RPA and the DEQ Drive for Lower Detection Limits Spencer Bohaboy Policy Development Specialist

Introduction How DEQ Develops permits How DEQ uses QLs in NPDES permits Timeline of QL development 2015 DEQ Lab revision Future Questions

How DEQ Develops Permits Reasonable Potential Analysis Process to determine if there is a “reasonable potential to cause or contribute to the exceedance of water quality criteria”. 2 simple water quality models Aquatic Toxicity Criteria Human Health Criteria Uses effluent and ambient characterization data to calculated potential impacts at the end of pipe or at the boundary of the mixing zone

How DEQ Develops Permits Lab Work Lab Work App. 3 years Issue Permit Tier 1 Monitoring All Tables 1 & 2 parameters Applicable Table 3 parameters 4 x in 24 months Identify POCs “End of pipe RPA” to identify Pollutants of Concern (POCs) Sampling Plan Tier 2 Monitoring Ambient data for POCs Optional: additional effluent data Optional: Source Investigation Run RPA and Calculate WQBEL Intake Credit Background Criteria “Can permittee meet WQBEL?” Y/N Year 0 Year 2 Year 3 Yes No Write Permit Select appropriate limits (lowest) Special Conditions (if necessary) Compliance Schedule Additional Monitoring Required BMPs or Benchmarks Document decisions in PER Select Option Work with permit writer to select most appropriate implementation option Now What? Source Reduction Engineering Compliance Schedule Variance Standards Change Year 5 RPA IMD: www.deq.state.or.us/wq/pubs/imds/rpaIMD.pdf

Permit Development: Various Sample Locations For each Pollutant of Concern (POC) identified, ambient and more effluent data is required For some POCs, might also require other forms of data Intake credit: municipal or ground water supplies Source identification: raw sewerage from industry or major junctions in collection systems Influent at headworks Permittee develops a monitoring plan Timing is important Seasonal Hydraulic retention time

How DEQ Uses QL’s in NPDES Permits Permit development Characterization of the ambient waters Characterization of the effluent Sometimes characterization of influent, source water or points within the sewer collection system Intake, BLM, misc studies Compliance Where Water Quality Effluent Limit (WQBEL) is less than analytic limit, the analytic limit becomes the Compliance Level For example, if WQBEL = 1.0 ug/l and Quantitation Limit is 5.0 ug/l, then “ND” or “detect” would indicate compliance. Permit Language: “DEQ has established a minimum Quantitation Limit of 0.05 mg/L for Total Residual Chlorine.  In cases where the monthly average or daily maximum limit for Total Residual Chlorine is lower than the Quantitation Limit, DEQ will use the reported Quantitation Limit as the compliance evaluation level.”

Timeline of QL Development DEQ ~2005, First attempt at establishing QLs DEQ 2007, Second attempt at establishing QLs Work group of DEQ and labs (municipal and commercial) Compared QLs to Water Quality Criteria Surveyed area laboratories for relative performance levels Approximate number of criteria below limits was ~40% DEQ 2011, Updated QLs for Human Health Criteria Update a few parameters based upon conversations with DEQ and labs Approximate number of criteria below limits was >50% EPA 2014, Sufficiently Sensitive Rule (SSR) Amendments to the Clean Water Act require that permit applicants must use “sufficiently sensitive” analytical test methods when completing an NPDES permit application Also, the Director (head of the permit-issuing authority) must prescribe that only “sufficiently sensitive” methods be used for analyses of pollutants or pollutant parameters under an NPDES permit Effective August, 2015 DEQ 2015, Revision to QLs Implemented October, 2015

2015 DEQ Lab revision DEQ 2015, Revision to QLs Compared QLs to Water Quality Criteria (WQC) Focus on QLs that were in the range of 1/1 to ½ of the WQC DEQ Lab made recommendations of estimated changes to QLs to reflect current practice Changes proposed for 33 of 165 parameters Values proposed for an additional 19 parameters without WQC or assigned QLs Surveyed laboratory community (13 laboratories in Or., Wa., Id. and Nv.) on methods used, QLs they can report and whether recommended QLs were achievable 6+1 laboratories reported Final recommendations 2 QLs to be raised from the current levels 13 QLs to remain unchanged from current levels 14 QL that are higher than originally proposed 28 QLs to remain as proposed 4 additional QL changes that were not originally proposed (Mercury, Dioxin, Methylmercury, Tributyltin) Oregon was compliance by October of 2015 Detailed SOP and Report is available

Recommended QL Changes

Recommended QL Changes

Future Electronic Data Delivery (EDD): Working with DEQ Lab, ACWA and Municipal Labs to develop electronic submission of data. Keys using CAS# to address chemical synonyms Data repository at DEQ Lab Ties directly into RPA spreadsheets for “cut and paste” insertion of data Increase productivity and less mistakes due to re-entry errors Sarah Rockwell, Laboratory Data Coordinator 503 693-5775 Biotic Ligand Model examines the bioavailability of metals in the aquatic environment and the affinity of these metals to accumulate on gill surfaces of organisms Site specific WQC ~10 parameters: upstream, effluent and downstream Robust data set: i.e. 24 sampling events in 24 months This might change how we develop permits Updates to Analytic Limits Periodic update of limits depending on changes to WQC or analytic technology Revisit and review of limits every 5 years (approximately) E-Reporting Rule Movement towards electronic delivery of data

Questions Spencer Bohaboy Policy Development Specialist 503-229-5415 Bohaboy.spencer@deq.state.or.us

Current Permit Language Detection and Quantitation Limits Detection Level (DL) – The DL is defined as the minimum measured concentration of a substance that can be distinguished from method blank results with 99% confidence. The DL is derived using the procedure in 40 CFR Part 136 Appendix B and evaluated for reasonableness relative to method blank concentrations to ensure results reported above the DL are not a result of routine background contamination. The DL is also known as the Method Detection Limit (MDL) or Limit of Detection (LOD). Quantitation Limits (QLs) – The QL is the minimum level, concentration or quantity of a target analyte that can be reported with a specified degree of confidence. It is the lowest level at which the entire analytical system gives a recognizable signal and acceptable calibration for the analyte. It is normally equivalent to the concentration of the lowest calibration standard adjusted for sample weights, volumes, preparation and cleanup procedures employed. The QL as reported by a laboratory is also sometimes referred to as the Method Reporting Limit (MRL) or Limit of Quantitation (LOQ).

Current Permit Language Implementation The Laboratory QLs (adjusted for any dilutions) for analyses performed to demonstrate compliance with permit limits or as part of effluent characterization, must be at or below the QLs specified in the permit unless one of the conditions below is met. The monitoring result shows a detect above the laboratory reported QL. The monitoring result indicates nondetect at a DL which is less than the QL. Matrix effects are present that prevent the attainment of QLs, and these matrix effects are demonstrated according to procedures described in EPA’s “Solutions to Analytical Chemistry Problems with Clean Water Act Methods”, March 2007. If using alternative methods and taking appropriate steps to eliminate matrix effects does not eliminate the matrix problems, DEQ may authorize re-sampling or allow a higher QL to be reported. In the case of effluent characterization monitoring, DEQ may allow the re-sampling to be done as part of Tier 2 monitoring. Sections B.5? and B.6? contain more information on Tier 1 and Tier 2 monitoring. See page 41 of EPA’s “Solutions to Analytical Chemistry Problems with Clean Water Act Methods”, March 2007 for why matrix interference needs to be demonstrated, and see page 42 for how to make sure a demonstration. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/atp/upload/2008_02_06_methods_pumpkin.pdf

Current Permit Language