RMP NOV 08 Watershed Monitoring and the RMP Lester McKee and Meg Sedlak Presentation to North Bay Watershed Association September 10 th, 2010

Regional Monitoring Program 17 th Year Budget and structure Status and Trends Storm water monitoring activities at SFEI

Budget and Fees Funded by NPDES dischargers and dredgers Total budget 2010: $3.2 million

Technical Review Committee Steering Committee Sources Pathways & Loading Contaminant Fate Exposure & Effects Emerging Contaminants RMP Structure

Technical Review Committee Steering Committee Sources Pathways & Loading Contaminant Fate Exposure & Effects Emerging Contaminants RMP Structure WWTPs Refineries Stormwater Agencies USEPA City of San Jose South Bay Dischargers Industry (USS POSCO Steel) RWQCB Reg. 2 City and County of SF US Army Corps of Engineers

Technical Review Committee Steering Committee Sources Pathways & Loading Contaminant Fate Exposure & Effects Emerging Contaminants Workgroups are where the rubber meets the road

Technical Review Committee Steering Committee Sources Pathways & Loading Contaminant Fate Exposure & Effects Emerging Contaminants Workgroups are where the rubber meets the road SPLWG Advisory Panel Dr. Barbara Mahler, USGS Dr. Eric Stein, SCCWRP Dr. Mike Stenstrom, UCLA

RMP Strategies TRCSCWGs STRATEGIES

Strategies focusing on Policy needs & Priorities

Small Tributary Loading Strategy Q1. Which are the high leverage small tributaries that contribute or potentially contribute most to Bay impairment by pollutants of concern? Q2. What are the loads or concentrations of pollutants of concern from small tributaries to the Bay? Q3. How are loads or concentrations of pollutants of concern from small tributaries changing on a decadal scale? Q4. What are projected impacts of management actions on load or concentrations of POC from high leverage small tributaries? Q5. Where should management actions be implemented in the region to have the greatest impact?

RMP Mission Collect data and communicate information about water quality in the San Francisco Estuary to support management decisions

Guided by Management Questions MQ1: Are chemical concentrations in the Estuary potentially at levels of concern and are associated impacts likely? MQ2: What are concentrations and masses of contaminants in the Estuary and its segments? MQ3: What are sources, pathways, loading, and processes leading to contaminant related impacts in the Estuary? MQ4: Have the concentrations, masses, and associated impacts of contaminants in the Estuary increased or decreased? MQ5: What are the projected concentrations, masses and associated impacts of contaminants in the Estuary?

How does the RMP answer MQs? Status & Trends Monitoring ( ) Sediment and water (annually) Bivalves (every 2 years) Sport fish (every 3 years) Bird eggs (every 3 years) Pilot and Special Studies Provides framework for adaptive management Responsive to changing needs

Status & Trends: Water and Sediment 22 Water sites Metals, PAHs, PBDEs, pesticides, & PCBs Aquatic toxicity Summer only 47 Sediment sites Metals, PAHs, PBDEs, pesticides and PCBs Sediment toxicity Wet/dry weather

Status &Trends: Monitoring of Biota Bivalves, bird eggs, and sport fish

Information Dissemination Pulse Annual Meeting –October 5 th, register on-line Technical reports Journal articles Workshops

Easy access to data

Presentation outline Overview Where and how to we measure contaminant mass loads in stormwater? How to we scale up from local scale to regional scale estimates? How much contaminant mass gets into San Francisco Bay on average each year? Which contaminants are our highest priority? Knowledge for managers: Tracking and abating - the PCB example What did we use PCBs for? Where are the contaminated areas? How should treatment controls be designed to be effective for PCB?

Overview – Where have we been monitoring? Sacramento River at Mallard Island –154,000 km 2 –WY , 2010 Guadalupe River at Hwy. 101 –400 km 2 –WY , 2010 Zone 4 Line A at Cabot Blvd. –4.5 km 2 –WY North Richmond Pump Station –1.4 km 2 –WY 2011 San Pedro Road Stormdrain –1 km 2 –WY 2005 Gellert Park Recreational Facility –0.016 km 2 –WY 2010 Guadalupe River San Pedro Stormdrain Zone 4 Line A North Richmond Sacramento River Gellert Park

Overview – Challenges of scale in monitoring? (40 acres) Guadalupe R. (8 hrs) Zone 4 Line A (1.6 hrs) (4 acres) North Richmond Pump Station (1.1 hrs) San Pedro Stormdrain (54 mins) Gellert Park Rec Facility (12 mins) Sacramento River At Mallard Island (3-4 days)

Overview – How have we been monitoring? Sacramento River at Mallard Island USGS 15 minute Turbidity Sampling over days during storms Sampling 4-7 storms per year Dayflow daily discharge

Overview – How have we been monitoring? Guadalupe River at Hwy minute Turbidity Sampling over hours during storms Sampling 7-10 storms per year 15 minute discharge

Overview – How have we been monitoring? Zone 4 Line A in Hayward 5 minute Turbidity Sampling over 1-3 hours during storms Sampling storms per year 5 minute discharge

Overview – How have we been monitoring? North Richmond Pump Station 5 minute Turbidity Sampling over 1-2 hours during storms Sampling 2 storms per year 5 minute discharge

Overview – How do we scale up from local to regional? PCB TMDL –Used loads measurements from Coyote Creek (WY 2005) and Guadalupe River (WY ), extrapolated them in time using monthly runoff data to derive a long term annual average load and scale up for urban area. Future –Presently developing a spreadsheet model that will incorporate: Rainfall Land use / contaminant source Impervious based runoff coefficients adjusted for slope and soil type Land use / contaminant source specific contaminant concentrations Hydrologic calibration for a range of Bay Area watershed types Loads calibrated to measurements

Overview – Average annual mass load to San Francisco Bay? Mercury PCBs

Overview – Average annual mass load to San Francisco Bay? Area (km 2 ) Sus. Sed.CrCuNiPbZnTotal Sacramento River154, Local Small Tributaries Municipal Wastewater Atmospheric Deposition Annual Average Mass Loads (metric t) Source: Davis et al, 2000; McKee et al in prep interpolated for annual average and scaled for urban area

Overview – Which contaminants are our highest priority? SubstancePriority Mercury and PCBsTop Polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDEs)High Current use pesticides (pyrethroids), dioxins, selenium, OC pesticides, copper, nickel, PAHsMedium Silver, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, zinc, organophosphate pesticides, nutrientsLow

Knowledge for managers: Tracking and abating - the PCB example

Tracking and abating: What did we use PCBs for? Estimated mass used in the Bay Area (metric t)Examples "Completely" closed systems 7400 (60%) Industrial scale transformers, capacitors, voltage regulators Fluorescent light ballasts Nominally closed systems1200 (10%) Vacuum pumps Hydraulic transfer systems, greases and oils, cutting Oil (microscope slide oil), heat transfer fluids, air compressor lubricants Starting aid (single phase motors) Power factor correction (rectifier, AC induction motor, furnaces) Consumer electrical items (refrigerators, televisions, washing machines) Water well pumps Switch Gear Manufacturing machinery (capacitors, transformers, associated switchgear) Open-ended applications3700 (30%) Plasticizer in paints, resins, synthetic rubber, surface coatings, wax Sealants, waterproofing compound, glues and adhesives Caulking compounds Pesticide extenders Inks Carbonless copy paper Total12300

Tracking and abating: What did we use PCBs for? Old factory transformers PG&E facilities Fluorescent light ballast Household appliancesFloor polish Caulking

Tracking and abating: Mapping sediment / soil contamination

Tracking and abating: Better treatment control design

Summary and next steps Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) calls for: –Incorporate PCB-containing equipment inspection into exiting industrial inspections –Conduct pilot projects to evaluate managing PCB-containing waste materials during building demolition and renovation –Investigate on-land locations with contaminated soils –Conduct pilot studies to evaluate and enhance municipal sediment removal and management practices –Conduct pilot projects to evaluate on-site stormwater retrofit –Investigate diversion of dry-weather and stormwater flows to wastewater treatment BASMAA EPA grant: “Clean Watersheds for a Clean Bay” –Select five watersheds an locate contaminated areas and refer these sites to regulatory agencies for cleanup and abatement –develop methods to enhance removal of sediment with PCBs during municipal sediment management activities –retrofit eight to 10 urban runoff treatment facilities into existing infrastructure –facilitate development and implementation of a regional risk reduction program