Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership Mercury Programs

Transcription

1 Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership Mercury Programs Monitoring, Modeling and Control Strategies December 6, 2011 Delta Tributaries Mercury Council Hong Lin, Ph.D., City of Sacramento Brian Laurenson, Larry Walker Associates

2 Partnership Members and Permit Seven member agencies are co-permittees First NPDES permit 1991; most recent renewal 2008 MOU and cost sharing based on population Joint monitoring and other technical activities Stormwater Quality Improvement Plan (SQIP) Individual agency activities and reporting 2

3 Partnership Area 3

4 Drainage Area Facts Sacramento County (2008 Farmland Mapping data) 178,000 urban acres 369,264 agricultural acres Gravity and pump systems Historic flooding and vulnerable areas Approximately two-thirds of urban area runoff is to American River 4

5 Urban Drainages 5

6 Partnership Program Elements Partnership organized in elements to address permit requirements and effective administration of activities Annual reporting of elements by individual agency and jointly Monitoring and Target Pollutant elements are two of the joint activities 6

7 Monitoring Program Element Urban runoff, urban tributary* and river water column monitoring since 1990 Toxicity Bioassessment Sediment Structural control effectiveness Coordinated Monitoring Program (CMP) with agreement and support from SRCSD for River Monitoring 7

8 Monitoring Objectives Permit compliance Long-term trend monitoring Assess cause and contribute Overall program effectiveness assessments (PEA) Support target pollutant strategies 8

9 Current Monitoring Locations RM44 SRCSD only 9

10 Monitoring and Analytical Methods Annual SAP updates Urban runoff characterization composite sampler stations Urban tributary continuous dataloggers and telemetry River cross sections EPA 1669 and 1638 equivalent since mid-1990s Field filtration of metals 10

11 RESULT o CONSTITUENT Mercury, T t al Methylmercury Report: Ut itled 47 Page 1 of NPDES Reporting Graph Bi lder RESULT v. Da y e by CONSI T UENT & Mo ito i ng Type y a f a Monitoring ur Tpe Urban Rnof f Urban Tibut ar y s t /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/2011 Date 11

12 RESULT o CONSTITUENT Mercury, T t al Methylmercury NPDES Reporting Report: Ut itled 39 Page 1 of 1 s C RESULT v. LO _ I D by CONSI TUENT *UR2S *UR3 *UR5 SA2 AC03 LC02 WC01 LOC_ID 12

13 Land Development Comparison NPDES Reporting Notes: [1] Location ID: UR2S = Strong Ranch Slough, UR3 = Sump 111, UR5 STA2 = North Natomas Detention Basin No. 4 [2] Event No.: WW40 = 10/31/08, WW41 = 12/14/08, WW42 = 2/13/08, DW21 = 6/10/09 DW = dry weather event WW = wet weather event Table 7. Comparison of Constituent Median Concentrations between Urban Runoff Discharge Characterization Sites Old Development [1] New Development [2] Constituent Median n Median n Mercury, Total (ng/l) Methylmercury (ng/l) Solids, Total Suspended (mg/l) Notes: [1] Old development includes data from Sump 111, Sump 104, and Strong Ranch Slough [2] New development includes data from the North Natomas Wet Detention Basin No. 4 effectiveness study Model Results Thirty years of output from the continuous simulation is averaged to determine the average annual load by discharge regime and by receiving water as shown in Table 8. To simulate the effect of new development standards, a range of assumed annual load reductions is shown in Table 9. For example, Table 9 reports that if it is assumed that all new development land areas 13

14 Trend Analysis 12/1/11 The official Dilbert website with Scott Adams' color comic strips, animation, mashups and more! 14

15 Trend and Data Analysis Urban runoff data variability within an event and between events Long term effectiveness evaluation approaches Multi-factor regressions Identification of significant factors Changes in analytical methods, sites or collection techniques New development areas and structural controls 15

16 Analytical Modeling Estimating loads for intermittent and highly variable discharges Multi-variate regressions Land use runoff volumes Continuous simulation of 30 year climate record New development areas Update frequency 16

17 Watershed Modeling Based on Center for Watershed Protection Watershed Treatment Model (WTM) Conceptual model of loads removed in watershed Structural and non-structural control effectiveness Partnership data on completed activities Inventory of control strategies 17

18 Load Removed by Partnership Activities (September 2009 Reporting) Table 10. Estimated Total Mercury and TSS Loads Removed by Partnership Activities in [1] BMP Treatment Control BMPs [2] Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs Channel Cleaning Street Sweeping Catch Basin & Sump Maintenance Universal Waste Collection TSS Load Removed (kg/ yr) [3] Hg Load Removed (kg/ yr) [3] 361, (406, ,000) ( ) 2,890, (2,970,000-2,600,000) ( ) 294, (336, ,000) ( ) 2,470, (2,960,000-1,970,000) ( ) 7,810, (9,370,000-6,250,000) ( ) 197,000, (237,000, ,000,000) ( ) n/a ( ) TOTAL 208,000, PEA Level [4] 5- Improving Runoff Quality 5 - Improving Runoff Quality 4 - Reducing Loads 4 - Reducing Loads 4 - Reducing Loads 4 - Reducing Loads Key Assumptions - All new development since 1995 is treated by treatment control with uniform discharge quality (wet detention basin results used as surrogate) - Used empirical rainfall runoff regression to calculate annual runoff volume - All BMPs designed to capture and treat 80% runoff volume - Area of active construction est. as the difference in urban ac. from 2007 to TSS influent concentration obtained from Caltrans - Hg influent and effluent concentrations are estimated from a TSS-Hg regression generated from Partnership monitoring data - Total solids equal to 50% of total material weight - Bulk density of material equal to 1.34 kg/l - Total solids equal to 50% of total material weight - Bulk density of material equal to 1.34 kg/l - Total solids equal to 50% of total material weight - Bulk density of material equal to 1.34 kg/l includes lamps, batteries, thermostats, latex paint Notes: Shaded value shown is for total solids [1] data was used to compile the table. [2] - Two values given for structural BMPs. The top numbers reflect load removal calculated using influent data from Natomas Basin - this represents runoff typical of new development. The bottom numbers reflect load removal calculated using urban runoff data from old development. [3] - Calculated values are shown without brackets; bracketed values represent the range of possible TSS and Hg load removed by Partnership activities (see Attachment C for additional details on ranges calculations). [4] - Program Effectiveness Assessment (PEA) levels as specified within CASQA's Municipal Stormwater Program Effectiveness Assessment Guidance document (2007). 18

19 Target Pollutant Program Identify and prioritize constituents of concern to Program Monitoring data analysis, regulatory programs and controllability Develop target pollutant strategies Iterative approach implementing strategies and testing outcomes 19

20 Mercury Plan (2004) Actions JPA IPA Municipal Operations Element 1. Identify specific permittee departments to be surveyed for mercury product use. X 2. Conduct the municipal survey. X 3. Summarize and evaluate the municipal survey results. X 4. Determine further individual permittee actions and implementation schedule. X 5. Implement the selected actions. X Operational BMPs to clean streets, detention basins, and the drainage infrastructure. Public Outreach Element 1. Incorporate mercury recycling messages into general materials/events. X X 2. Add mercury webpage to County and City of Sacramento stormwater websites. X 3. Add links from other permittee general municipal websites. X 4. Coordinate with local HHWs to post consistent list of recyclable mercury devices. X 5. Consider adding mercury awareness to the Stormwater Program opinion survey. X Commercial/Industrial Element 1. Develop commercial/industrial fact sheet on disposal of mercury products/ CESQG. X 2. Post the fact sheet on the County and City of Sacramento stormwater websites. X 3. Encourage posting on BERC, HHW websites. 4. Supply fact sheet for distribution to County EMD staff. X 5. Conduct outreach to other commercial/ industrial businesses, as appropriate. X Construction Element Erosion and sediment control BMPs New Development Element On-site and regional stormwater treatment BMPs Target Pollutant Reduction Program 1. Participate through the DTMC on mercury watershed programs. X 2. Track urban runoff and HHW mercury reduction programs. X 3. Track mercury air deposition and emission studies relevant to the Sacramento area. X 4. Review and provide input to Delta and Sacramento River TMDLs. X 5. Develop mercury load reduction calculation methods for BMPS. X 6. Develop fluorescent lamp recycling outreach plan and consider its feasibility/benefit. X DOCUMENT COMPLETION OF TASKS IN ANNUAL REPORTS. X v 20 v JPA = Joint Program Activity IPA = Individual Permittee Activity

21 Delta Methylmercury TMDL Phase 1 Studies Control strategy collaboration possibilities may be limited to MS4 agencies and CSS Other partnership possibilities and other target pollutants PEA and low impact development (LID) Urbanization does not necessarily increase pollutant per acre loading rates (pollutant specific testing) 21

22 Partnership Current Activities Continued monitoring at all locations Load modeling and long term effectiveness evaluation for Report of Waste Discharge Delta Methylmercury TMDL Phase 1 compliance Update control strategy conceptual model framework Update target pollutant control strategies Permit required special study 22

23 Discussion 23