Sediment Quality Objectives Development for California's Enclosed Bays and Estuaries Advisory Committee Meeting

1. Advisory Committee MeetingOctober 6, 2003 SWRCB Program to Develop Sediment Quality Objectives for Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of CaliforniaCAL/EPA BuildingSacramento, CaliforniaChris Beeganbeegc@swrcb.ca.gov

2. Meeting Agenda • 10:00 – 10:15 Welcome and Meeting Objectives – Chris Beegan • 10:15 – 10:30 Program Review and Role of Advisory Committee – Chris Beegan • 10:30 – 10:45 Membership Update – Chris Beegan • 10:45 – 11:00 Technical Update – Steve Bay • 11:00 – 12:00 Present Proposed Topics for Sediment Assessment and Implementation Strategies – Steve Bay and Chris Beegan • 12:00 – 1:00 Lunch • 1:00 – 2:30 Focused Discussion on Draft Outline – Brock Bernstein • 2:30 – 3:00 Public Forum • 3:00 – 3:15 Future Activities • 3:15 – 3:30 Adjourn

3. Meeting Objectives • Review Program for New Participants • Review Roles Responsibility and Membership of Advisory Committee • Review Program Status • Review and Obtain Comments on Proposed Topics for Sediment Assessment and Implementation Strategies • Identify Future Activities

4. Background • In 1989 the California Water Code was amended to include the Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program • Section 13392.6 Required SWRCB to prepare workplan to develop SQOs (original workplan completed 1991) • Section 13393 Requires SWRCB to adopt SQOs (not completed)

5. Background (Continued) • 1999 a lawsuit was filed against the SWRCB for failing among other issues to adopt SQOs • Court Agreed with the Petitioners and SWRCB staff negotiated with the petitioners to develop within a specific time frame

6. Compliance Schedule • By June 30 2003, SWRCB must adopt scoping document (workplan) • By August 5, 2005 SWRCB must circulate draft objectives • By February 28, 2007 SWRCB must adopt objectives and policy and submit to office of Administrative Law

7. Definitions • Section 13391.5(d) of CWC defines SQOs: “’Sediment Quality Objective’ means that level of a constituent in sediment which is established with an adequate margin of safety for the reasonable protection of the beneficial uses of water or the prevention of nuisances.”

8. More Water Code • 13393 (b) further states “that the SWRCB shall adopt the sediment quality objectives pursuant to the procedures established by this division for adopting or amending water quality control plans. The sediment quality objectives shall be based on scientific information, including, but not limited to, chemical monitoring, bioassays, or established modeling procedures, and shall provide adequate protection for the most sensitive aquatic organisms. The state board shall base the sediment quality objectives on a health risk assessment if there is a potential for exposure of humans to pollutants through the food chain to edible fish, shellfish, or wildlife.”

9. Project Goals • Develop scientifically defensible SQOs that are protective of beneficial uses. • Develop policy that’s fair and provides for consistent application throughout the state. • Describe methods and tools for assessing sediment quality as part of implementation policy

10. Key Project Elements • Utilize combination of numeric and narrative SQOs to encompass broad range of beneficial uses • Develop numeric objectives using regional information • Provide implementation policy for different applications • Focus on protecting benthic communities/aquatic life using weight of evidence approach

11. Project Roles • SWRCB staff will manage project • Scientific activities: SCCWRP Lead Development Program with Support from SFEIMoss Landing Marine Labs and UC Davis-MPSL Granite Canyon. Scientific Steering Committee, Advisory Committee and Agency Coordination Committee will have opportunity to provide input. • Enforcement/Application policy development:SWRCB staff with input from Scientific Steering Committee, Advisory Committee and Agency Coordination Committees • SWRCB Board members ultimately decide what the policy or plan will contain

12. Advisory Committee • Section 13394.6. of the California Water Code requires the SWRCB to establish an advisory committee to assist in the implementation of Bay Protection Program. Members shall be appointed by the SWRCB to represent: (1) Trade associations whose members are businesses that use the bay, estuaries, and coastal waters of the state as a resource in their business activities. (2) Dischargers required to pay fees pursuant to Section 13396.5. (3) Environmental, public interest, public health, and wildlife conservation organizations. • Mechanism for stakeholder involvement in policy development process • Committee input part of information considered in SWRCB staff decisions

13. Advisory Committee Regulated Community • Ports: Paul Johansen, Port of Los Angeles. Alt; Andy Jahn, Port of Oakland • POTWs: Tom Grovhoug, Larry Walker Associates). Alt: Lisa Haney, LACSD • Municipal Stormwater: Desi Alvarez, City of Downey. Alt Sandy Mathews, California Stormwater Quality Association • Industrial Stormwater: Tim Piasky, BIASC. Alt Steve Arita, Western States Petroleum Association • Industrial Direct: Susan Paulsen, Flowscience. Alt Craig Johns, California Resource Strategies • Federal Facilities: Teresa Marley, USN. Alt Bart Chadwick USN • Legacy Pollutants: Paul Singarella, Latham & Watkins. Environmental/Conservation Organizations • __________, Deltakeeper, • Mtizi Taggart, Heal the Bay • Sarah Newkirk and Linda Sheehan as Alternate Representing The Ocean Conservancy. • ????

14. Scientific Steering Committee • Composed of scientists from state and federal agencies, academic institutions, and other research organizations. • Key responsibilities of SSC will be: refinement of the draft workplan for SQO development, review of analyses and data interpretation, review of technical reports, and guidance to SWRCB regarding preparation of the FED for the plan or policy document containing SQOs and implementation program. • The three primary criteria used to select members of the SCC were: • ·        A high level of technical experience either developing guidelines, assessing effects or developing or implementing sediment quality policy. • ·        A member of a key agency involved in sediment quality assessment such as U.S. EPA, USACE, NOAA or USGS. • ·        No direct involvement in water quality or sediment quality projects or issues in California.

15. Scientific Steering Committee • Dr. Todd Bridges, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ERDC • Dr. Dan Dauer, Old Dominion University • Tom Gries, Washington Dept. of Ecology • Chris Ingersoll, U.S. Geological Survey • Dr. Scott Ireland, U.S. EPA, Office of Water • Dr. Peter Landrum, NOAA, Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab • Edward Long, ERL Environmental • Donald D. MacDonald, MacDonald Environmental Services • Gail Sloane, Florida Department of Environmental Protection

16. Agency Coordination Committee • Comprised of Departments and Agencies that protect water quality, protect and conserve Natural Resources. • In some cases the Department of Agency may take on the role a Responsible Party. • Because of this mix, Committee members will be able to provide a Unique Perspective on both the development of objectives and proposed policy and how any proposed policy could impact other programs. • Participants to include Division of Water Quality, Department of Fish and Game, Coastal Regional Boards, State Lands Commission, Department of Pesticide Regulation, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Coastal Commission, SF Bay Conservation and Development Commission, NOAA and USEPA.

17. Technical Update Steve Bay Principal Scientist Southern California Coastal Water Research Project