Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Water Quality Standards and Assessment in New Hampshire
January 17th, 2020
New Hampshire Rivers Management Advisory Committee
Presented by:
Ken Edwardson, Senior Scientist, Watershed Management Bureau
1
Today’s Topics
• Water Quality Standards• What and How• PFAS• Dissolved Oxygen• Flows for nutrient permitting• Aluminum• Cyanotoxins
• Surface Water Quality Assessments• Why?• How?• Oh, the CALM thing.• Documents available. • Find out about my waterbody.
2
1. DESIGNATED USES (DU)• Goal uses: “what do we (society) want to use the waters of the
state for?” OR “What valuable things do we want waters to do?
2. CRITERIA TO SUPPORT THE USES• What are the measurable attributes of waters related to each
DU, and what is a minimum acceptable value?
3. ANTIDEGRADATION• Conditions should not get progressively worse.
Full Clean Water Act (CWA) text: http://epw.senate.gov/water.pdf
Surface Water Quality Standards
3
Aquatic Life
Fish & Shellfish Consumption
Drinking Water Supply After Treatment
Recreation
Wildlife
Designated Uses
4
A. NUMERIC [e.g. “The pH of Class B waters shall be 6.5 to 8.0, unless due to natural causes.”]
B. NARRATIVE [e.g. free from substances in kind that float as foam, debris, scum or other visible substances,…]
Water Quality Standard Criteria: Numeric vs Narrative
5
Water Quality Standards “Numeric” Criteria Types
6
Human Health• Water Conc. for Human
Recreation
• Water Conc. for Water and Fish Consumption
• Water Conc. for Fish Consumption
• Tissue Conc. for Fish Consumption
Aquatic Life• Freshwater
• Acute
• Chronic
• Marine Waters• Acute
• Chronic
Where do numeric water quality standards come from?
EPA produces Clean Water Act 304(a) Guidance for a
Parameter.
State adopts 304(a) “As Is”.
State adopts 304(a) “With Modifications” as, or more, protective as 304(a).
State “creates its own” criterion as, or more, protective as 304(a).
State “creates its own” criterion.
7
AntidegradationAntidegradation Diagram BEST POSSIBLE WATER QUALITY
Better
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Res
ou
rce
Wat
ers
(OR
Ws)
TIE
R 3 TIER 2
HIGH QUALITY
More than 10% of the Total Assimilative
Capacity Remaining
EXISTING WATER QUALITY
Tota
l Ass
imila
tive
Cap
acit
y
20% Remaining Assimilative Capacity
Rem
ain
ing
Ass
imila
tive
C
apac
ity
WA
TER
QU
ALI
TY
Par
amet
er
Val
ue
Insignificant pollutant loading allowed --<20% remaining assimilative capacity.
Significant pollutant loading allowed after full public review – determine economic or social necessity
TIER 1
MARGINAL QUALITY
Less than 10% of the Total Assimilative
Capacity Remaining
No additional pollutant loading.
Res
erve
Ass
imila
tive
C
apac
ity
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
WorseIMPAIRED
Water quality is below the standard
No additional pollutant loading. Pollutant loading reductions are needed to restore water quality 8
Antidegradation
• Don’t pollute what’s already polluted.• Don’t cause what isn’t polluted to become too
polluted.• If it is already polluted, make it better.• Well, maybe you can pollute it a bit more with a
whole lot of justification and ongoing review of that justification.
9
WQSAC JLCAR Submit to EPAPublic
Hearing
EPA Approval
Data & Research & Math
Public Comment
Usable in Federal Actions
Usable in State Actions
State Adopted
Public Discussions
How do standards get adopted/updated?
10
Formal “Triennial Review”
EPA Review and Action (40 CFR 131.21)
11
https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20190411-epa-wqstd-review.pdf
Surface Water Quality Standards
Questions?
12
Chapter 368:8 Laws of 2018, NHDES Shall:
Develop a Plan including Schedule and Budget to establish standards for PFAS in NH Surface Waters.
Due January 1st, 2020. For all designated uses.
PFAS - Legislative Charge to Plan for Water Quality Standards
13
If one just looks at places we might predict have PFAS…
Rivers representing a range of sizes, regions, geology, and development pressures...
OR
PFAS - Preliminary Occurrence Data for Surface Waters
14
Water Concentration Criteria (ng/L)• MCL as a Water Quality Standard• Fish/Shellfish Consumption (req. BAF)• Fish/Shellfish & Water Consumption (req. BAF)• Recreational Contact
Tissue Concentration Criteria (mg/kg)Fish/Shellfish Consumption (no BAF req.)
Fish/shellfish consumption advisoriesMeals per month
Human Health Criteria
15
Aquatic Life Criteria Development
16
Acute Toxicity Effects Data (EC50, LC50)
Final Acute Value (FAV)
Acute Criterion / Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC)
Chronic Toxicity Effects Data (growth, reproduction, survival)
Final Chronic Value (FAV)
Chronic Criterion / Criteria Continuous Concentration (CCC)
Acute/Chronic Ratio (ACR)
Water Characteristics (pH, DOC, hardness,…)
Modified from: Stephen, C., Mount, D., Hansen, D., Gentile, J., Chapman, G., & Brungs, W. (1985). Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the Protection Of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses. EPA.
Water Concentration Criteria (ng/L)Water Concentration Criteria (ng/L)
CriteriaEstimated Development
Costs of Approach
Estimated Time to
Initiate
Rulemaking
Subsequent Assessment Costs*
MCL adoption as
Water Consumption Criteria$25,000 4-8 months $92,000
Establish Fish Consumption Advisory $9,000 2-3 months $547,000 - $4,747,000
Fish/Shellfish Tissue Criteria $34,000 - $120,000 5-24 months $547,000 - $4,747,000
Fish/Shellfish Consumption Criteria
Water Concentration Criteria, State-wide$75,000 - $741,000 18-36 months $153,000
Fish/Shellfish Consumption PLUS Water
Consumption Criteria
Combination of MCL adoption as Water and Fish/Shellfish Consumption Criteria (line 1) and Water
Concentration Criteria to Protect Fish Consumption (line 4).
$75,000 - $741,000 18-36 months $153,000
Recreational Contact$34,000 - $120,000 6-18 months $540,000
Aquatic Life Use$2,525,000 - $43,225,000 3-8 years $153,000
Cost Summary for Surface Water Quality Criteria
17*Approximately 8,500 distinct waterbodies in the state. **There are four aquatic life criteria; freshwater acute, freshwater chronic, marine water acute, and marine water chronic.
More on Water Quality Standards for PFAS
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20191206-pfas-plan-overview.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/documents/r-wd-19-30.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/archives.htm
18
Dissolved Oxygen Saturation Criteria
• 2015 - Discussions in WQSAC begin.• 2017 - RSA altered to preclude percent saturation. • 2018 303(d) list – DO Saturation impairments proposed for delisting.• 2019 – Correspondence with EPA regarding DO saturation and critical
habitat listing in estuarine waters.• 2019 – NH withdraws request for delisting and change to water
quality standard.• 2019/2020 - Legislation to de-preclude percent saturation.
• Conclusion – DO is a complicated issue!
19
EPA 304(a) Guidance
“Gold Book” (1986)
• Based on production impairment estimates which are based primarily upon growth data and information on temperature, disease, and pollutant stresses.
• The average dissolved oxygen concentrations selected are values 0.5 mg/L above the slight production impairment values and represent values between no production impairment and slight production impairment.
“Virginia Province Approach” (2000)
• Applies from Cape Hatteras north to Cape Cod.
• “Effects on different lifestagessegregated— separate criteria for larvae and juveniles/adults.”
• “Recruitment Model: Individual larvae not as important to population growth as individual juvenile or adult.”
20
“Virginia Province Approach” (VPA) (2000)
VPA Acute Criterion to Protect Adult/Juvenile Survival
VPA Acute Criterion Curve to to Protect Larval Survival
VPA Limitations Include• All Lab
• Predator-Prey • Sediment• Food• Avoidance• Single Stressor
• Wrong pH• 1 Reproductive study
VPA Chronic Criterion to Protect Overall Health and Growth
Gold Book – Slight Production Impairment
21
Forthcoming White Paper Considerations
22
• “Goldbook” values and supporting science.
• “Virginia Province Approach” approach.
• Delaware process.
• Massachusetts process and possible outcomes.
• Endangered and Threatened species.
• State Species of Concern (Alewife, Am. Eel, Herring, Shad*, Smelt*).
• Direction gleamed from NMFS ESA discussions.
• Criteria that lets aquatic life do more than survive.
• Weighting the impacts of science gaps.• Missing DO requirements for NH species and life stages.• Avoidance.• Implications of VP approach being all lab studies.• Uncertainty in the VP approach.• ESA Species life stage DO requirement gaps.• Relationships in DO needs between life stages.
• Existing Conditions at time of stress are generally greater than any criteria.
• Assessment Methods and Compliance.
• Other…
Dissolved Oxygen - How to move forward?
• White paper on marine dissolved oxygen criteria.• Discussion in WQSAC.• Integrate to next triennial review?
• Conclusion – DO is a complicated issue!
23
More on Dissolved Oxygen
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2016/documents/20160414-nhdes-do-preview.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2016/documents/20161013-nhdes-pres.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2017/documents/20170209-nhdes-pres.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2017/documents/20170413-nhdes-mtg3-pres.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2017/documents/20171012-thursby-do.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20190411-marine-do.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20191206-epa-do-slides.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/archives.htm
24
Flows for Nutrient Permitting
25
(April 12, 2018 – NHDES)
RSA 485-A:8 II.ADDED in 2017
“The commissioner shall not calculate nutrient discharge limits for aquatic life and human health criteria based on 7Q10 flow or such other flow criteria more restrictive than 7Q10.”
Translator for Narrative Criteria and Applicable Flow
EPA NPDES Permitting
Gold Book values are “not to exceed” values.
NH WQS at Env-Wq 1705.01 requires that not less than 10 percent of the assimilative capacity of each surface water shall be held in reserve to provide for future needs (For example the Gold Book instream target of 100 ug/L is reduced to 90 ug/L to hold 10% assimilative capacity in reserve for future needs).
7Q10 flow (infrequently exceeded) is currently used by EPA in both NH and MA.
26
27
Waterbodies receiving NPDES WWTF effluent (red)
and everyone else (blue)
Mass Balance Equation
EPA - https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2018/documents/20180111-2-nh-tp-lim-calcs.pdf
28
Mass Balance
Background River Flow and Concentration Downstream River Flow and Concentration
Thickness = FlowColor = Concentration
29
Mass Balance – 7Q10 Flow & 100 ug/L
Background River Flow and Concentration Downstream River Flow and Concentration
Thickness = FlowColor = Concentration
RSA 485-A:8 II modified in 2017. EPA “Gold Book”
30
Mass Balance – What now?
Background River Flow (>7Q10) and Concentration
Downstream River Flow and Concentration
Thickness = FlowColor = Concentration
31
Hodgson Brook, (NHRIV600031001-04)
Summer Median TP = 43 ug/L (n=25)East Br. Saco River, (NHRIV600020301-03)
Summer Median TP = 6 ug/L (n=8)
00K-HOB, August 2, 201806-EBS, June 21,2017
Focus on the August Median Flow
32
EPA Ecoregional values
33
10
31.25
Existing Ambient TP Concentrations
34
• Important to know existing conditions before setting targets.
National 25th percentile 10 – 128 ug/LNew Hampshire 25th percentile 5 – 16 ug/L
Existing Ambient TP Concentrations
35
• Important to know existing conditions before setting targets
• NH HUC 8 River Median TP Concentrations vary from 5.85 ug/L in the north to 25 ug/L in the south• Higher values are in more populated
areas of the state (not natural).
New Hampshire Medians
Looking at ambient TP as a function of existing assessments –Rivers and Impoundments
36
Baker River, Plymouth Pemigewasset, Ayers Island dam
• Higher TP in impaired waters.
• Significant difference in rivers.
Does TP increase as flow decreases?
37
Current Summer Median = 45 ug/L (n=31)
Perhaps.
Merrimack R, (Lots of WWTFs)
Does TP increase as flow decreases?
38
2018, 02-ISG, Isinglass R
Current Summer Median = 25 ug/L (n=45)
Looking at many sites, generally no.
Isinglass R, (No WWTFs)
State-wide, River TP Concentration –vs – Flow
39
16-ASH, Ashuelot R
• Increased concentration as flow decreased only apparent in WWTF effluent rivers.
Nutrient Permitting Flows - How to move forward?
Tiered Approach Guidance Likely
I – Rule of thumb for reasonable potential – 7Q10 and 100 ug/L or August med and 30 ug/L TP (2x state-wide median)
II – Model approach – multi-parameter (include biological activity)
III - Intensive monitoring – response parameters
40
More on River Flows for Nutrient Permitting
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2018/documents/20181011-7q10-alternatives.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20190725-wqsac-prm-flow-nut.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2018/documents/20180111-2-nh-tp-lim-calcs.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/archives.htm
41
Aluminum 304(a) Guidance
42
Existing New Hampshire Criteria verses 2018 304(a) Guidance
Existing New Hampshire Criteria
Fixed Criterion
2018 304(a) Guidance
Variable Criterion
Dependent upon pH, Hardness, and Dissolved Organic Carbon
Example
Lake DepthDOC
(mg/L)Total Hardness
(mg/L as CaCO3)pH
Acute (ug/L)
Chronic (ug/L)
Epilimnion 4m
2.9 12.1 6.56 430 230
Metalimnion 9.5m
3.0 12.2 6.46 380 210
Hypolimnion 13m
5.0 15.3 6.60 690 330
43
Acute(ug/L)
Chronic(ug/L)
750 87
Aluminum - How to move forward?
• Mine datasets to identify possible defaults.• Spatial differences?• Waterbody type differences?• Seasonal differences?• Diel differences?
• Discussion and draft in WQSAC.• Likely integrate to next triennial review.
44
45
Cyanobacteria 304(a) Guidance
Cyanotoxin* Mode of action and/or symptomsMicrocystins (nearly 100 variants) Hepatotoxic, targets the liver and digestive organs, tumor
promoting, inhibition of protein phosphatases. Acute gastroenteritis, chronic tumor promotion.
Nodularins (similar in structure to microcystins)
Similar to microcystins, but not as toxic and common in brackish or marine systems.
Anatoxin-a Neurotoxic, inhibits acetylcholine receptors (neurotransmitter). Fast-acting and may cause seizures or death (i.e. common for dogs or others animals to ingest and die).
Anatoxin-a (S) Neurotoxic, similar to anatoxin-a (S)Saxitoxins Neurotoxic, blocking voltage gate of sodium ion channels. More
common to marine organisms.
Cylindrospermopsins Toxic to multiple organs, neurotoxic and genotoxic, affecting neurons and genes.
Lyngbyatoxins Tumor promotionBMAA/DAB(beta-Methylamino-L-alanine / 2,4-diaminobutyric acid )
Neurotoxic, chronic exposure may be linked to neurodegenerative diseases such as ALS. (Individuals can have a genetic precursor).
*This is not a complete list of the cyanotoxins.
What NH has seen and what the 304(a) guidance covers?
47
304(a) Guidance
Who is covered by this 304(a) criteria?
48
Nice EPA Infographic on Cyanobacteria
More nice EPA Infographics on Cyanobacteria
49
Be aware that 304(a) Guidance only covers some parts.
How does NHDES assess for cyanobacteria right now?
Env-Wq 1105.14(e)
An advisory is posted if:
• A potential toxin-producing cyanobacterial scum is present at the beach and cell dominance is greater than 50 percent of the sample total cell count.
OR
• The cyanobacteria cell count is greater than 70,000 cells/mL of water.
50
Cyanobacteria - How to move forward?
51
• Cyano concentrations likely to operate in conjunction with cell counts.
• Assessment could consider cell counts and toxin concentrations by genera, however more toxins by genera are constantly being added.
• Discussion and draft in WQSAC.
• Likely integrate to next triennial review.
More on Cyanobacteria
52
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/wqs/meetings/2019/documents/20190725-wqsac-cyano.pdf
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/beaches/cyano_bacteria.htm
• http://www4.des.state.nh.us/WaterShed_BeachMaps/• https://www.des.nh.gov/media/pr/cyano.htm• Twitter @NHDES_Beaches• http://www4.des.state.nh.us/CoastalAtlas/Shellfish_Map.html
Overview of the Clean Water Act Assessment Process
53
Revise CALM & Assessment Database as Necessary
Gather All Readily Available Data
Draft 303(d) & CALM for Public
Comment
Final 305(b)/303(d),
CALM, and Response to Comments
Assess Data per CALM
303(d) Portion is ‘Finalized’ when EPA ‘Approves the List’
Request Data from the Public
Data Submitted to NHDES for EMD
Import
Public Comments on the 303(d) List & CALM
Assessment Process
54
Assessment Document Availability
55
Assessment Unit
56
• Spatial unit of record is the “Assessment Unit”.
Data
57
• In an assessment year – a request for data is sent out to over 2,000 individuals/organizations
• But…Data can be submitted at any time
• Needs supporting documentation to be used in assessment process
1. Low
2. Fair
3. Good
4. Excellent
• 2018 - Over 4M grab and 2.5M datalogger records
https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/swqa/documents/nhdes-w-07-024.pdf
Keep CalmAND
Geek OutON
Data
Consolidated Assessment & Listing Methodology (CALM)
58
• Translator document for how the water quality data will be used to make surface water quality attainment decisions by designated use, consistent with state surface water quality standards.
• Like the 303(d), the CALM is available for public comment.
• What kinds of things are in the CALM?
CALM Overview
59
What kinds of things are in the CALM?• Core parameters for each use (i.e. bacteria for
swimming use).
• Minimum number of samples.
• Maximum age of samples.
• How older data is treated.
• When samples must be taken (seasonality, time of day, flow, …).
• Where samples are collected (depth profiles, to compare with older data, ...).
• How multiple samples will be treated.
• …
• Data – Environmental Monitoring Database (EMD)
• Water quality standards
• Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology (CALM)
• Final assessment
• Process the data
Building an Assessment
60
305(b) / 303(d) - Categories
61
• Category 2 – Parameter meets water quality standards
• Category 3 – Insufficient data to assess the parameter per the CALM
• Category 5 – Parameter is a pollutant that requires a TMDL
• Category 4 – Impairment per the CALM• 4A = An EPA-approved TMDL has been
completed
• 4B = A TMDL is not necessary since other enforceable controls are expected to attain water quality standards
• 4C = Not a pollutant but is causing impairment
Assessment Viewer
62
Assessment Viewer - Data
63
More on the 305(b)/303(d) Assessment Process
• https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/swqa/index.htm
64
65
• Water Quality Standards• What and How• PFAS• Dissolved Oxygen• Flows for nutrient permitting• Aluminum• Cyanotoxins
• Surface Water Quality Assessments• Why?• How?• Oh, the CALM thing.• Documents available. • Find out about my waterbody.
Review
Ken Edwardson, Senior ScientistWatershed Management Bureau Phone: (603) 271-8864Email: [email protected]
Discussion
66
