Missouri Water Seminar, September 10-11, 2015, Columbia, MO

1. Speed Learning #6
Water Seminar 2015
ENGINEERING ● PLANNING ● SURVEYING ● GEOTECHNICAL ● INVESTIGATIVE
Forecasting Potential Resource &
Compliance Constraints
Presented by:
Chris Zell, John Holmes, and Cary Sayre

2. The Pinch of Regulatory Lag Time

3. •Minnesota’s Nitrate Criteria for Aquatic Life
Protection
•The 304(a) Parking Lot…(not your space and terminal #)
•Potential Changes to AWQC Derivation Procedure
•Ephemeral Stream Standards
•Sufficiently Sensitive Methods Rule
Preview

4. Minnesota PCA – Nitrate Toxicity Criteria
The Numbers
The Drivers
Acute Criteria
41 mg/L (1-day duration)
Chronic Criteria
3.1 mg/L (4-day duration, coldwaters)
4.9 mg/L (4-day duration, all Class 2)
Acute
FAV / 2 = 41 mg/L
Chronic
Class 2: ACR = 17 (C. dubia)
FAV / ACR = 4.9 mg/L
Class 2a: MATC for Lake Trout
from McGurk et al. (2006)

5. Nitrate Toxicity Criteria – Anticipated Concerns
Urban Stormwater: According to NSQD (2015) only 87 out
of 5685 (1.5%) exceeded chronic Class 2.
WOUS Implications ?
Domestic Wastewater Effluent: 1 – 9 mg/L (variable!)
from US EPA (2008)

6. The 304(a) Criteria Parking Lot
Mentioned at WP Forum (08/06)
2012 Rec. Criteria
Aluminum Iron
2013 Ammonia
Cadmium Others…
The Statistical Threshold Value
(aka, Single-ish Sample Maximum)
Illness Rate
(36/1,000)
Illness Rate
(32/1000)
410cfu/100mLasE.coli 320cfu/100mLasE.coli
No greater than 10% excursion of STV within 30-day
averaging period (no minimum sample size)
Mean 5800
Standard Error 989
Median 1530
Mode 1000
Standard Deviation 11659
Sample Variance 135925256
Kurtosis 11
Skewness 3
Range 65990
Minimum 10
Maximum 66000
Sum 806188
Count 139
Confidence Level(95.0%) 1955
NSQD E. coli (2015)  303d list likely to expand
 WOUS Implications
 Site-specific variability
(e.g., log std. dev ≠ 0.4)
 Natural source exclusions
etc.
 Highest Attainable Use, lack
of SCR in 2012 criteria….

7. Changes to AQL Criteria Guidelines
• 2003 Draft Strategy (13 considerations)
• 2006 SAB meeting to discuss alternatives
• 2008 Contaminants of Emerging Concern
• Invited Expert Meeting 9/14/2015
Changes in these protocols will propagate
into many CWA programs.
 ESA review and surrogate considerations
 Incorporate elements of ecological risk assessment
 Further consider plant and amphibian taxa
 Uncertainty analyses
Follow: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf
for updates!

8. Ephemeral Stream Standards
What are Highest Attainable Uses?
Karr (1998), see also Stream Continuum Concept
(Vannote et al.1980)
Stream Order
Naturally Occurring Processes May Limit
Attainability of Selected 304(a) Criteria: DO,
Temp., pH, others…
See also Zell and Hubbart (2012)
The Arid West Water
Quality Research Project
• http://www.wwm.pima.gov/wqrp/index_research.htm
• Detailed examination of ephemeral stream
standards
• Extant Criteria Evaluation (2006)
Criteria Magnitude: Changes warranted, unique
assemblages
Criteria Duration: Function of test methods, no change
Criteria Frequency: Changes warranted due to
disturbance regime. Synergistic effect considerations
WOUS Implications?

9. Sufficiently Sensitive Methods Rule
• Permit Application
• Compliance Monitoring
Permittees must use approved analytical methods capable of detecting and
measuring concentrations at, or below, applicable limits.
Low-level Methods = $$$
Metals, PBTs, TRC etc.

10. Thank You
For More Information…
Chris Zell, PHWQ
Allstate Consultants LLC
3312 Lemone Industrial Blvd.
Columbia, MO 65201
(573) 875-8799
czell@allstateconsultants.net