Contaminant Fate WG 5 Year Plan

1. Contaminant Fate WG 5 Year Plan RMP CFWG Meeting September 14, 2007

2. Management Context • CFWG addresses linkages between sources and exposure/effects • In Bay transport/partition/transformation/removal processes • Project effects of loads changes (management actions) on processes & ultimately exposure • Fate work to date driven by TMDL needs • Mass budget/ conceptual models for priority pollutants, e.g. PCBs, Hg

3. Previous/Ongoing Work • Contaminant loads- NPDES permits, MDN, RMP river/trib/stormwater studies (Guadalupe, Mallard, Hayward Z4LA) • Contaminant distributions- RMP, NOAA, BPTCP surface, USGS PAH/PCB/metal/Hg cores, USGS,UCSC wetland Hg cores • Hydrology- USGS Uncles&Peterson, Gross, URS SFO Model • Sediment dynamics- USGS Schoellhamer&Lionberger, Fuller radiodating, USACE Leahy • (Net) Sedimentation- USGS bathymetry trends, UCB Byrne/Watson in wetlands

4. Previous/Ongoing Work • Mass budgets:1 box models for PCBs, PAH, PBDE; Multibox model for PCBs; TMDLs for Cu/Ni, Hg, PCBs • Conceptual models for Cu/Ni, Hg (TetraTech), OCpests, PCBs, dioxins (SFEI), OPpests (PERL), Se (LWA/PERL) • Speciation/Partitioning- Cu/Ni- UCSC Bruland/Flegal, Se- Cutter, Hg– Marvin-DiPasquale, Steding/Sedlak, PCBs – Luthy, DDT- USEPA • Transformation/degradation- Hg- USGS Marvin-DiPasquale, Cu/Ni- USGS Kuwabara/Topping • Biouptake- Se- USGS Luoma/Presser; PCB- Gobas et al.; Hg- UCD Slotton, metals- UCSC Flegal/Luengen, Bruland

5. Questions to be answered: • Are the priorities and questions appropriate ? • Have we identified & prioritized the right workplan elements? • (Are the budget allocations and timing appropriate?)

6. Right Priorities and Questions? • To date prioritized by focusing on individual contaminants (mirroring TMDLs) • PCBs (via multi-box fate model) (mostly done?) • Hg – in progress • Is it time to expand focus (or too early)? • Expanded (generalized) application of sediment/ water fate/ transport models (multi-box) • Other individual contaminants (Se, dioxins)?

7. #0: PCBs Priorities • Are PCBs still a priority for future work, or mostly done for now? • Yes done- already more effort than spent on anything else • No more needed- large uncertainties in many model parameters and assumptions • Is multi-box sophisticated enough? • Model resolution outpaces input data? • Continued coring • Golden Gate export

8. #1: Hg Priorities • Which processes, sources, and pathways contribute disproportionately to food web accumulation of mercury? (Hg Strategy Q2) • SPLWG focus on sources & loads • CFWG focus on process linkages • Sed/water transport/mixing, speciation, partitioning, de/methylation, export, burial, uptake* • EEWG focus on food web/effects • *CFWG linkage via abiotic factors affecting uptake at primary producer/consumer level

9. #2: Persistent Particulate Pollutant Priorities • What patterns of impairment are forecast for persistent, particle-associated pollutants for major segments and the Estuary as a whole under various management scenarios? • Piggyback off PCBs? • Multi-box application to other pollutants (PBDE>dioxins>Se>PAH>pyreth>pharma>Cu) • [other contaminants may benefit from coring, Golden Gate export estimates work also]

10. #2: Persistent Particulate Pollutant Priorities • To prioritize do we want to continue to mirror TMDLs? • Some efficiency in grouping contaminants, e.g. hydrophobic organics • But responsiveness to stakeholder needs important (RMP mission relevance and timeliness)

11. Questions Review: • Are the priorities and questions appropriate? 0. Are PCB questions sufficiently answered for now? • Which processes, sources, and pathways contribute disproportionately to food web accumulation of mercury? • What patterns of impairment are forecast for persistent, particle-associated pollutants for major segments and the Estuary as a whole under various management scenarios? Any others, or tweaks to the above?

12. #0 PCB elements • Right elements, right study priorities? • None directly planned • Future coring, Ggate export have PCB component but not necessarily their only/central focus. • Do we need more PCB specific questions answered? • Degradation rates? Hot spot transport?

13. #1: Hg Elements • Right elements, right study priorities? • Already funded • Sediment reactive Hg special study (UCSC) • 2008 Data Integration • MeHg mass budget ($ via RMP data integration?)- tool for prioritizing data gaps • 2008 top tier SS proposals (CFWG) • Hg isotope signatures (2 yr x $75k) • Reactive Hg in trib (& air?) sources (1 yr x $60-160k) • ~150k placeholder in 2009, 2011 for Hg questions • “Identify high leverage sources, processes, pathways”

14. #2: Other Pollutant Elements • Right elements, right study priorities? • If not reorder (to match anticipated TMDL timelines?) • Screening application of multibox (RMP data integration) • Would need loads, literature review for new pollutants • Continued coring (alternate years special study? S&T element?) • How much is sufficient/ representative? • Sediment export – • Remote observations (Oram), G Gate, other bridges (Schoellhamer)

15. Budget and Timeline • Appropriate distribution?

16. Budget and Timeline • Alternative (more even) distribution?

17. Budget and Timeline • Alternative distribution? • More distributed coring effort • (Maybe) harder on sampling logistics? • 2-3 core sites on RMP S&T surface sampling cruises • Easier for analysis (esp. radiodating shorter half life isotopes) • Distributed effort for process studies • Pros/cons depends on study design, budget • Large influence, large uncertainty = top priority

18. Elements review: • Have we identified and prioritized the right workplan elements? • What directions beyond proposals already made? • MeHg mass budget may help ID gaps? • RFPs to get proposals addressing specific elements? • Other pollutant data sufficient for a multibox? • E.g. Loads and other details needs higher for multibox

19. Budget review: • Are the budget allocations and timing appropriate? • Commensurate with importance of pollutant questions • In time to inform management actions • TMDL schedule to prioritize among pollutants?