and regulations that agencies and other organizations

utilize (e.g. USFS and Eldora Mountain Resort).4. Encourage timing herbicide application in relation to soil moisture, anticipated weather

conditions, and recommended measures to protect water supplies. Monitor theweather (temperature, wind speed, wind direction, and humidity) and avoid applicationof herbicide when heavy rains are forecast to prevent runoff of herbicide into nearbywaterways. Avoid application during windy weather to prevent drift of herbicide intowaterways or buffer zone.

41

Illegal Dumping

Illegal dumping of waste (including discarded soil and fertilizer used in marijuana cultivation)could be a concern in the proposed drinking water supply protection areas. Inappropriatedumping, especially those containing substances that can be detrimental to water quality,should be discouraged.

Illegal Dumping Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Rely on Boulder County’s 24/7 EERT Response to hazardous materials in coordination w/

1st responders.2. Research environmental regulations for cultivation sites to inform future Town actions.3. Based on findings of #2, implement a public education program and create a hazardous

waste drop off site, or recycling center.4. Begin monitoring at intake and wastewater treatment plant for signs of illegal dumping.

Mines and Mineral Resources

Not until 1973 were mines required to be permitted by the State of Colorado. Current miningpermit data for the source water protection areas were obtained from the Colorado Division ofMines, Reclamation, and Safety. Within the protection area there are no permitted mines.Should new mining permits be granted within the watershed, the steering committee offeredthe following recommendations:

Mines and Mineral Resources Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Coordinate with the agencies who can further identify potential risks in the sensitivity

zones and help determine appropriate BMP strategies (ex. CDPHE, DRMS, BLM, etc.). Alist of potential BMP approaches that may be implemented once a target mine isidentified.

2. Establish contacts with Boulder County Public Health and DRMS to be notified of anynew permits/public notices related to proposed future mining areas and re processingareas.

Lake Eldora Water & Sanitation District

The Eldora Mountain Resort is located on 1,200 acres of mountainous terrain about 3 milessouthwest of the Town of Nederland. The resort has operated alpine ski lifts since 1963 andcurrently supports expansive winter recreational areas and several associated buildings. Theresort utilizes two sewage treatment lagoons, which have been recently relined. The lagoonsare operated and regularly monitored in accordance with state regulations.

42

The majority of the resort is located along the southern divide of the Nederland intake portionof the Middle Boulder Creek’s watershed; however, the resort’s water supplies are derivedfrom both the Middle Boulder Creek and South Boulder Creek basins. Most snow making wateris derived from Peterson Lake, which is fed by Lake Eldora and Peterson Creek. Water andwastewater for the resort are managed by the Eldora Water and Sanitation District.

Lake Eldora Water & Sanitation District Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Become informed of regulations in place and request copies of regular inspection

reports from Lake Eldora WSD.2. Coordinate with Lake Eldora WSD to notify Nederland of notable changes, non

compliance, and general downstream concerns.

Storage Tanks (Regulated and Unregulated)

Available database review reveals no known regulated storage tanks within the NederlandPublic Water Source Water Protection Area (Primary and Secondary Zones of the SWPA).However, several known regulated tanks are located within the Tertiary Zone, and informationregarding these tanks is included in the appendix.

Numerous unregulated storage tanks of unknown locations are likely within the NederlandSource Water Protection Area. Some of them are currently in use (active), while others havebeen permanently closed. Gasoline, or “liquid phase hydrocarbon,” can leak from tanks anddescend through the unsaturated soil zone. Because gasoline is lighter than water, it generallyfloats on the water table, potentially closer to drinking water sources. Gasoline contains Class Aacute health concern compounds like the carcinogenic benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylenes (BTEX) suite. As such, releases from gasoline storage tanks are a serious concernbecause of its potential to contaminate public and private water supply sources. Besides thepotential for being consumed in drinking water, volatile organic compounds such as the BTEXsuite can enter nearby buildings. If buildings are poorly ventilated, the compounds canaccumulate and pose a health risk.

Rural residents of the source water protection area may have private aboveground storagetanks containing gasoline to store vehicular fuel. The private aboveground storage tanks are aconcern because they may be old and subject to leakage. It only takes a small amount ofpetroleum to contaminate the ground or surface water. Fuel tanks should be inspected visuallyon an annual basis and properly seated on a type of secondary containment structure toprevent spills from reaching the ground.

Storage Tanks Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Maintain a current inventory and information on the status of regulated above and

underground storage tanks in the source water protection area using the ColoradoStorage Tank Information (COSTIS) website at http://costis.cdle.state.co.us. Storagetank information from this site includes: facility, tank, owner, and events.

43

2. Identify Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) events that have occurred within theSWPA using the COSTIS database, and monitor progress on any remedial actionconducted for the known contamination sites. Nederland can contact the ColoradoDepartment of Labor and Employment Division of Oil and Public Safety (303 318 8000)for information regarding LUST events within the SWPA. Nederland can also contact thePublic Records Center at (303) 318 8521 or (303) 318 8522 for a file review.

3. Encourage private unregulated tank owners within the SWPA to construct secondarycontainment areas under their storage tanks, and research funding opportunities toassist them in this endeavor.

Public Recreation (Fourth of July and Hessie Trailheads)

The expanses of public and private lands within and surrounding the Nederland SWPA attractboth tourists and locals for camping and recreation. Several camping areas in the upper MiddleBoulder Creek watershed are in close proximity to surface water bodies and do not includewaste management facilities. Should a runoff event occur, or a camper fail to practice properoutdoor ethics, these wastes could enter the water supply.

Off road vehicles, hunting, fishing, and boating near drinking water intakes all have thepotential to impact the water supply. Increased erosion can occur when trail and road usersleave designated routes and remove vegetation; garbage and litter from visitors can be left atsites or even deposited directly in the water.

Campgrounds and Recreation Best Management Approaches:1. Coordinate with the USFS to discuss recreational activities, downstream water quality

concerns and management strategies that could be applied to minimize effects on waterquality

2. Any potential future development by the USFS at public recreation sites will be designedand managed to preserve downstream water quality.

3. The Town of Nederland should keep aware and provide comment on futuredevelopment via the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

Nederland Middle/Senior High School

Nederland Middle/Senior High School, operated by the Boulder Valley School District (BVSD), islocated approximately 800 feet upgradient of the Nederland public water supply intake, and500 feet directly west of the Nederland Water Treatment Plant. The school, with an enrollmentof 300 to 400 students, uses a limited amount of hazardous materials that are normally used inhigh school science instruction and building maintenance. The school is subject to seasonalroad traffic and utilizes a one acre paved parking lot located less than 600 feet upgradient ofthe intake.

44

Quality of water downgradient of the school has been identified as an item of concern by thesteering committee.

Nederland Middle/High School Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Notification of events, such as new construction, site work, spills, etc.2. Continued coordination with High School administration with regard to environmental

issues.

Eldora Mountain Resort Operations

Snowmaking operations at the Eldora Mountain Resort have been identified as a potential issueof concern. Since it is still unclear whether or not the additive used in snowmaking has thepotential to affect water quality, the Town has concerns about these potential effects ofsnowmelt from artificially created and placed snow on the water quality of Middle BoulderCreek. In addition, construction of diversion, conveyance, storage, and delivery structures cancreate ground disturbance leading to erosion and sedimentation.

Eldora Mountain Resort Operations Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Notification of events, such as new construction, site work, spills, etc.2. Continued coordination and monitoring with Eldora Mountain Resort Management with

regard to environmental issues.

Road Spills

The impacts and management approaches for incident spills vs. cumulative effects can differgreatly. Incident spills typically come from trucks that transport fuels, waste, and otherchemicals getting in an accident or going off the road. Chemicals from accidental spills areoften diluted with water in the process of cleaning up the spill, potentially washing thechemicals into the soil and infiltrating into surface water and groundwater. Illegal dumping ofhazardous or other potentially harmful wastes is considered an incident spill as well. These spillevents are addressed through emergency responders at the fire district or state/county hazardmitigation crews.

Cumulative effects to roads can result from a number of factors. Small but frequent accidentsthat spill chemicals can lead to overall degradation of waters, dust from roadways can increasesediment loading, and chemical application can alter the chemistry of the water supply.

Road Spills Best Management Practices Recommendations:1. Rely on Boulder County’s 24/7 Environmental Emergency Response Team (EERT)

Response in coordination with 1st Responders.2. Distribute Nederland Emergency Response Cards to all local emergency responders and

keep information on the emergency response cards updated.

45

3. Install “Source Water Protection Area” signage at strategic locations throughout SWPA.

Existing “Save Our Watershed” sign along Eldora Road, at west end of the Town of Eldora.

46

SUPPLEMETARY DISCUSSION

Tertiary Zone

The Tertiary Zone, as shown in the figure above, has been delineated in this study to highlightthe portion of the Middle Boulder Creek watershed immediately local to, and flowing through,the Town of Nederland, yet outside of the Nederland intake watershed (Primary and SecondaryZones). The Town of Nederland recognizes that the Tertiary Zone is outside the watershed ofthe Nederland public water intake, and does not contribute to Nederland’s drinking water. TheTertiary Zone has been included in the delineation of the overall source water protection zonesfor the collection of environmental data normally collected for a watershed study; however, theTertiary Zone environmental data, provided as a reference in the Appendix, is for informationalpurposes only, and has not been included in the development of this particular Source WaterProtection Plan.

Tertiary Zone Potential Sources of Contamination

47

A cursory environmental data base search revealed potential sites of concern within theTertiary Zone as shown in the figure above. USGS Mineral Resources Data System (MRDS) andColorado Division of Reclamation & Mining Safety (DRMS) sites, along with abandoned mineand tailings piles, are concentrated near the Caribou and Cardinal mining areas in the westernportion of the zone, as well as scattered across the eastern portion of the zone. EPA FacilityRegistry Service (FRS)7 sites and general potential sites of concern (PSOC) are mostly locatedwithin or near the town limits of Nederland. Some On site Wastewater Treatment System(OWTS) sites are shown on the figure above; however, all known OWTS sites within the TertiaryZone are not shown due to the large number of sites. The Big Springs and Hilltopneighborhoods of Nederland are currently unsewered, and developed properties within theseareas have on site treatment systems.

The Town may consider creation of more detailed GIS maps that specifically address mining,OWTSs, regulated tanks, and other sites, such as EPA FRS and RCRA locations. These mapscould aid in the management of the Middle Boulder Creek between the intake and the westend of Barker Reservoir.

Integration with the Town Master Infrastructure Plan

The recently adopted Master Infrastructure Plan recommends several short and long termprojects consistent with the goals of this SWPP. Among others, proposed MIP projects includeraw water storage reservoirs at Arapaho Ranch, water system distribution leak detection, andwater treatment plant additions. These projects will allow the Town to conserve water in amore sustainable manner, and to better protect the primary resource of the watershed.

Municipal Watershed Ordinance

Colorado Revised Statute C.R.S. § 31 15 707 gives municipalities the right to enact watershedprotection ordinances and regulations for the purpose of maintaining and protecting localwaterworks from injury and the public water supply from pollution. The Town may consider toimplement and to enforce these regulations for the purpose of reviewing and permitting anyactivity within the watershed, which creates a foreseeable risk of injury to the Town'swaterworks or pollution of the Town’s water supply.

Integration with the City of Boulder Source Water Master Plan

The City of Boulder has a close interest in the proper stewardship of the Middle Boulder Creekwatershed. The City of Boulder Source Water Master Plan identifies major concerns such as the

7 The EPA’s Facility Registry Service (FRS) identifies and geospatially locates facilities, sites or places subject to environmental regulations or ofenvironmental interest.

48

large volume and critical storage of Barker Reservoir, effluent of the Nederland WastewaterTreatment Plant, and fire mitigation within the watershed, among many others. The Town ofNederland may consider coordination and participation with the water utility staff of the City ofBoulder to accomplish mutual goals in management of the upper reaches of the Middle BoulderCreek watershed.

49

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION MEASURES

Best Management Practices

The Steering Committee reviewed and discussed several possible best management practicesthat could be implemented within the Source Water Protection Area to help reduce thepotential risks of contamination to the community’s source water. The Steering Committeeestablished a “common sense” approach in identifying and selecting the most feasible sourcewater management activities to implement locally. The focus was on selecting those protectionmeasures that are most likely to work for the community. The best management practiceswere obtained from multiple sources including: EPA, CDPHE, NRCS, and other source waterprotection plans. The Steering Committee recommends the best management practices listedin Table 9, “Source Water Protection Best Management Practices” be considered forimplementation by:

Town of NederlandBoulder County Public HealthCity of BoulderNederland Fire DistrictUnited States Forest Service

Furthermore, with Barker Reservoir as a City of Boulder water source, the City’s source watersoverlap with Nederland’s Source Water Protection Area and Nederland’s Tertiary Zone. As aresult, source water protection measures and best management practices can benefit bothwater systems but may have different priorities. The City and Nederland intend to shareinformation and cooperate on mutually beneficial water quality protection efforts.

Evaluating Effectiveness of Best Management Practices

The Town of Nederland is committed to developing a tracking and reporting system to gaugethe effectiveness of the various source water best management practices that have beenimplemented. The purpose of tracking and reporting the effectiveness of the source water bestmanagement practices is to update water system managers, consumers, and other interestedentities on whether or not the intended outcomes of the various source water bestmanagement practices are being achieved, and if not, what adjustments to the Source WaterProtection Plan will be taken in order to achieve the intended outcomes. It is furtherrecommended that this Plan be reviewed at a frequency of once every 1 to 2 years or ifcircumstances change resulting in the development of new water sources and source waterprotection areas, or if new risks are identified.

The Town of Nederland is committed to a mutually beneficial partnership with the ColoradoDepartment of Public Health and Environment in making future refinements to their sourcewater assessment and to revise the Source Water Protection Plan accordingly based on anymajor refinements.

50

Table9.Source

Water

Protectio

nBe

stManagem

entP

ractices

Issues

BestMan

agem

entP

ractice

Implem

enter

ForestFire

1.Proactive

Partne

rwith

theNed

erland

Fire

Protectio

nDistrict,theUS

ForestService,andBo

ulde

rCou

ntyto

continue

firemitigatio

narou

ndthe

distrib

utionsystem

andcompletemitigatio

narou

ndtheArapaho

Reservoirson

cethey

arecompleteandop

erational.

2.Proactive

Sharemaps,GISshapefiles,andEm

ergencyNotificatio

nCa

rds

with

theUSFSandBo

ulde

rCou

ntyandcoordinate

with

theUSFSand

Boulde

rCou

ntyon

fuelsred

uctio

nop

portun

ities.

3.Proactive

Coordinate

with

theCityof

Boulde

ronop

portun

ities

toparticipateintheCity’sPre

andPo

stWildfirePlanning.

4.Re

activ

e–Assesspo

stwildfirecond

ition

stoiden

tifypo

tentialthreatsto

drinking

water

infrastructure

and/or

water

quality

(sim

ilartotheUSFS

BAER

process).

5.Re

activ

e–provideresource

inform

ationto

inform

firesupp

ressionefforts.

1.Ned

erland

and

Ned

erland

FPD

2.Ned

erland

,USFS,

andBo

ulde

rCou

nty

3.Ned

erland

and

Boulde

r

4.Ned

erland

,USFS,

andNed

erland

FPD

5.Ned

erland

Onsite

Wastewater

Treatm

entS

ystems

(OWTS

includ

ingvaults

andArap

ahoRa

nch)

1.Crossreferralprocesswith

theTownof

Ned

erland

onup

stream

OWTS

perm

itting.

2.Im

plem

enta

ctivemanagerialcon

trolsa

ndou

treach

onun

approved

/unp

ermitted

OWTS

with

intheSW

PA.

3.De

velopaGISlayerw

ithsepticsystem

side

ntified

alon

gwith

prioritizing

which

OWTS

arethemostimmed

iate

threat

(Zon

e1).

4.Use

publicou

treach

toed

ucatespecificOWTS

owne

rsabou

thow

tomaintainandchecktheirsystems.Co

nsider

send

ingthisinform

ationou

tin

1.Bo

ulde

rCou

nty

PublicHe

alth

(BCP

H)2.

BCPH

3.BC

PHand

Ned

erland

4.BC

PHand

Ned

erland

51

thewater

utility

billing

(ex:Areyouaw

arethat

noto

peratin

gyour

septic

system

prop

erlycouldaffectyour

drinking

water

quality

?)

5.Iden

tifyinTownprop

erty

files

andEldo

raprop

erty

files

which

prop

ertie

sareon

OWTS

sothat

they

areflagged

anytim

epe

rmits

arepu

lled.

6.Partne

rwith

BCPH

toim

plem

enta

rene

wablepe

rmitprocess.

5.Ned

erland

and

BCPH

6.Ned

erland

and

BCPH

Floo

dan

dStormwater

Runo

ff1.

ArapahoRa

nchRe

servoirswillallowNed

erland

toshut

offintakeina

flood

even

ttokeep

operations

runn

ing.

2.Overla

yFEMAflo

odplainlayerson

SWPA

toiden

tifyareaso

fhighriskand

volatileop

erations.

3.Co

ordinate

with

Boulde

rCou

ntyto

notifyNed

erland

ofne

wconstructio

npe

rmits

with

intheSW

PA.

4.Partne

rwith

theBo

ulde

rCou

ntyDe

partmen

tofT

ranspo

rtationandthe

USFSto

iden

tifyerosionmitigatio

nop

portun

ities

onor

near

roadwaysa

ndrestorationop

portun

ities

adjacent

towater

bodies.

1.ArapahoRa

nch

andNed

erland

2.Ned

erland

3.Ned

erland

4.Ned

erland

Road

Mainten

ance

1.Meetw

ithCD

OT,USFS,andtheCo

unty

Transportatio

nDe

partmen

tto

providethem

with

anEm

ergencyNotificatio

nCa

rdalon

gwith

GIS

shapefiles.Encouragethem

tocontinue

theuseof

theirroadBe

stManagem

entP

ractices

topreven

troadmaterialsfrom

enterin

gthe

source

waters.Re

commen

datio

nsfora

pplicationof

road

deicinganddu

stabatem

entm

aterialsinclud

e:applying

minim

umam

ountsn

ecessary;

applyon

lywhe

nremovalof

snow

andicecann

otbe

accomplish

edby

blading,plow

ingor

sand

ing;

minim

izeuseof

chem

icalsinandadjacent

tostream

s,aquifers,and

1.Ned

erland

52

flood

pron

eareas;and

avoiddu

mping

orstoringchem

icallytreatedor

sand

edsnow

whe

reitcanmelta

ndinfiltrategrou

ndwater

orflo

winto

surfacewaters.

2.Install“Source

Water

Protectio

nArea”sig

nage

atstrategiclocatio

nsthrougho

utSW

PA.

2.Ned

erland

Aban

done

dMines

/MineTailings

1.Proactive

Create

andmaintainan

inventoryof

abando

nedmines

with

intheSW

PAandcrossreferencewith

theCD

PHEandDR

MSto

determ

ine

which

mines

areim

paire

d.

2.Proactive

Developno

tificationproced

ures

with

organizatio

nsthat

might

firstno

ticetheprob

lems(e.g.Bo

ulde

rCou

ntyOpe

nSpace)

3.Proactive

Evaluate

actio

nsthat

might

mitigate

andprotectthe

source

watersa

ndbe

prep

ared

toim

plem

enta

sapp

ropriate.

4.Re

activ

eWorkwith

Cind

yMcCollum

andtheUSFS’sA

band

oned

Mine

Land

sProgram

Manager,TrezS

killern,tode

term

inewhich

mines

areof

highestp

riorityandcoordinate

onremed

iatio

nop

portun

ities.

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

3.Ned

erland

4.Ned

erland

PesticideAp

plication

(Eldora,bu

tspe

cifically

privateland

owne

rs)

1.Im

plem

ente

ducatio

nprogram

andno

tificationprogram

forsprayingby

gene

ralpub

licwith

inSW

PA.

2.Be

ginmon

itorin

gat

theintake

forp

esticides

(spe

cificallyCarbaryl).

3.Re

view

andmon

itorthe

BMP’sa

ndregulatio

nsthat

agen

cies

andothe

rorganizatio

nsutilize

(e.g.U

SFSandEldo

raMou

ntainRe

sort).

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

3.Ned

erland

IllegalDu

mping

(includ

ingmariju

ana

cultivatio

nbyprod

ucts)

1.Re

lyon

Boulde

rCou

nty’s2

4/7EERT

Respon

seto

hazardou

smaterialsin

coordinatio

nw/1

strespon

ders.

2.Re

search

environm

entalregulations

forcultiv

ationsites

toinform

future

1.BC

PHand

Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

53

Townactio

ns.

3.Ba

sedon

findingso

f#2,im

plem

enta

publiced

ucationprogram

andcreate

ahazardou

swaste

drop

offsite

.

4.Be

ginmon

itorin

gat

intake

andwastewater

treatm

entp

lant

forsigns

ofillegaldu

mping.

3.Ned

erland

4.Ned

erland

Mines

andMineral

Resources

1.Co

ordinate

with

theagen

cies

who

canfurthe

ride

ntify

potentialrisk

sinthe

sensitivity

zone

sand

helpde

term

ineapprop

riate

BMPstrategies

(ex.

CDPH

E,DR

MS,BLM,etc.).

Alisto

fpoten

tialBMPapproaches

that

may

beim

plem

entedon

ceatarget

mineisiden

tified.

2.Establish

contactswith

Boulde

rCou

ntyPu

blicHe

alth

andDR

MSto

get

notifiedon

anyne

wpe

rmits/pub

licno

tices

relatedto

prop

osed

future

miningareasa

ndre

processin

gareas.

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

Lake

Eldo

raWater

and

Sanitatio

nDistric

t(Lagoo

n)

1.Be

comeinform

edof

regulatio

nsinplaceandrequ

estcop

ieso

fregular

inspectio

nrepo

rtsfrom

Lake

Eldo

raWSD

.

2.Co

ordinate

with

Lake

Eldo

raWSD

tono

tifyNed

erland

ofno

tablechanges

andno

ncomplianceandgene

raldow

nstream

concerns.

1.Ned

erland

&Lake

Eldo

raWSD

2.Ned

erland

&Lake

Eldo

raWSD

StorageTanks

(Regulated

and

Unregulated

)

1.Maintainacurren

tinven

tory

andinform

ationon

thestatus

ofregulated

aboveandun

dergroun

dstoragetanksinthesource

water

protectio

narea

usingtheCo

lorado

StorageTank

Inform

ation(COSTIS)w

ebsiteat

http://costis.cdle.state.co.us.Storagetank

inform

ationfrom

thissite

includ

es:facility,tank,ow

ner,andeven

ts.

2.Iden

tifyLeakingUnd

ergrou

ndStorageTank

(LUST)e

ventsthath

ave

occurred

with

intheSW

PAusingtheCO

STISdatabase,and

mon

itor

progresson

anyremed

ialactioncond

uctedforthe

know

ncontam

ination

sites.N

ederland

cancontactthe

Colorado

Departmen

tofLabor

and

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

54

Employmen

tDivision

ofOilandPu

blicSafety(303

3188000)for

inform

ationregardingLU

STeven

tswith

intheSW

PA.N

ederland

canalso

contactthe

PublicRe

cordsC

entera

t(303)

3188521

or(303)3

188522

for

afilereview

.

3.Encourageprivateun

regulatedtank

owne

rswith

intheSW

PAto

construct

second

arycontainm

enta

reas

unde

rthe

irstoragetanks,andresearch

fund

ingop

portun

ities

toassistthe

minthisen

deavor.

3.Ned

erland

PublicRe

creatio

n(4th

ofJulyan

dHe

ssie)

(includ

ingpo

tential

parkinglota

tcampgroun

d)

1.Co

ordinate

with

theUSFSto

discussrecreationalactivities,dow

nstream

water

quality

concerns

andmanagem

entstrategiesthatcou

ldbe

applied

tominim

izeeffectso

nwater

quality

.

2.An

ypo

tentialfuturede

velopm

entb

ytheUSFSat

publicrecreatio

nsites

willbe

desig

nedandmanaged

topreserve

downstream

water

quality

.

3.TheTownof

Ned

erland

shou

ldkeep

awareandprovidecommen

ton

future

developm

entviatheNationalEnviro

nmen

talPolicyAct(NEPA)

process.

1.Ned

erland

&USFS

2.USFS

3.Ned

erland

Ned

erland

High

Scho

ol(storm

water,m

isc.)

1.Notificatio

nof

even

ts,suchas

newconstructio

n,sitework,spills,etc.

2.Co

ntinue

dcoordinatio

nwith

scho

oladministratio

nwith

regard

toen

vironm

entalissue

s

1.Ned

erland

&Scho

olAd

ministratio

n2.

Ned

erland

&Scho

olAd

ministratio

nEldo

raMou

ntainRe

sort

Ope

ratio

ns(sno

wmaking,

operations)

1.Notificatio

nof

even

ts,suchas

newconstructio

n,sitework,spills,etc.

2.Co

ntinue

dcoordinatio

nwith

scho

oladministratio

nwith

regard

toen

vironm

entalissue

s

1.Ned

erland

&EM

R

2.Ned

erland

&EM

R

Road

Spills

1.Re

lyon

Boulde

rCou

nty’s2

4/7Environm

entalEmergencyRe

spon

seTeam

(EER

T)Re

spon

seincoordinatio

nwith

1stRe

spon

ders.

2.Distrib

uteNed

erland

EmergencyRe

spon

seCardstoalllocalem

ergency

1.BC

PHandNed

erland

2.Ned

erland

55

respon

ders,and

keep

theinform

ationon

theem

ergencyrespon

secards

updated.

3.Install“Source

Water

Protectio

nArea”sig

nage

atstrategiclocatio

nsthrougho

utSW

PA.

3.Ned

erland

Integrationwith

the

TownMaster

Infrastructure

Plan

1.Prop

ose/plan

rawwater

storageprojecta

tArapaho

Ranch.

2.Prop

ose/plan

water

system

distrib

utionleak

detectionproject.

3.Prop

ose/plan

water

treatm

entp

lant

additio

nprojects(CLEAR

LOGX

and

backwashdischarge).

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

3.Ned

erland

Mun

icipalWatershed

Ordinan

ce1.

Consider

implem

entatio

nanden

forcem

ento

fColoradoRe

visedStatute

C.R.S.§31

1570

7forthe

purposeof

review

ingandpe

rmittingany

activ

itywith

inthewatershed

.

1.Ned

erland

Integrationwith

theCity

ofBo

ulde

rSou

rceWater

MasterP

lan

1.Co

ordinatio

nandmutualparticipationinaccomplish

ingshared

Middle

Boulde

rCreek

watershed

managem

entp

rojectgoals,such

asfire

mitigatio

n,pu

blicou

treach,w

ater

quality

mon

itorin

g,etc.

1.Ned

erland

&Bo

ulde

r

Issues

inTertiary

Zone

1.Pe

rform

additio

naldetaileden

vironm

entaldatabaseresearch.

2.Create

specificGISmapso

fPSO

Cs,including

MiningSites,OWTSs,

RegulatedStorageTanks,andothe

rsite

sincluding

EPAFRSandRC

RAsites.

1.Ned

erland

2.Ned

erland

56

REFERENCES

Anchor Point Group. (May 2011). Nederland Fire Protection District Community WildfireProtection Plan. Boulder, CO: Prepared for Nederland Fire Protection District and TimberlineProtection District.

Boulder Valley School District website information retrieved fromwww.bvsd.org/high/nederland/pages/ne derlandmshs.aspx.

Boulder County Public Health website information retrieved September 2014 fromhttp://www.bouldercounty.org/env/water/pages/

Cadmus Group, Inc., 2013. “Effects of Wildfire on Drinking Water Utilities and Best Practices forWildfire Risk Reduction and Mitigation.”

Colorado Geologic Survey. Groundwater Atlas of Colorado. Retrieved fromhttp://coloradogeologicalsurvey.org/water/groundwater atlas/)

Eiler, Dylan, (2013). Source Water Protection for the Colorado River Partnership – Source WaterProtection Plan, Colorado Rural Water Association. Pueblo, Colorado.

EPA (2002). Potential Environmental Impacts of Dust Suppressant: "Avoiding Another TimesBeach." U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Las Vegas, Nevada. May 2002.

EPA (2014). Colorado Water Quality Assessment Report. Retrieved fromofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_ state.control?_state=CO.

Ficco (2012). Information about Road Maintenance. Dave Ficco, Ouray County Road and BridgeDepartment. Ridgway, Colorado. January 18, 2012.

GEI Consultants (2002). Middle Boulder Creek Water Source Management Work Plan, City ofBoulder, Colorado.

Gowler A.and Sage R. (2006) Traffic and Transport: Potential Hazards and Information Needs. InO. Schomoll, J. Howar, J. Chilton, I. Chorus, Protecting Groundwater Health. IWA Publishing.London, UK.

Ground Water Protection Council (2008). Ground Water Report to the Nation: A Call to Action.Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Ground Water Protection Council.

Hill, M., (January 2013). Source Water Protection for the Colorado River Partnership SourceWater Protection Plan. Morgan Hill, Garfield County Public Health

JVA Consulting Engineers (2014). “Master Infrastructure Plan for the Town of Nederland.”

57

Mihelich, K. (June 2013). Town of Hotchkiss Source Water Protection Plan. Kimberly Mihelich,Colorado Rural Water Association. Pueblo, Colorado.

Murphy, Sheila; Larry B. Barber, Philip L. Verplanck, and David A. Kinner (2000). Comprehensivewater quality of the Boulder Creek Watershed, Colorado, during high flow and low flowconditions Chapter 1 Environmental Setting and Hydrology of the Boulder Creek Watershed,Colorado.

MWH Consulting Engineers. (2009). City of Boulder Source Water Master Plan. Denver, CO.

Ramey Environmental Compliance, Inc. (2013). Town of Nederland Drinking Water TreatmentFacility Standard Operating Procedures Manual.

Shelley, Jim (September 2014). City of Boulder, Colorado Source Water Manager. PersonalCommunication.

Williams, C. (December 2010). Town of Basalt Source Water Protection Plan. Colleen Williams,Colorado Rural Water Association. Pueblo, Colorado.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013). December 6, 2013 letter from Glenn Casamassa, ForestSupervisor, U.S Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, CO to Susan Linner, Project Leader, U.SFish & Wildlife, Denver, CO.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (2012). National Best Management Practices for Water QualityManagement on National Forest System Lands, “Volume 1 National Core BMP Technical Guide.”

Williams, C. (September 2012). Town of Ridgeway Source Water Protection Plan. ColleenWilliams, Colorado Rural Water Association. Pueblo, Colorado.

Williams, C. (February 2013). Town of Jamestown Source Water Protection Plan. ColleenWilliams, Colorado Rural Water Association. Pueblo, Colorado.

58

APPENDICES8

A. Contingency Plan*

B. Source Water Assessment Report

C. Source Water Assessment Report Appendices

D. MOU Between CDPHE and U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region

E. Table A 1 Discrete Contaminant Types

F. Table A 2 Discrete Contaminant Types (SIC Related)

G. Table B 1 Dispersed Contaminant Types

H. Table C 1 Contaminants Associated with Common PSOC’s

I. Tertiary Zone Potential Sources of Contamination

Note: This public document will only include information that is not deemed sensitive to the safety and operation of theindividual community’s water plan operation. Appendices marked with an * are only included in the Public Utility’s report orkept on file at their office. All other documents are included on the CD located in the back pocket of this report. All documentscan be reprinted.

8 All appendices are located on the CD version of this SWPP.