Identifying Pollutant Sources through the Use of the USEPA

Identifying Pollutant Sources through the Use of the USEPA/GLRC

Standardized Sanitary Survey Tool

Dr. Julie KinzelmanCity of Racine Health Departmenty p

Racine, WI

Dr. Greg KleinheinzUW OshkoshUW-OshkoshOshkosh, WI

GL Policy, Strategies, Initiatives

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement• 2002 Great Lakes Strategy2002 Great Lakes Strategy • USEPA BEACH Act of 2000• GL Regional Collaboration

– Coastal Health Strategy goals• USEPA Beach Sanitary Survey Pilot

Study (2007)• GLRC Clean Beach Initiative (2009)

Much Monitoring has Occurred Since BEACH Act…There are Still Lots of Advisories/Closures!e e a e St ots o d so es/C osu es!

Great Lakes Pollution Sources - 2003Great Lakes Pollution Sources 2003Reported Sources Causing Beach Actions

in Great Lakes States in 2003G eat a es States 003(1,462 actions)

Other2%

Wildlife3%

Unknown95%

Charles Kovatch, USEPA

Great Lakes Pollution Sources - 2004Great Lakes Pollution Sources 2004

Reported Sources Causing Beach Actionsin Great Lakes States in 2004in Great Lakes States in 2004

(2,281 actions)

Other3%Storm

5%

Unknown92%

Charles Kovatch, USEPA

Great Lakes Pollution Sources - 2005Reported Sources Causing Beach Actions

in Great Lakes States in 2005(1 481 ti )(1,481 actions)

OtherOther3%

Storm7%

Unknown90%90%

Charles Kovatch, USEPA

Fifteen percent of Great LakesFifteen percent of Great Lakes beach samples violated public health standards for safe swimming in 2007,more than twice the national average.

NRDC, TTW 2008

The Great Lakes RegionalThe Great Lakes Regional Collaboration:

A Strategy to ImproveA Strategy to Improve Coastal Health

BACKGROUND

• In May of 2004 President Bush signedIn May of 2004 President Bush signed an Executive Order

• Recognized the Great Lakes as aRecognized the Great Lakes as a national treasure

• Cabinet level interagency task forceCabinet level interagency task force• Great Lakes regional collaboration

comprised of local, state, federal, NGOcomprised of local, state, federal, NGO tribes & others (over 1500 participants)

• Eight issue area strategy teamsEight issue area strategy teams

GLRC Initiative• First steps:

– Following the Conveners Meeting, 8 issue area strategy teams began their work.began their work.

– These teams were organized using priorities identified by the Council of Great Lakes Governors. The priorities were:

• Aquatic invasive species• Aquatic invasive species • Habitat conservation and species management • Near-shore waters and coastal areas (Coastal health) • Areas of concern • Non-point sources • Toxic pollutants • Indicators and information• Sustainability• Sustainability

• Draft for comment in July 2005• Final published in December 2005

I di id l h t i iti ti i (CH B h• Individual chapter initiatives – ongoing (CH = Beach Initiative)

CH - Problem StatementCH Problem Statement• As a natural body of water, contact (including

external, ingestion, and inhalation) with the near shore waters of the Great Lakes can pose a risk to human healtha risk to human health

BUT th i f d i ki t• BUT as the primary source of drinking water, supplier of fish, and recreational outlet for millions of US residents the minimum possiblemillions of US residents the minimum possible risk to human health should be present through contact with the Great Lakes

COASTAL HEALTH GOALSCOASTAL HEALTH GOALSFour Goals

1 Wet Weather Events eliminate human/industrial1. Wet Weather Events - eliminate human/industrial waste discharge to surface waters

2. Risk Management – reduce BWQF, develop and implement sanitary surveys remediateimplement sanitary surveys, remediate

3. Indirect Sources of Contamination – reduce bacterial, algal & chemical contamination, provide public educationpublic education

4. Safe Drinking Water – protect drinking water from chemical & biological contamination, including acts of bioterrorismof bioterrorism

Recommended Actions to Achieve Goals• Short-term (by 2009)• Short-term (by 2009)• Long-term (2009 and beyond)

CH Goal 2 - Recommended ActionsCH Goal 2 Recommended Actions

• Fully fund the BEACH Act – provides monies for it i t t t t ib l & l l th iti hi h tmonitoring to state, tribal & local authorities which meet

criteria• Evaluate and trial real-time testing technologies g g

including predictive models - eventually supplanting existing test methods

• Comply with BEACH Act requirements for publicComply with BEACH Act requirements for public notification

• Draft and implement standardized sanitary surveys to identify pathogen sourcesto identify pathogen sources

• Use historic monitoring data & source information todevise risk-based approach to management ala A li P t l (USEPA/WHO 1999)Annapolis Protocol (USEPA/WHO 1999)

CH Goal 3 – Recommended ActionsCH Goal 3 Recommended Actions

• Implement coastal community education• Implement coastal community education and outreach programs

• Promulgate enforceable local• Promulgate enforceable local ordinances which will serve to reduce inputs of direct and indirect contaminationinputs of direct and indirect contamination

• Using sanitary surveys – ID 90-95% of all indirect pollutant sources resulting inindirect pollutant sources resulting in beach closures

• Control, manage, remediate sources Co t o , a age, e ed ate sou cesidentified by sanitary surveys

GLRC BSS Timeline• 2003/2004 – Racine develops local BSS tool to gather 

potential pollutant source informationOth l ti l i f l l (NY St t P k MI)– Other locations also using for local purposes (NY State Parks, MI) 

• 2005 – Draft tools created by EPA BSS workgroup• 5‐year watershed assessment, annual, routineS 2006 R i & l l il d l• Summer 2006 – Routine & annual tools piloted at volunteer GL beaches

• Autumn 2006 – US EPA GLNPO released RFP • Summer 2007 – grants awarded for pilot studies

– 9 awards, 61 beaches– Electronic data retrieval system for beach managers

• November 2007 – USEPA compiled pilot study results• Spring 2008 – EPA revised BSS documents• GLRC CBI/GLSLCI – Promote use of BSS, 2008/ ,• GLRC CBI – 2009 Beach Manager Questionnaire

Were SS Used at GL Beaches Pre-GLRC?Were SS Used at GL Beaches Pre GLRC?

• Sanitary surveys were typically associated with drinking y y yp y gwater and shellfish programs.

• Identify sources of pollution• Assess the magnitude of pollution• Suggest appropriate actions to control pollution• Identify priority locations for sampling

• Broad-based use unlikely– Limited use by some– Previous figure demonstrates magnitude of unknown sources

• Not an eligible expense under the BEACH Act of 2000Not an eligible expense under the BEACH Act of 2000• No standardized form• No mechanism for sharing data/results

What is a Beach Sanitary Survey?y y– Guided data collection

C t h– Creates a common approach– Aid state and local water program managers

i t i i l l b h t i tiin ascertaining local beach contamination sourcesAssist in the development of predictive– Assist in the development of predictive modelsEvaluate conditions that pose risks to human– Evaluate conditions that pose risks to human health at recreational beaches

– Targets mitigation measures to improve GLTargets mitigation measures to improve GL water quality

Environmental Data Collected –i / ilRoutine/Daily BSS

• General Beach Conditions • Bather Load– Air temperature– Wind speed/direction– Rainfall

W th diti ( t )

– Total number of people at beach– Swimmers/non‐swimmers

• Potential Pollution Sources– Weather condition (sunny, etc.)– Current speed/direction– Wave Height

• Water Quality

– Sources of discharge• Rivers, outfalls, wetlands, etc.

– Floatables– Amount of debris/litter• Water Quality

– FIB concentrations– Water temperature– Water color/odor

– Amount of debris/litter– Amount of algae

• Stranded on beach• Floating/submerged in waterWater color/odor

– Turbidity (clarity) – Presence of wildlife• Gull counts• Geese, deer, other

Presence of domestic animals– Presence of domestic animals• Dogs, Horses

Land Use/Source ID Data – Annual Survey

• Wastewater discharge points• Septic systems • Combined sewage overflows• Subsurface sewage disposal• Storm water outfalls• Rivers, creeks & streams• Agricultural run-off

• Caged Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)

• Wildlife• Domestic animalsAgricultural run off

• Urban run-off• Industrial waste• Marinas & harbors

M d b t

• Stream bank erosion• Landfills, open dumps• Ground water

Bathhouse toilet facilities• Moored boats• Land Use (local & watershed)• Annual bather load

• Bathhouse toilet facilities• Drains & pipes• Wetland drainage• Hydrological assessmentsy g• Sediment/Sand assessments

Motivation for ActionMotivation for Action• Public perception/expectationsPublic perception/expectations

– Citizens value utility as condition of residence• Economic issuesEconomic issues• Social issues

– Equity with regards to accessq y g• Environmental protection/preservation

– Coastal habitat– Fisheries and wildlife

• Public health

Beaches, water recreation & related activities t billi f d ll llgenerate billions of dollars annually

“Healthy Waters, Strong Economy”

• The Brookings Institution, September 2007– http://www healthylakes org/site upload/upload/GrtLakesCostBenefit pdf– http://www.healthylakes.org/site_upload/upload/GrtLakesCostBenefit.pdf

1. Investing $26 billion in the GL will result in $80 billion in short- and long-term economic benefitslong term economic benefits

2. Reinvigorate the economy regionally

3. Direct economic benefits from recreation

4. Raises property values

5. Makes region more attractive to businesses and workers5. Makes region more attractive to businesses and workers

How Do BSS fit with the Beach Protection Act?Protection Act?

Proposed language– Extends BEACH Act through 2012– Requires State environmental agency notification

when water quality standards are exceededwhen water quality standards are exceeded– Monitoring, notification, source identification programs

(includes sanitary surveys)( y y )– Use of rapid testing methods (within 6 hours of receipt

by testing facility)• Lab based• Predictive models

– Increases authorizationc eases aut o at o

Utility of BSSy• Create a common approach to identify sources

– Standardized formStandardized form• Consistent data collection method • Common data fields collected• Creates a common mechanism for sharing data

on likely pollution sources & ambient conditions• Applicable to variety of water bodies in the Great• Applicable to variety of water bodies in the Great

Lakes basin• Mechanism for sharing tips amongst beach

t i l l b h ditimanagers to improve local beach conditions– Increased awareness of what may impact beaches

• Aids in prioritizing remediation measuresAids in prioritizing remediation measures

D. Rockwell, US EPA

D. Rockwell, US EPA

D. Rockwell, US EPA

ANNUAL BEACH ADVISORIES – RACINE, WINORTH ZOO BEACH SEASONYEAR NORTHBEACH*

ZOOBEACH*

BEACH SEASON(TOTAL DAYS)

1997 18/19% 30/32% 931998 16/16% 4/4% 981999 15/16% 19/20% 942000 62/66% 39/41% 942000 62/66% 39/41% 942001 17/20% 21/25% 842002 27/31% 22/25% 872003 31/32% 26/27% 962004 22/22% 16/16% 992005 5/5% 5/5% 932005 5/5% 5/5% 932006 3/3% 7/7% 942007 3/3% 7/7% 94

* Number of advisory days per season/per cent of season2008 1/1% 3/3% 88

Site Specific Examples from Wisconsin

Using sanitary surveys to initiate remediation – immediate successes

d i i ht i t f th i ti tiand insights into further investigation

US EPA Beach Sanitary Forms and Guidance Document

Website: http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/sanitarysurvey/index.html

Sunset Park BeachSturgeon Bay

D C t Wi iDoor County, Wisconsin

Techniques EmployedAdditi l l ti l d t l• Additional samples – spatial and temporal

• Avian fecal counts• Overland flow• Overland flow• Detailed rainfall evaluations• Outfall samples (surrounding beach)p ( g )• Beach sand (upshore, swash, and submerged)• Bathers, birds, wind speed, wind direction, wave

h i ht t t t bidit l hheight, temperature, turbidity, long-shore current, animals, etc..

• Land use evaluations• Watershed • Daily SS (4x/week)• Annual Sanitary Survey

~260 acre watershed

Courtesy - City of Sturgeon Bay Engineering Department.

Current

Future

B fBefore

After

Fish Creek BeachFish Creek BeachTown of Gibraltar

Door County, Wisconsin

Techniques Employed• Additional samples – spatial and temporal• Avian fecal counts• Overland flow• Detailed rainfall evaluations• Outfall samples (surrounding beach)• Outfall samples (surrounding beach)• Beach sand (upshore, swash, and submerged)• Bathers, birds, wind speed, wind direction, waveBathers, birds, wind speed, wind direction, wave

height, temperature, turbidity, long-shore current, animals, etc..

• Land use evaluations• Land use evaluations• Watershed • Daily SS (4x/week)Daily SS (4x/week)• Annual Sanitary Survey

Existing ConditionsConditions

Planned ImprovementsImprovements

CurrentCurrent

Future

Maslowski Park BeachMaslowski Park BeachCity of Ashland

Ashland County, Wisconsin

Techniques Employedq p y• Additional samples – spatial and temporal• Avian fecal counts• Overland flow• Detailed rainfall evaluations• Outfall samples (surrounding beach)• Beach sand (upshore, swash, and submerged)

Bathers birds wind speed wind direction wave• Bathers, birds, wind speed, wind direction, wave height, temperature, turbidity, long-shore current, animals, etc..

• Land use evaluations• Watershed

Daily SS (4x/week)• Daily SS (4x/week)• Annual Sanitary Survey

Existing ConditionsConditions

Sand and Spatial Data

•More work needed!

•Some items identified, but k d d t i tmany unknown and data is not

consistent.