Developing Water Quality Solutions for SF Bay

1
Developing Water Quality Solutions for SF Bay
Dyan Whyte dcw_at_rb2.swrcb.ca.gov California
Regional Water Quality Control Board San
Francisco Bay Region
2
Total Maximum Daily Load

• Clean Water Act 303(d) requires States to
• Identify impaired waters
• Adopt plans to restore and maintain water quality
  standards
• California
• TMDLs are adopted by incorporation into Basin
  Plans
• Basin Planning process requires implementation
  plans

3
1998 303(d) Impaired Waters List

• 1472 listings statewide
• (400 800 projects)
• 160 listings in SF Bay Region
• (33 projects?)

4
San Francisco Bay listed as impaired by

• Pesticide toxicity
• Legacy pesticides
• Selenium
• Exotic species
• Dioxins/furans

Copper Nickel Mercury PCBs
PAHs PBDEs watch listed
5
TMDL Phases Products
303(d) List
1
Impairment assessment, conceptual model
development
Project Definition
2
3
Project Planning
Data Collection
4
Project Analyses
Project Reports
5-7
Basin Plan amendment
Regulatory Action/Process
8
Adaptive Implementation
WQS Support
6
How to deal with uncertainty complexity ???

• STOP! Do not proceed until all the facts are in
  and we understand the system perfectly and can
  take actions that we know will be 100 effective.
  

7
Coping with Complexity Uncertainties

• Proceed but employ
• the scientific method
• A cautious approach
• Flexibility
• Adaptive implementation

8
TMDL Projects Updates
9
Cu/Ni in SF BayOutcomes of the TMDL project

• SSOs for South Bay calculated to fully protect
  beneficial uses
• Assessment suggested no impairment by ambient
  levels of copper
• Water quality protection plan that contains
  pollution prevention actions and ongoing
  monitoring to assess status
• Recommended de-listing

10
Keys to Cu/Ni project success

• Adequate Funding and data
• RMP baseline monitoring provided core data set to
  evaluate ambient conditions
• San Jose and other cities contributed gt 2
  million to improve scientific understanding and
  stakeholder involvement.
• Stakeholder involvement
• Consensus reached on complex technical issues.
• Technical Peer Review
• Ensured that the science component was sound.
• Paved the way for consensus on the policy issues.

11
Mercury transformations in the environment
From cinnabar
to the sushi bar
12
SF Bay mercury sources
Mercury Load (kg/yr)
13
MercurySources
WQStandards(beneficial uses)
MercurySources
Beneficial Uses
14
SF Bay Mercury TMDLImplementation Plan

• Reduce mercury loads to SF Bay.
• Reduce production of methyl mercury.
• Perform monitoring and focused studies to
• Assess progress toward targets
• Refine load estimates
• Evaluate appropriateness of targets
• Evaluate controllability of loads.
• Encourage actions that address multiple
  contaminants
• Re-visit decisions on targets, allocations, and
  implementation actions every 5 - 10 years

15
Bioturbation, Scouring, Deposition
Resuspension, Transport, Dredging
Atmospheric Deposition
PCBs TMDLConceptual Model
Golden Gate Outflow
PointSources
Surface Waters
UrbanRunoff
Fish eatingWildlife
Fish
Spills On-LandContaminated Sites
Biologically Active Sediment Layer
Benthic Plant eating Wildlife
Benthic Invertebrates Plants
Non-UrbanRunoff Non-Point Sources
Buried Sediment Layer
Humans
Degradation, Sorption Desorption, Diffusion
DeltaInflow
16
Stay tuned for

• SF Bay Hg final TMDL report
• SF Bay PCBs preliminary and final TMDL reports
• Guadalupe River source assessment conceptual
  model report
• Urban Creeks pesticide toxicity final TMDL report
• Napa River sediments and nutrients preliminary
  project report
• San Francisquito sediments preliminary project
  report
• Sonoma Creek sediments and nutrients preliminary
  project report

17
Stay tuned for

• Conceptual models and SF Bay impairment
  assessments for
• Legacy pesticides
• Selenium
• Pesticide toxicity
• Dioxins/furans
• PAHs
• PBDEs

18
Acknowledgements

• Thank you to the hard working TMDL staff,
  especially
• Bill Johnson
• Fred Hetzel
• Richard Looker
• Tom Mumley
• who let me pillage their slide collections