Innovative Surface Water Systems for Nutrient Removal to Control Algal Blooms: Grand Lake St. Mary’s Presented by, Chris Overcash, PE, BCEE, ENV SP For USGS Maryland-Delaware-D.C. Water Science Center Baltimore, Maryland March 15, 2016 `

Presentation Overview Recent Events Bring Hazardous Algal Blooms (HABs) to the Forefront of Water Quality Discussions Brief Background on HABs Current and Expected Regulatory Climate Case Study: Grand Lake St. Mary’s   Working backwards…. Overview, local, wetland itself

Microcystin HABs at the Forefront of Water Quality Discussions Toledo WTP Shutdown 2014 500,000 without water for 56 hours 75 year old plant, sedimentation, chlorination 2013 town of 2,000 issued similar restriction – first on record Other local situations: Grand Lake St. Mary’s - No lake use of any kind 2009 - 2010 Drinking Water and Surface Water Impacts Linked by microcystin   Reuters – Toledo Microcystin Bloom Toledo Aug 1 – 3, 2014 Intake >5.5 ppb, drinking water at up to 3.1 ppb. Grand Lake summer 2010 - >2000 ppb. CAG 12,000 people drinking water ok. 2015 – readings to 106 ppb

Lake Erie and the Summer 2014 Bloom   NOAA Great Lakes CoastWatch Lake Erie MODIS image

Grand Lake St. Marys – Mercer County, OH Impacts Algal blooms shut down all use of the lake in 2009/10 Estimated loss of $77 million to local economy Loss in housing value of $25 million No Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae funding for homes in proximity to lake Identified public health threat  

Grand Lake St. Marys – Mercer County, OH Ohio Governor Strickland News Conference – July 30, 2010   The Daily Standard Celina, Ohio

Cyanotoxins HABs are composed of cyanotoxins from certain types of blue green algae (cyanobacteria). A metabolite of cyanobacteria: Microcystis, Anabaena, Planktothrix Microcystin - one of three identified as toxic and occurring regularly. Phosphorus loading indicated as root cause Regulatory focus U.S. EPA

Microcystin Effects Humans, Pets Dermal Ingestion Brazil 1996 - 130 on dialysis - 50 die from Microcystin Maryland – not common. bloom in Sassafrass River in 1998. In the 1960s common in the Potomac just above Washington DC   U.S. EPA

Microcystin Treatment of Drinking Water The 5 Most Effective Treatment Methods ozone – up to 100% ozone with hydrogen peroxide - up to 100% membrane separation with reverse osmosis - up to 99% membrane filtration with ultrafiltration - up to 98% powdered activated carbon -up to 100 % only some microcystin strains U.S. EPA's "Drinking Water Treatability Database" for microcystins, several processes are considered effective for the removal/oxidation of microcystins. The five most effective are ozone (up to 100 percent), ozone with hydrogen peroxide (up to 100 percent), membrane separation with reverse osmosis (up to 99 percent), membrane filtration with ultrafiltration (up to 98 percent), and powdered activated carbon (up to 100 percent for some microcystins, but less for others). Picture: Ultrafiltration equipment at the Emmons Country Water Treatment Plant U.S. EPA

Current Regulatory Climate Surrounding HABs 1990s - WHO set recommended limit of 1 ppb microcystin in drinking water. Recommended limit for Drinking water and for surface water use contact No federal standards for cyanobacteria in drinking water Cyanotoxins added to the US EPA CCL (Contaminant Candidate List) in 1998 States Regulating Individually…………   EPA uses CCL to prioritize research to determine if contaminant has sufficient data to meet regulatory determination criteria specified in SDWA •As of 2012, three cyanotoxins are listed on the CCL 3: •anatoxin-a •microcystin-LR •cylindrospermopsin

Current Regulatory Climate Surrounding HABs   Examples of US State Drinking Water Guidance/ Action Level Toledo Aug 1 – 3, 2014 Intake >5.5 ppb, drinking water at up to 3.1 ppb. EPA uses CCL to prioritize research to determine if contaminant has sufficient data to meet regulatory determination criteria specified in SDWA •As of 2012, three cyanotoxins are listed on the CCL 3: •anatoxin-a •microcystin-LR •cylindrospermopsin

Current Regulatory Climate Surrounding HABs Surface Water - Example  

HAB Regulatory Climate – What’s Next? HAB and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 Comprehensive HAB and Hypoxia Research Plan and Action Strategy $20.5M per year through 2018 Report on Implementation of the HAB and Hypoxia Action Strategy Great Lakes Hypoxia and HAB Integrated Assessment Great Lakes HAB and Hypoxia Plan Progress Report on Northern Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia AWWA Feb 2015 – Source Reduction of Nutrients is the key ….. EPA and USDA, should use existing authorities to give much higher priority to nutrient reduction projects that protect downstream drinking water supplies and therefore, public health.  More information necessary to define Regulatory approach at Federal Level  

HAB Regulatory Climate – What’s Next? EPA Reaction – Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) - $12 million to federal & state agencies to target harmful algal blooms in Lake Erie. June 2015 - Drinking water Health Advisories (HAs) for microcystin-LR and others. 1.6 ppb and 0.3 ppb. Drinking Water Protection Act (of the SDWA) – Aug. 2015 - Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and Management Strategic Plan for Drinking Water – Nov. 2015 Considering inclusion of cyanotoxins, in the 4th round of Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UMCR 4) in 2018.   UMCR - every five years EPA must issue a new list of up to 30 unregulated contaminants to be monitored by public water systems. Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and Management Strategic Plan for Drinking Water – Nov 2015 Algal Toxins and Their Human Health Effects Health Advisories Factors Likely to Cause Harmful Algal Blooms Analytical Methods Frequency of Monitoring Treatment Options Sources Water Protection Practices

Grand Lake St. Marys – Mercer County, OH 21 square mile man made lake in West Ohio 52 square mile watershed 425 million in agricultural production 125 million in tourism Key issues Excessive nutrient loading resulting in Hypo-trophic condition in lake and watershed Blue Green algal blooms producing microsystin toxins  

Grand Lake St. Marys – Mercer County, OH Impacts Algal blooms shut down all use of the lake in 2009/10 Estimated loss of $77 million to local economy Loss in housing value of 25 million No Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae funding for homes in proximity to lake Identified public health threat  

Grand Lake St. Marys Strategic Plan Critical Response Actions Conceptual Ecosystem Revitalization Model Environmental Economic

Grand Lake St. Marys Littoral Wetland Restoration Critical Element in GLSM System Historically over 2,500 acres Lost due to; Water quality degradation Invasive species (carp) Anthroprogenic activities Restore by; Increase water clarity Reduce nutrient loading Establishing substrate

Littoral Wetland Restoration Engineered Ecosystem – Treatment Train Prairie Creek Treatment Train Engineered Mechanical Pumping 1.3 MGD Chemical Dosing Alum Bio-Technical Constructed Wetlands 6 Acres Natural Restored Wetlands 10 acres

Prairie Creek Treatment Train - PCTT MAID System Controls pumping into system Doses chemical as required Tracks water quality Ph Turbidity Flow rates Allows remote monitoring and control Mobile Alum Injection Device

Prairie Creek Treatment Train - PCTT Constructed Wetland Cells Five cells, alternating deep and shallow water

Prairie Creek Treatment Train - PCTT

Prairie Creek Treatment Train - PCTT Results 65% reduction in Total Phos 30% reduction in Total N Trophic shift in embayment

Prairie Creek Littoral Wetland - PCLW Basic Design Deep and shallow marsh system Designed to improve Fish and Wildlife habitat Will receive flow from PCTT Encapsulation of nutrient laden sediment

Prairie Creek Treatment Train - Expansion

Littoral Wetland Restoration Engineered Ecosystem – Treatment Train Cold Water Creek Treatment Train Engineered Mechanical Pumping 4 MGD Bio-Technical Constructed Wetlands 17 acres Flow Diversion Natural Restored Wetlands 250 acres

Cold Water Creek Treatment Train

Grand Lake St. Mary’s Status Current Engineered Ecosystems on GLSM have shown; Observed and measured improvements in water quality Observed expansion of existing littoral wetland system On-going Ecosystem response to re-establishment in historic wetland zones is being monitored Future One more Treatment Train under construction and one in design, four more in planning

QUESTIONS