1 / 35

California's TMDL Guidance and Use of Adaptive Implementation

California's TMDL Guidance and Use of Adaptive Implementation. Tom Mumley CA Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region. Presentation Overview. CA uses adaptive implementation Driving issues / challenges Overview of CA guidance (Adaptive) implementation planning

lenora
Download Presentation

California's TMDL Guidance and Use of Adaptive Implementation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. California's TMDL Guidance and Use of Adaptive Implementation Tom Mumley CA Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region

  2. Presentation Overview • CA uses adaptive implementation • Driving issues / challenges • Overview of CA guidance • (Adaptive) implementation planning • Lessons learned

  3. California Uses Adaptive Implementation • TMDLs must have implementation plans • Adaptive implementation is implicit part of TMDL development • Adaptive implementation is explicit part of TMDL implementation

  4. TMDL Process Elements Problem Numeric Target Linkage Sources TMDL or equivalent Allocations Actions Regulatory Actions

  5. TMDL Issues / Challenges Technical • TMDLs are inherently difficult • Limited data / monitoring • Complex water body and watershed systems • Unknown or legacy sources • Water Quality Standards • $$ Resource Limitations

  6. TMDL Issues / Challenges Regulatory • Unknown or legacy sources • “Unregulated” sources • Regulatory constraints / conflicts • Water Quality Standards • $$ Resource Limitations

  7. TMDL Issues / Challenges Political • Interagency cooperation • Stakeholder cooperation • Water Quality Standards • $$ Resource Limitations

  8. TMDL “Impaired Waters” Guidance • Basic project planning principles • Base guidance with add-ons • Issue papers • Categorical pollutant modules • Phased “trackable” process • Seek best response to repair waters

  9. TMDL Project Phases

  10. 303(d) List 1 Project Definition 2 3 Project Planning Data Collection 4 Project Analyses 5-7 Regulatory Action/Process 8 Implementation WQS Support

  11. Hmmm… Mercury… Key Challenge Make decisions or recommendations despite numerous uncertainties!

  12. Key Solution • Apply scientific method to decision making • Consider physical and biological science AND social science challenges

  13. Key Opportunities = Adaptive Implementation • Project Definition and Plan • Conceptual Models (technical) • Implementation Planning (regulatory) • Manage stakeholder participation (political)

  14. Project Definition • One or more water body – pollutant combinations • Direction/focus of project • What is the problem? • What are the sources? • What can we do about it? • Initial “repair” estimate

  15. Is the listed water meeting WQS? Delist YES NO Are WQS appropriate? Evaluate Cause of Impairment NO Pollutants UAA SSO Anti-deg finding Pollution Develop TMDL Regulatory Actions Implementation Re-evaluate & adapt if necessary Meet WQS

  16. Project Plan • Detailed “trackable” road map • Detailed “repair” estimate • Identify and fill key data/information gaps • Identify and conduct appropriate analyses/modeling • Use conceptual model(s) • Include implementation planning • Include stakeholder participation

  17. Conceptual Models • Define the system • Describe inputs / outputs • Describe system conditions • Describe relevant fate, transport, and effects processes

  18. Conceptual Models • Illustrate key assumptions • Illustrate hypotheses • Identify information gaps • Identify analyses and modeling needs • Scientific basis of TMDL

  19. Implementation Planning • Identify issues early • Consider opportunities and constraints • technical, economic, political • Adaptive implementation • Think “backwards” • How do I get there from here?

  20. Adaptive Implementation Hypotheses = answers to implementation questions • What sources must be controlled? • What are applicable control measures? • What are applicable regulatory mechanisms?

  21. Adaptive Implementation

  22. Adaptive Implementation Collect data; perform analyses; make decision recommendations • As part of initial TMDL and implementation plan development • As part of implementation and refinement of actions • As part of implementation resulting in refinement of TMDL and implementation plan

  23. Stakeholder Participation • Getting buy-in = investing time • Conceptual Model • Project Plan • Seek collaboration • Data collection (before and/or after TMDL) • Implementation commitment • Constructive comments

  24. Lessons Learned • Need better project planning • Begin implementation planning earlier • Avoid adaptive implementation = study versus action

  25. Lessons Learned • Adaptive implementation requires long-term commitment • Need more trust and buy-in • Current regulatory framework inhibits adaptive implementation • Too much NPDES • Not enough nonpoint

  26. Conceptual Model of PCBs in SF Bay (USEPA)

  27. Bioturbation, Scouring, Deposition & Resuspension, Transport, Dredging Atmospheric Deposition Golden Gate Outflow PointSources Surface Waters UrbanRunoff Fish eatingWildlife Fish Spills & On-LandContaminated Sites Benthic & Plant eating Wildlife Biologically Active Sediment Layer Benthic Invertebrates & Plants Non-UrbanRunoff &Non-Point Sources Buried Sediment Layer Humans Degradation, Sorption & Desorption, Diffusion DeltaInflow PCBs Conceptual Model

  28. Bioturbation, Scouring, Deposition & Resuspension, Transport, Dredging Atmospheric Deposition Golden Gate Outflow PointSources Surface Waters UrbanRunoff Fish eatingWildlife Fish Spills & On-LandContaminated Sites Benthic & Plant eating Wildlife Biologically Active Sediment Layer Benthic Invertebrates & Plants Non-UrbanRunoff &Non-Point Sources Buried Sediment Layer Humans Degradation, Sorption & Desorption, Diffusion DeltaInflow PCBs Conceptual Model

  29. Mass Budget of PCBs in SF Bay (SFEI, 2002)

  30. Bioturbation, Scouring, Deposition & Resuspension, Transport, Dredging Atmospheric Deposition Golden Gate Outflow PointSources Surface Waters UrbanRunoff Fish eatingWildlife Fish Spills & On-LandContaminated Sites Benthic & Plant eating Wildlife Biologically Active Sediment Layer Benthic Invertebrates & Plants Non-UrbanRunoff &Non-Point Sources Buried Sediment Layer Humans Degradation, Sorption & Desorption, Diffusion DeltaInflow PCBs Conceptual Model

  31. Conceptual Food Web Model (Draft SFEI/EVS, 2002)

  32. Lessons Learned • Difficult to fast-track nonpoint source TMDLs • Dischargers not “used to” being regulated • Dischargers not “used to” monitoring • Difficult to make responsible for studies • New drivers = WDR waiver and nonpoint source policies

  33. Lessons Learned • Charting new territory = doing things never been done before • Pesticides in SF Bay Urban Creeks • Solution / implementation beyond municipalities • Prevent future impairment

  34. Adaptive Implementation • Take actions of “limited” scope based on available information • Improve understanding of problem and solutions • Make progress towards attaining water quality standards • Take action  prevent, manage, control  observe system’s response • Lather, rinse, repeat if necessary

More Related