Ohio EPA Harmful Algal Bloom Update. OAWWA NE District Fall Meeting October 26, 2017 Mentor, Ohio

Transcription

1 Ohio EPA Harmful Algal Bloom Update OAWWA NE District Fall Meeting October 26, 2017 Mentor, Ohio

2 Results 120 PWS in Ohio Microcystins detected at 47% PWS mcye genes detected at 56% of PWS Saxitoxins detected at 18% PWS sxta genes detected at 38% PWS Where microcystins detected, highest levels typically observed during defined HAB season Lake Erie Western Basin Photo Credit: Dr. Rafat Ansari

3 2017 Lake Erie Data Summary - qpcr mcye mcye detections at 22 of 25 PWSs and Microcystins detections at 18 PWSs - West Basin: mcye preceded microcystins at all four water systems by 1-4 weeks - Central Basin (East of Cleveland): mcye preceded microcystins detections at 6 of 7 PWSs by 1-2 weeks - Central Basin (Vermillion Cleveland): no microcystins - Sandusky Subbasin: mcye preceded microcystins at half (3) PWSs, Trace detections at three PWSs not preceded by mcye detections Lake Erie MODIS Image 10/22/17

4 2017 Lake Erie Data Summary - qpcr sxta sxta detections at four Lake Erie PWSs, including two with no prior sxta detections Saxitoxins detections in Central Basin (offshore) No saxitoxin detections at Lake Erie intakes Lake Erie MODIS Image 10/22/17

5 HAB Off-Season Monitoring

6 Background Ohio Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) Rules in effect since 6/1/2016 Requires microcystins analysis and cyanobacteria screening Rule provides reduced offseason monitoring and additional reductions per Director s discretion

7 Rationale for Monitoring Changes Cyanobacteria screening (qpcr) provides a reliable indicator Comprehensive data from 2 HAB seasons Ohio PWS high compliance rate with monitoring requirements Can reduce monitoring burden while remaining protective of public health

8 Off-Season Monitoring Breaking offseason into two segments November 1 December 31, 2017 January 1 April 30, 2018 Account for Ohio EPA covering biweekly qpcr screening through 12/31/17 PWS will remain on same week of the biweekly scheduling provided in their monitoring requirements mailed in December, 2016 Starting January 1, all analysis responsibility of PWS DES still available for qpcr/mc analysis for a fee

9 2017 Off-Season Monitoring November 1 December 31 All PWS are eligible Bi-weekly qpcr screening Microcystin gene detection triggers monitoring by PWS Other gene detections triggers monitoring by OEPA Same shipping HUBs and analysis at DES Systems must have no microcystinsor mcye gene detections for 2 weeks to be eligible

10 2018 Off-Season Monitoring January 1 April 30 Eligibility for reduced monitoring under Schedules 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, or 3 PWS and their laboratories must complete qpcr and microcystin analysis and report any cyanotoxin gene (mcye, sxta, or cyra) detections or microcystins detections above the reporting limit to edwr within 7 days of collection. PWS not able to meet these reporting requirements will follow the unreduced off-season monitoring schedule.

11 Initial Seasonal Monitoring Schedule 1, 2 or Off-Season Monitoring Requirements (1/1/18-4/30/18) Off-Season Schedule in Rule Biweekly raw water microcystin; AND Biweekly qpcr screening (paired) Reduced HAB Off-Season Schedule 1/2 A If any detections of saxitoxins, cylindrospermopsin, sxta or cyra genes (6/1/16-present), then; Biweekly qpcr screening only 1 or 2 3 Reduced HAB Off-Season Schedule 1/2 B If no detections of saxitoxins, cylindrospermopsin, sxta or cyra genes (6/1/16-present), then; Biweekly raw water microcystins only PWS may elect to be on Schedule 1/2 A with written notification by 12/15/17 Reduced HAB Off-Season Schedule 3 Monthly qpcr screening; OR Monthly raw water microcystins Only PWSs currently on Schedule 3 are eligible

12 Off-Season Schedule A (1A, 2A) qpcr Only If myce genes are detected in the raw water: Collect raw/finished water microcystins sample within 24 hours of receiving the result and complete analysis within 5 days. If microcystins are not detected the PWS will remain on reduced monitoring schedule A. If microcystins are detected in either the raw or finished water, the PWS continue with weekly raw/finished microcystin monitoring until non-detect for at least two consecutive weeks, then eligible to return to off-season monitoring schedule A. If sxta or cyra genes are detected in the raw water: PWS must notify Ohio EPA no later than the end of the next business day.

13 Off-Season Schedule B (1B, 2B) biweekly microcystins sampling only If microcystins are detected in the raw water: PWS must collect raw/finished water sample within 24 hours of receiving the result complete analysis within 5 days. If paired finished water sample collected with initial raw water sample, an additional raw and finished sample is not required until the following week. PWS will continue with weekly raw/finished water monitoring until non-detect for at least two consecutive weeks, then eligible to return to off-season monitoring schedule B.

14 Unchanged PWS response and additional monitoring requirements raw water microcystins > 5 ug/l any finished water microcystins detections Ohio EPA will conduct follow up monitoring for other cyanotoxins cylindrospermopsin and saxitoxins based on gene detections

15 Ohio Laboratories Certified for qpcr Method (cyanobacteria screening) Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District (NEORSD) Phone: (216) Address: 4747 E. 49 th St., Cuyahoga Heights, OH Akron Public Water Supply Laboratory Ohio EPA Division of Environmental Services Phone: (614) Address: Ohio EPA Lab, 8955 E. Main St., Building 22, Reynoldsburg, OH Ohio EPA is working with other laboratories to build additional qpcr cyanobacteria screening method capacity around the state: University of Toledo or Alloway

16 2018 HAB Season Monitoring

17 2018 HAB Season Monitoring May 1 October 31 Schedule 1 Biweekly qpcr screening Weekly raw and finished microcystins paired with qpcr screening Schedule 2 Biweekly qpcr screening Biweekly raw water microcystins collected on alternate week as screening sample, not paired Schedule 3 Monthly qpcr screening

18 Comprehensive Performance Evaluation (CPE) Approach to Addressing HABs Partnering with USEPA & Process Applications, Inc. 4 Pilot HAB CPEs at Ohio WTPs 3 out of 4 Pilot HAB CPEs Completed Final Pilot at Campbell in January 2018 Transfer capability to conduct CPEs from USEPA and Consultants to Ohio EPA staff Provide assistance to PWSs in HAB treatment optimization and HAB general plan guidance

19 Applying the CPE to Address Cyanotoxins Utilize CPE protocol to Optimize Existing Facilities for particle removal 50-95% of cyanotoxins are typically intracellular Avoid/Minimize pre-oxidation and release of cyanotoxins Jar test evaluating microcystins release after permanganate addition Utilize Multiple Barrier Approach to achieve USEPA health standards for microcystins (and thresholds for saxitoxins) Optimize cyanobacteria cell removal through improved coagulation, sedimentation and filtration processes Identify and assess strategies for extracellular cyanotoxins removal or destruction through adsorption and oxidation processes Jar tests evaluating carbon dose to adsorb cyanotoxins

20 Treatment Optimization: Jar Test Experiments Conduct on-site experiments to assist with site-specific treatment optimization Simulate HAB conditions with concentrated samples Compare Real-World data to lab data and published studies Inform USEPA guidance

21 Jar Test Experiment #1: Permanganate addition affecting coagulation and microcystins release Jar # Coagulant (ACH) dose Permanganate dose 1 (control) None None 2 24 mg/l (plant s dose) None 3 24 mg/l (plant s dose) 1.2 mg/l (plant s dose) 4 24 mg/l (plant s dose) 3 mg/l (high dose where cyanotoxin release may occur)

22 Microcystins (µg/l) Jar Test Experiment #1- Permanganate Results 85% of microcystins removed by coagulation, no clear benefit from permanganate Extracellular microcystins increased to 80% of total with high permanganate dose Initial Sample Control ACH only ACH & low NaMnO 4 ACH & high NaMnO 4

23 Jar Test Experiment #2: Evaluate Impact of Carbon Dose and Contact Time on Microcystins Adsorption 4 PAC Doses (plus control and duplicate), 5 Time Steps No PAC Increasing PAC Dose 40 mg/l PAC Challenge Water: Simulated bloom by concentrating cyanobacteria in raw water using phytoplankton net and spiking raw with concentrate

24 Experiment #2- PAC Results Increasing PAC dose improved microcystins removal, but even highest dose did not achieve total removal Most removal occurs during within four hours of contact time Unexpected high variability between jars and increase in extracellular microcystins for control Ruptured cells

25 Jar Test Experiment #3: Evaluate Carbon Type (Coal vs. Wood), Dose (10 & 40 mg/l), and effect of other treatment chemicals (alum & lime)

26 Extracellular Microcystins (µg/l) Extracellular Microcystins (µg/l) Jar Test Experiment #3: PAC Results Coal-based Carbon Wood-based Carbon Carbon Carbon, Alum & Lime Carbon Carbon, Alum & Lime Control Low Carbon 10 mg/l High Carbon 40 mg/l Control Low Carbon 10 mg/l High Carbon 40 mg/l No appreciable difference between PAC only and PAC + Alum & Lime PAC Dose Impacted Microcystins Reduction: - No Appreciable Microcystins Reduction at 10 mg/l - Highest reduction at 40 mg/l: Coal PAC had higher adsorption than wood

27 Treatment Optimization: Next Steps 4 th Pilot CPE- PWS with both microcystins and saxitoxins impacts Repeat and conduct additional jar test experiments Saxitoxins jar test experiments Compare real-world experimental results to published isotherm data and results from OBHE funded research projects Conduct real world oxidation kinetics study during next CPE (MCs and STXs) and compare to AWWA calculator and results from OBHE funded projects Develop modified Ohio EPA HAB CPE approach and conduct CPEs at additional Ohio water systems impacted by HABs

28 Microcystins Accumulation in Water Treatment Residuals Study Goals Determine MCs occurrence in from a variety of residual types. Investigate persistence of MCs in WTR over time. Evaluate microcystins (MCs) analytical methods for water treatment residual (WTR) matrices. Study Design Four sites Three extraction methods Three analysis methods

29 Microcystins Accumulation in Water Treatment Residuals Initial Findings Complex WTR matrices require an advanced extraction step Microcystins were detected in all WTR samples, regardless of WTR age In general, microcystins concentrations in WTR were greater than concentrations in raw water Additional Sampling and Analysis Two additional sites with low historic microcystins concentrations Representative composite sampling

30 MCs in Residuals: Next Steps Ohio Board of Higher Education HAB Grant Further evaluate extraction and analytical methods Determine fate and transport of microcystins in WTR Identify potential for biodegradation of microcystins in WTR Evaluate potential for plant uptake Ohio EPA Division of Materials Waste Management Addressing interested party comments and revising General Permits for beneficial reuse of water treatment plant residuals (land application or soil blend)

31 Questions? Amy J. Klei Ohio EPA HAB Section

32 Ohio EPA District HAB Coordinators Central District Tya Darden Northeast District Chris Maslo Northwest District Ben Sloan Southwest District Brian Chitti Southeast District Lesley Jenkins

33 2018 Off-Season Schedule 3 January 1 April 30 Monthly qpcr screening OR Monthly raw water microcystins PWSs must notify Ohio EPA in writing by 12/15/17 their preference for monthly microcystins or monthly qpcr screening and remain on that schedule through 5/1/18. HAB Season: switch to monthly qpcr Eligibility: PWS on Seasonal Monitoring Schedule 3 monitoring