SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT (SCCWRP) Stephen B. Weisberg Executive Director.
Post on 29-Jan-2016
216 Views
Preview:
Transcript
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT
(SCCWRP)
Stephen B. WeisbergExecutive Director
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
MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS
City of San Diego
City of Los Angeles
Orange County Sanitation District
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
San Diego Regional Water Quality Board
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Board
State Water Quality Board
U.S Environmental Protection Agency
SCCWRP’S GOALS
• To develop, participate in, and coordinate programs to understand ecological systems in the coastal waters and to document relationships between these systems and human activities;
• To answer the questions regarding the southern California coastal waters: (a) Is it safe to swim? (b) Is it safe to eat the fish? (c) Is the ecosystem healthy? (d) Are the natural resources being protected?
• To effectively communicate our research findings and recommendations, through a variety of media to decision makers and other stakeholders;
• To serve as a catalyst in forming partnerships and alliances which further these goals; and
• To provide an information management system to archive, retrieve, analyze, and display SCCWRP data in order to achieve the above goals and enhance our understanding of the Southern California Bight.
SOME FOCAL POINTS OF CURRENT SCCWRP RESEARCH
• Source estimation
• Regional monitoring
• Stomwater assessment
• TMDL development
WHY STUDY MASS EMISSIONS?
• Relative risk among sources
-- Where do the largest proportion of pollutants come from??
• Changes over time
-- Were management actions effective at reducing loads?
TYPES OF SOURCES YEAR OF LAST ESTIMATE
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) ongoing
Power generating stations 1995
Industrial dischargers 1995
Hazardous material spills 1989
Urban runoff ongoing
Dredged material disposal/ocean dumping 1997
Oil platforms 1996
Atmospheric deposition ongoing
Vessel bottom points an anodes ongoing
Oceanic currents 1973
Year
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Po
pu
lati
on
(m
illio
ns)
0.1
1
10
An
nu
al D
isch
arg
e V
olu
me
(bill
ion
lite
rs)
10
100
1000Population
Wastewater Flow
LA River
Year
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Was
tew
ater
Vo
lum
e(b
illio
n li
ters
)
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
Su
spen
ded
So
lids
(th
ou
san
ds
met
ric
ton
s)
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Wastewater Flow
Suspended Solids
Year
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Mas
s E
mis
sio
ns
(met
ric
ton
s)
0
200
400
600
800
Chromium Copper
1971 - 1972
0
20
40
60
80
100
Urban Runoff
POTW Wastewater
1994 - 1995
Flow
Sus
pend
ed S
olid
s
Chr
omiu
m
Cop
per
Nic
kel
Lead
Zinc
Pe
rce
nt
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
n t
o O
ce
an
0
20
40
60
80
100A
mm
onia
Pho
spho
rous
SANTA ANA RIVER PROJECT
• Collected water samples every 15 minutes for an entire year-- Automated sampler
• Almost 2000 samples-- Measured TSS on all-- Measured metals/organics on approximately 200
• Several project goals-- Accurately estimate mass emission for the year-- Compare our estimate from intensive sampling with that of routine sampling frequencies-- Use simulation approach to identify optimal subsampling strategy
Ballona Creek Land UseAgricultureCommercialIndustrialOpenOtherResidentialWater
REGIONAL MONITORING
• Nearly $20M/year is spent on routine marine monitoring in southern California-- >80% is associated with discharge permits
• Despite this expenditure we can’t provide a regional assessment of condition
• Most monitoring is site-specific-- Less than 5% of the southern California coast is monitored
• Existing data can’t be easily integrated-- Different parameters-- Different methods-- Inaccessible data
WHAT ARE WE DOING TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM?
• Two cooperative regional monitoring surveys-- $3M effort in 1994 involved 12 organizations
-- $8M effort in 1998 involving 62 organizations
• Unique funding mechanism-- Regulators modified permits reallocating sampling effort towards
regional monitoring
-- Helps keep costs nearly neutral for participants
• Dischargers work jointly with regulators to define most appropriate methodologies-- Pooling of expertise
-- Increase in communication
200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m
200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m200 m
oo119 00' W 118 00' W
o33 00' N
o
o
120 00' W
34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'34 00'
606060606060606060303030303030303030000000000
KilometersKilometersKilometersKilometersKilometersKilometersKilometersKilometersKilometers
LOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELESLOS ANGELES
SAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGOSAN DIEGO
DanaDanaDanaDanaDanaDanaDanaDanaDanaPointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointPoint
U.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l BorderU.S.-Mexico Int'l Border
SANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARASANTA BARBARA
PointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointConceptionConceptionConceptionConceptionConceptionConceptionConceptionConceptionConception
PointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDume
PointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointPointDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDumeDume
SantaSantaSantaSantaSantaSantaSantaSantaSantaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonicaMonica
BayBayBayBayBayBayBayBayBay
Total DDTng/dry g (No. sites)
500 to 2,500 (8) 50 to 500 (37) 10 to 50 (57) RL to 10 (102) Below RL (44)
Monthly Standards
0102030405060
Remainingshoreline
Within 100yards of outlet
Beach nearfreshwater
outlets
Per
cen
t o
f sh
ore
lin
efa
ilin
g s
tan
dar
ds
SANTA MONICA BAY SEDIMENT(Final Round)
Component LAB-1 LAB-2 LAB-3 LAB-4 LAB-5 LAB-6
Naphthalene 213 162 170 191 139 1932-Methylnapthalene 376 435 480 532 405 525Biphenyl 659 644 850 800 606 7962,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 403 212 255 343 228 269Fluorene 33 25 50 40 24 53Phenanthrene 116 131 145 130 109 1411-Methylphenanthrene 16 62 27 68 51 128Fluoranthene 152 280 150 135 87 183Pyrene 227 196 155 230 79 185Benz[a]anthracene 91 126 145 118 65 114Chrysene 113 88 121 152 83 145Benzo[e]pyrene 129 115 155 183 171 115benzo[a]pyrene 125 109 195 191 162 66Perylene 62 91 79 110 72 26benzo[g,h,I]perylene 30 100 nd nd 109 97
TOTAL 3,279 3,280 3,653 3,927 2,957 3,515
SANTA MONICA BAY SEDIMENT(First Round)
Component LAB-1 LAB-2 LAB-3 LAB-4 LAB-5 LAB-6 LAB-7 LAB-8 LAB-9
Naphthalene 54 171 279 27 139 259 54 211 872-Methylnapthalene 129 485 721 59 405 615 193 653 270Biphenyl 233 756 1,140 97 606 770 297 650 4372,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 131 217 401 37 228 203 94 356 138Fluorene 0 38 75 2 24 69 nd 26 19Phenanthrene 0 137 469 9 109 112 69 95 901-Methylphenanthrene 0 154 0 0 51 nd nd 31 52Fluoranthene 76 0 495 26 87 108 187 173 149Pyrene 91 0 1,120 28 79 111 153 165 158Benz[a]anthracene 0 0 284 30 65 38 140 100 122Chrysene 60 0 320 31 83 46 167 136 151Benzo[e]pyrene 0 0 367 11 171 63 117 195 138benzo[a]pyrene 0 0 409 13 162 nd 163 189 139Perylene 0 249 183 5 72 32 81 59 83benzo[g,h,I]perylene 0 0 60 0 109 30 160 163 nd
TOTAL 834 2,418 7,657 451 2,957 2,836 2,294 4,034 2,493
STORMWATER ASSESSMENT
• Where does the plume go?
• Is it toxic?
-- Seasonal patterns
• What are the causes of toxicity
-- Toxicity identification evaluation
Santa Monica Storm Drain
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (minutes)
Dye
Co
nc
(pp
b)
25 meters
50 meters
100 meters
SeptOct
NovDec Jan
FebMar Jul
AugSept
OctNov
Dec JanFeb
MarApr
May
Cum
ulat
ive
Rai
nfal
l (in
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35T
oxic
Uni
ts
0
10
20
30
40Cumulative Rain
Toxic Units
1996 1997 1998
Ballona Creek Stormwater
DISSOLVED METALS
Median
EffectiveConcentration Ballona Creek
(ug/L) (ug/L) Cd1200 nd-1CU 31 3 – 28Zn 22 36 – 183Mn >40,000 1 – 114Pb nd – 16Ni 1 - 5
Dilution
Decay
Current
Beach
BacterialConcentration
Flow
Plume Dispersion Study
Storm Drain
Santa Monica Storm Drain
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (minutes)
Dye
Co
nc
(pp
b)
25 meters
50 meters
100 meters
SOME SCIENTIFIC ASPECTS OFTMDL DEVELOPMENT
• Problem definition
• Source identification
• Model development
-- Hydrodynamic component
-- Rate processes
Source 1100,000 MPN/100mL
Slow Stream, Fast Degradation
Source 1100,000 MPN/100mL
Source 21,000 MPN/100mL
FLOW
10,000
5,000
1,000
200 900
Fast Stream, Slow Degradation
Source 21,000 MPN/100mL
FLOW
95,000
90,000
85,000
80,000 995
BACTERIAL DEGRADATION STUDY
• Six day study
-- Every six hours the first day
• Three bacteria plus virus
• Several potential factors
-- Type of inocculant (sewage, stormwater)
-- Temperature
-- UV radiation
-- Suspended solids
-- Nutrient concentration
top related