330 likes | 488 Views
Water Quality Monitoring, Standards, and Assessments. Southeastern Water Pollution Biologists Association Presented by David Melgaard November 2012. Standards, Monitoring, Assessment, and Listing.
E N D
Water Quality Monitoring, Standards, and Assessments Southeastern Water Pollution Biologists Association Presented by David Melgaard November 2012
Standards, Monitoring, Assessment, and Listing A.K.A.: Federal: CWA§303 [(a),(b),(c),(d)], CWA§305(b), CWA§106(e), Numerous CFRs; Many State Rules and Regulations; Multiple Guidance documents - both Federal and State
Topic Description • A discussion of the approaches that states are currently considering in assessing impairment for water quality parameters
Water Quality Standards • Most are not developed with specific monitoring requirements included • Exceptions- Bacteriological- Fish consumption- Toxics – “shall not exceed”- State specific requirements (e.g., FL NNC (proposed), others??) • Lack of standards to address flow related issues
Elements of Monitoring and Assessment Program • Strategy • Objectives • Design • Indicators • QA • Data Management (WQX/STORET, ADB, State systems) • Data Analysis/Assessment • Reporting (IR, State Reports) • Programmatic Evaluation • General Support and Infrastructure Planning • References
Assessment and Listing Methodologies for Waterbody Condition Determination • EPA’s Consolidated and Listing Methodology Guidance, 2002 http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/monitoring/calm.cfm • Each state has an Assessment and Listing Methodology- Must be consistent with state’s WQS • EPA’s Integrated Report Guidancehttp://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/guidance.cfm
Current Status • Great progress has been made in data management • Great progress has been made in developing CALMs that are directly related to WQS • Very few issues with assessment and impairment calls in 303(d) listings/delistings
Issues with Assessment and Listing • Inadequate resources for monitoring • Dealing with small data sets • Lack of data for toxics • Lack of biological data • Flow monitoring resources (USGS, internal) • Insufficient data for determining causes of impairment • Many unassessed waters • Time constraints • Other
Issues with CALMs vs. 303(d) • Small datasets • Uses of the binomial with small datasets • Toxics • Inconsistencies with standards • Interpretation of biological data • Interpretation of narrative criteria • 4b determinations – Reasonable Assurance • Natural condition determinations (4c) • Bacteriological (shellfish vs. recreational) • Other
Current Approaches States are Considering in Assessments • Funding - Reverse recent budget cuts - Seek new sources • Toxics - metals • Emerging contaminants - Pharmaceuticals - Personal care products – soaps, fragrances, cosmetics - Water treatment byproducts e.g., brominated THMs • Third party data - when and how to use - QA/QC
Current Approaches States are Considering in Assessments (continued) • Sedimentation - qualitative vs. quantitative measures • Habitat Alteration – how to measure and document • Natural condition determinations • Periphyton • Fish IBI • Estuary bioassessment • Flow
Flow Concerns • USGS found that human alteration of waterways has impacted the magnitude of minimum and maximum stream flows in more than 86% of monitored streams nationally.
Flow Concerns • Must balance the needs of water quantity and water quality • Competing interests to use GW and SW for: • Drinking water • Industrial uses – power generation • Municipal needs • Agriculture • Etc.
Flow Concerns (cont.) • Water use conflicts complicated by: • Droughts • Floods • Climate Change • Interbasin Transfers • Water Diversion
The Effect of Groundwater Withdrawals on Surface Water Groundwater discharge to a gaining stream can be affected by a pumping well. A well close to a gaining stream could decrease the amount of groundwater discharging to the stream. Further pumping of the well could cause the gaining stream to become a losing stream. USGS Circular 1139
EPA R4: Addressing Flow Issues Under the CWA • Discussions with State Water Division Directors • Working with EPA HQ, USGS, FWS, and other Regions • Water division Flow Workgroup tasked to look at instream flow issues in all program areas including monitoring and assessment • Encouraging all states to adopt explicit flow WQS(TN,KY, Seminole already have)