A Summary of NE State Coastal Monitoring Programs. in support of EPA required 305b/303d Integrated Reporting for the CWA

Transcription

1 A Summary of NE State Coastal Monitoring Programs in support of EPA required 305b/303d Integrated Reporting for the CWA Christopher Deacutis, Ph.D. Narragansett Bay Estuary Program September 2011

2 NE State Coastal Monitoring Programs in support of EPA required 305b/303d Integrated Reporting for the CWA A Report by the NBEP to the RIDEM Water Resources Christopher Deacutis, Ph.D., NBEP This is a summary report of the coastal monitoring programs used by other NE states (+ several others) used to assess coastal waters for compliance with the Clean water Act under CWA sections 305b and 303d. States are required to assess surface water quality, including marine/coastal waters of the state against state WQ standards, and report waters not meeting CWA requirements (as defined by their state WQ standards) in a list of waters requiring implementation of TMDLs (303d list). All data information has also been put into tabular form as a 1 page summary of this info (see Table 1 excel sheet). Most NE states do not have extensive marine/coastal monitoring programs, but rely on ongoing programs that provide some WQ information. New Hampshire seems to have the most organized and thorough estuarine review process (see NH CALM 2010), and utilizes very clear statistically-based rules for minimal data needed for assessments of violations / impairment decisions as well as a weight of evidence approach for aquatic life assessments that includes many more biological indicators than the other New England states, apparently through a MOA with UNH to review specified biological indicators every 3 years. This info, including the Pisqataqua Region Estuaries Partnership (see PREP, 2009) may be useful as an initial basis for examining potential biological criteria for Rhode Island in the future, along with the recently released LISS Sentinel Monitoring Draft Plan (2011). The most common of these are federally-supported Beach monitoring programs, usually run by the state health departments, and the US FDA-required National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) bacterial surveys to certify shellfishing areas are safe for commercial sale based on fecal coliform standards for open shellfish grounds.

3 Narrative biological community protection criteria are used for biological assessments of nutrient impacts in marine, with loss of eelgrass and/or low D.O. interpreted as due excess nutrients Some states (e.g., MA) have ongoing department-funded special studies that provide some assessment information in terms of expert assessment of ecosystem health such as state of eelgrass SAV beds using the state biological descriptive standards (vs numerical standards). Loss of eelgrass and/or low D.O. are usually interpreted by these states as due to excess nutrient causal factors.

4 Massachusetts Contact: Art Johnson, MADEP.(508) MADEP Integrated 305b assessments are developed by Art and another staff member, Rich McVoy. Boston Harbor and other coastal water assessments are located at (includes MWRA reports) and and for the Estuary Project. MADEP has no dedicated active state-wide marine monitoring program at this time. They rely on several monitoring programs required of certain major permitees and special studies in marine waters funded by the agency, as well as rotating basin work (when available), NCA probabilistic monitoring data and beach monitoring under a state-federal Beaches Bill run by MADPH, and shellfish monitoring data performed by the MADiv Marine Fisheries. They also contact MADMF with inquiries as to special areas of WQ concern they may have observed in their fisheries monitoring. Impairment maps and Assessment Reports are developed based on fish consumption advisories (MADPH) for Hg and PCBs, as well as impairments due to bacterial violations that close shellfish grounds (e.g., Boston Harbor) or violate secondary contact recreational use. MADEP also uses whole effluent toxicity test results from major permitee dischargers to waterbodies (e.g., NE Aquarium) to determine aquatic life use, and where available, D.O. data. They also have an eelgrass monitoring program that indicates where eelgrass losses have occurred through a 12 yr monitoring cycle for various areas ( Because of the change in Boston Harbor through removal of the MWRA major WWTF discharge to an offshore discharge point, MWRA has been required to perform extensive biological and chemical and physical monitoring of Boston Harbor into the future. This extensive monitoring program is used for WQ determinations by the state for the Boston Harbor area and the offshore area also sampled as part of this permit-required monitoring program. A special project, the Massachusetts Estuary Project ( and is a collaborative effort begun in Dec 2001 through an MOA between the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (through the MA Department of Environmental Protection) and the University of Massachusetts's School of Marine Science and Technology and is subsidized by funding that allows communities to undertake this evaluation at approximately 40 percent of the actual cost (state covers 60% through an environmental bond). Contacts are : Brian Dudley (MassDEP): ; Brian Howes (SMAST): MADEP uses the intense monitoring analyses provided by this program for assessing aquatic life impairments based on health / condition / loss of eelgrass in the marine waterbodies studied under this program. Most waterbodies covered so far occur in the Cape Cod coastal area. They apply the descriptive biological community criteria, assuming loss of eelgrass in areas where it

5 occurred previously is due to excess nitrogen based on the Estuary Project Reports for specific waterbodies. Connecticut Info Source: CT Water Quality Assessment Report and CALM report available at: and Paul Stacey, past coordinator of CT DEP 304b/303d (now with the NERRS system, Research Coordinator, Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, "Stacey, Paul" CT DEP (now CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) has used special university studies etc, but relies on federally-funded beach monitoring results and the state shellfish ISSP WQ program for comparison with bacterial standards. The state has also participated with the US EPA NCA monitoring program (25-30 stations in LIS), taking samples which are then processed through an EPA contractor for chemical and biological benthic analyses. They examine the toxics concentrations against their CT sediment criteria (I believe the stds are for dredged sediment disposal). For eutrophication / nutrient issues, a monthly D.O. / nutrients (N & P) survey at 30 sta. is run by the stste of CT DEEP, which is expanded to biweekly in summer months funded by LISS NEP along with commitments from CT for state lab analyses support. The state does not presently use the UConn IOOS-LISICOS funded ( ferry-based chl a or MYSOUND real-time continuous D.O. monitoring buoy system data ( for 305b /303d purposes, but does check the monthly survey data against the available buoy data as a QA check. The state uses hypoxia and high Chl a data from the state-run surveys as proxies for excess nutrient impacts, and uses an EPA funded (very expensive) complex ecological model - the System Wide Eutrophication Model (SWEM) - as a basis for a TMDL for permit limits on major WWTFs in NY and CT to improve future D.O. levels and bring them back to acceptable state standards. Present work is moving away from a proprietary model (Hydroqual) to an open-source model that allows more researchers to test ideas out. Note: recent presentations at the NEERS May 2011 at Port Jefferson NY highlighted physical drivers that are exacerbating nutrient-driven hypoxia in LIS due to changes in summer winds and stratification in LIS and may interfere with D.O. remediation at present nutrient target levels (see O Donnell, J. - projected D.O. with zero N discharges is 1.0 mg/l in present hypoxia-prone areas).

6 New Hampshire Info sources: CT DES Integrated 305b/303d report and CT CALM at and pdf New Hampshire Dept of Environmental Services (DES) also uses the federal beach monitoring program as well as ISSP state shellfish bacterial data for coastal water bacterial CWA / state WQ standard violations. Most University / special study marine work is concentrated on Great Bay, and this is where the majority of coastal data is available for NH assessments. There is an NCA probabilistic monitoring program for the Great Bay through an agreement with UNH, which collects the samples. UNH also does extensive work on eelgrass / SAV conditions in Great Bay. NH uses benthic community data from the NCA, comparing results with EPA AED Gulf of Maine benthic indices. Toxics are assessed using NCA sed tox data against DES Aquatic Sediment policy guidelines as well as EPA Gulfwatch-Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment blue mussel tissue toxics data and any fish health advisories for Hg or PCBs. In addition, D.O. and chlorophyll surveys and several continuous monitoring sites as well as state eelgrass mapping and data from the NH F&G on oyster abundance, reef health and extent, disease prevalence, anadromous fish run trends are all used in a weight of evidence approach to assessing aquatic life conditions in marine waters where these data are available. NH has also developed nitrogen, chlorophyll a, and turbidity numeric criteria linked to excess nitrogen impacts on the health/survivability of eelgrass as a critical aquatic habitat through collaborative work with UNH. However, the validity of these criteria are being questioned by local developers through the courts.

7 Maine Source 305b 303d integrated reports at Maine Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP), as with the other NE states, uses ISSP shellfish area conditions and federally funded beach monitoring programs for bacterial CWA assessments. Maine has limited state marine WQ monitoring, but uses federal funded projects like Casco Bay NEP, Casco Bay Partnership, Friends of Casco Bay, the Gulf of Maine Council on the Environment, and the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership for volunteer coastal monitoring data. The state of Maine participates in the EPA NCA monitoring through an agreement with the U of So. Maine + Casco Bay NEP + ME DEP. Two continuous coastal buoys are condidered for D.O., one run by Bowdoin College, one run by U of New England. The GoMOOS-IOOS buoy data is not used in assessments because it is considered to reflect offshore water quality. The state of Maine also has a statewide eelgrass mapping program, but it does not appear to be used for WQ assessments. Toxic assessments are based on NCA and consumption advisories (Maine CDC) and ME DEP fish samples + Gulfwatch- Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment blue mussel tissue data. Nutrient criteria are in development and will require extensive state monitoring of marine waters. There is presently no chl a criteria for marine waters.

8