Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ COOPERATIVE REGIONAL MONITORING IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Stephen B. Weisberg Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Authority (

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ WHAT IS SCCWRP? Joint Powers Agency founded in 1969 Initiated to address regional monitoring and research needs –Cumulative impact assessment –Methods development –Data integration Member organizations include city, county, state, and federal agencies –Unique combination of regulators and regulated

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS San Diego Regional Water Quality Board Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Board State Water Resources Control Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency California Ocean Protection Council Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts City of Los Angeles Ventura County Watershed Protection Division Orange County Watershed and Coastal Resources Orange County Sanitation District City of San Diego

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ REGIONAL MONITORING BACKGROUND Started with 1990 National Research Council assessment of monitoring in southern California –$17M in annual monitoring could not be integrated to provide a regional assessment of condition Many impediments to a regional assessment –Most monitoring was site-specific –Different parameters among groups –Different methods –No common QA –Lack of data management systems SCCWRP Commission stepped up to solve the problem –Two-thirds of the ocean monitoring in southern California is in response to NPDES permits

Federal Government3,148 State Government547 Local Government1,274 NPDES Permittees24,034 Private Party394 University1,883 Total31,279 Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ Southern California Coastal Monitoring Expenditures (in $1,000s, 1997)

UNIQUE FUNDING MECHANISM 90% funded through in-kind services –A participatory program Facilitated through resource exchange –Regulators allow exchange of some routine monitoring elements for an equal level of effort in the Bight program –Regional monitoring has even been formalized in some permits The cooperative nature provides a mechanism for dialog about monitoring approaches –Monitoring methods manuals –QA protocols –Data management structures –Data interpretation approaches Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

BIGHT’03 WAS THE THIRD REGIONAL SURVEY Started with a Pilot Project in 1994 –Limited to SCCWRP member agencies –Focused on contaminant effects on sediment and fish quality Opened up to all interested parties in 1998 –62 organizations participated –Added a shoreline microbiology component –Expanded into Mexico 66 organizations participated in 2003 –Expanded the number of habitats sampled –Added remote sensing to the tool box –Greater number of academic partners Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

MULTIPLE REGIONAL MONITORING COMPONENTS Coastal Ecology –Fish and sediment quality Water Quality –Nutrients and harmful algal blooms Shoreline Microbiology Rocky reef

COASTAL ECOLOGY BASICS Primary question: What is the spatial extent of chemical contamination and their biological effects? Probability based sampling design –Stratified to evaluate potential impact areas –Approximately 400 sampling sites Multiple indicators at each site –Sediment chemistry –Toxicity –Benthic infauna –Fish tissue contaminants –Gross pathology –Biomarkers Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ STRATA Mainland continental shelf -5-30m m m Mainland slope and basin m ,000m Embayments -Ports/harbors -Marinas -Estuaries Discharge zones -Large POTW -Small POTW -Stormwater receiving areas Special Management Areas -Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary -Santa Monica Bay National Estuary Program

COASTAL ECOLOGY BASICS Primary question: What is the spatial extent of chemical contamination and their biological effects? Probability based sampling design –Stratified to evaluate potential impact areas –Approximately 400 sampling sites Multiple indicators at each site –Sediment chemistry –Toxicity –Benthic infauna –Fish tissue contaminants –Gross pathology –Biomarkers Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

PRODUCTS OF COOPERATIVE REGIONAL MONITORING Assessment of condition Methods standardization Regional assessment tools Information management Dialogue about data interpretation Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

Low to Moderate Risk Little to No Risk Embayments Mainland Shelf Large POTWs Percent Area > SQGQ Mod to Hi Risk. (34%) (65%)(1%) Small POTWs Slope/basins Islands PERCENT AREA EXCEEDING SEDIMENT QUALITY GUIDELINES

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

COMPARTMENTESTIMATE OF TOTAL DDT (metric tons) Benthic Fish<0.001 Pelagic Fish0.001 – Water Column0.014 – SedimentApprox. 200

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ COMPARTMENTESTIMATE OF TOTAL DDT (metric tons) Benthic Fish<0.001 Pelagic Fish0.001 – Water Column0.014 – SedimentApprox. 200 Total DDT DischargedApprox. 2,400

PRODUCTS OF COOPERATIVE REGIONAL MONITORING Assessment of condition Methods standardization Regional assessment tools Information management Dialogue about data interpretation Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

Methods manuals –Field methods –Lab methods –Information management –All available on the web ( Intercalibration exercises –Fish identification –Benthic infaunal identification –Toxicology –Chemistry –Microbiology METHODS STANDARDIZATION Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

PALOS VERDES SEDIMENT – FIRST ROUND COMPOUNDLAB-1LAB-2LAB-3LAB-4LAB-5LAB-6 2-MethylnaphthaleneND BiphenylND ,6-Dimethylnaphthalene283062ND3964 PhenanthreneND FluorantheneNDND Pyrene Benz[a]anthraceneNDND ChryseneNDND Benzo[e]pyreneND Benzo[a]pyreneNDND Perylene Benzo[g,h,i]pyreneNDND91ND11237 TOTAL Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

PALOS VERDES SEDIMENT – FINAL ROUND COMPOUND LAB-1 LAB-2 LAB-3 LAB-4 LAB-5 LAB-6 2-Methylnapthalene Biphenyl ,6-Dimethylnaphtalene Phenanthrene Fluoranthene Pyrene Benz[a]anthracene Chrysene Benzo[e]pyrene Benzo[a]pyrene Perylene Benzo[g,h,I,]perylene259975ND11091 TOTAL1,3911,5721,7481,4181,3441,296 Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

Biocriteria development –How do we interpret complex biological data? Sediment quality assessments –How do we integrate chemistry, toxicology, and biology data? Unique opportunity for dialog among participating organizations in a non-regulatory setting –Productive discussion while writing the interpretive reports REGIONAL ASSESSMENT TOOLS Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

Species Abundance

Biocriteria development –How do we interpret complex biological data? Sediment quality assessments –How do we integrate chemistry, toxicology, and biology data? Unique opportunity for dialog among participating organizations in a non-regulatory setting –Productive discussion while writing the interpretive reports REGIONAL ASSESSMENT TOOLS Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

POTENTIAL FLAWS WITH INDIVIDUAL LINES OF EVIDENCE Chemistry –Bioavailability poorly understood (e.g. paint chip, tar ball) –There may be unmeasured contaminants Toxicity –Confounding factors (e.g. ammonia) –Agitation enhanced bioavailability –Differing sensitivity among test species Benthic infaunal assemblages –Physical disturbance (anchor, dredging) –Oxygen stress

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ MLOE FRAMEWORK Severity of Effect Potential for Chemically Mediated Effect Station Assessment BenthosToxicityChemistryToxicity Three lines of evidence (LOE) needed to assess sediment condition

Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_ PLATFORM FOR ASSESSING NEW TOOLS AND ISSUES New methods –IDEXX enterococcus method –Toxicity identification evaluation –Sediment profile imaging camera –Satellite imagery New Issues –Emerging contaminants Endocrine disruptors Flame retardants Next generation pesticides –Harmful algal blooms

PRODUCTS OF COOPERATIVE REGIONAL MONITORING Assessment of condition Methods standardization Regional assessment tools Information management Dialogue about data interpretation Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

CATALYSTS A common question –An audience for the answer: The SCCWRP Commission Available resources –Resource exchange –We have the population density to have multiple candidate participants –We were given incentive funds (thank you EMAP!) Perception of likely success –It will happen with or without you –Continuity and previous success creates a positive perception A neutral organization in a leadership role –Credibility of the products is essential Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

CHALLENGES Time –Interminable planning meetings Flexibility to change –New collection methods –Provides an opportunity for upgrading Intercalibration costs –Can initially be larger than implementation costs Loss of autonomy –Most program managers are invested in their own thing Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

OCSDLACSD Chemistry Committee meetings$27,884$59,339 Intercalibration39,53897,754 Survey sample processing34,95011,184 Microbiology Committee meetings4,7068,607 Intercalibration4,06410,359 Survey sample processing13,3173,203

CHALLENGES Time –Interminable planning meetings Flexibility to change –New collection methods –Provides an opportunity for upgrading Intercalibration costs –Can initially be larger than implementation costs Loss of autonomy –Most program managers are invested in their own thing Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

THE CONCEPTS ARE SPREADING TO OTHER HABITATS Streams –Co-joining of discharger and state programs –Regional QA evaluations –Common data management Wetlands Rocky intertidal Subtidal hard-bottom reefs Beach water quality Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_

Map of B’03 Strata

Range Between Labs Coefficient of Variation 1998 before137-2,30067% 1998 after1,180-1,75015% 2003 before1,036-1,93627% 1998 before6,560-21,90050% 1998 after8,410-19,50031% 2003 before7,770-16,66225% 1998 before529-1,95046% 1998 after901-1,50020% 2003 before920-1,44219% Total PAH (ng/g) Total DDT (ng/g) Total PCB (ng/g) Regional_Partnerships_NWQMC_