Water Quality Standards for Contact Recreation, Bacteria TMDLs, and MS4 Permits
1 like540 views
Reviews history of contact recreational standards for surface water quality. Describes how TMDLs for bacteria may impact stormwater quality permits.
More Related Content
What's hot (8)
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Water Quality Standards for Contact Recreation, Bacteria TMDLs, and MS4 Permits (20)
Water Quality Standards for Contact Recreation, Bacteria TMDLs, and MS4 Permits
- 1. 11th Annual EPA Region 6 th MS4 Operators Conference Houston, TX Houston, TX Water Quality Standards for Contact Recreation, Bacteria TMDLs, and MS4 Permits Presented by MICHAEL F. BLOOM, P.E., CFM Senior Associate TOPICS Technical basis for freshwater criterion Research for new standard Current Region 6 standards Region 6 contact recreation impairments Recent bacteria TMDLs Implications for MS4 permits 1
- 2. LAKE ERIE, ERIE PENNSYLVANIA KEYSTONE LAKE OKLAHOMA 2
- 3. STUDY CONDITIONS LAKE WWTP BEACH RAW RESULTS 3
- 4. ILLNESS RATES VS. E. COLI DENSITIES R2 = 0.80 EPA CRITERIA 4
- 5. CONCERNS Actual level of exposure was not evaluated; Actual pathogenic organisms not measured; Only two of nine trials showed statistical differences between swimmers and non-swimmers; The correlation between swimmer and non-swimmer illness rates was 0.67; Haas, C., et. al. 2006. Expert Review Report Regarding United States Environmental Protection Agencys Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria 1986: Application to Secondary Contact Recreation. (Report No. 2006-38) Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, Chicago, IL., July. CONCERNS Only highly credible GI symptoms were counted in the regression; The hypothesis that indicator densities are correlated with pathogen densities has not been tested; and, Application of the criterion to bodies of water other than lakes with nearby municipal wastewater discharges is questionable. Haas, C., et. al. 2006. Expert Review Report Regarding United States Environmental Protection Agencys Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria 1986: Application to Secondary Contact Recreation. (Report No. 2006-38) Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, Chicago, IL., July. 5
- 6. APPLIED CONDITIONS STUDY CONDITIONS LAKE WWTP BEACH 6
- 8. KEYSTONE LAKE OKLAHOMA 8
- 9. OKLAHOMA STANDARDS SOURCE: http://www.owrb.ok.gov/util/rules/pdf_rul/Chap45.pdf OKLAHOMA STANDARDS (Continued) SOURCE: http://www.owrb.ok.gov/util/rules/pdf_rul/Chap45.pdf 9
- 10. TEXAS STANDARDS (A) Freshwater (i) Contact recreation. The geometric mean of E. coli should not exceed 126 per 100 ml. In addition, single samples of E. coli should not exceed 394 per 100 ml. Contact recreation applies to all bodies of freshwater except where specifically designated otherwise in 則307.10 of this title. (ii) Noncontact recreation. The geometric mean of E. coli should not exceed 605 per 100 ml. (B) Saltwater. (i) Contact recreation. The geometric mean of Enterococci should not exceed 35 per 100 ml. In addition, single samples of Enterococci should not exceed 89 per 100 ml. Contact recreation applies to all bodies of saltwater, except where specifically designated otherwise in 則307.10 of this title. (ii) Noncontact recreation. The geometric mean of Enterococci should not exceed 168 per 100 ml. (C) Fecal coliform bacteria. Fecal coliform bacteria can be used as an alternative instream indicator of recreational suitability until sufficient data are available for E coli or Enterococci. For segments designated as oyster waters in 則307.10 of this title, fecal coliform can continue to be used as an indicator of recreational suitability because fecal coliform is used as the indicator for suitability of oyster water use as described in paragraph (3)(B) of this subsection. Fecal coliform can also continue to be used as a surrogate indicator in effluent limits for wastewater discharges. Fecal coliform criteria are the same for both freshwater and saltwater, as follows. (i) Contact recreation. The geometric mean of fecal coliform should not exceed 200 per 100 ml. In addition, single samples of fecal coliform should not exceed 400 per 100 ml. (ii) Noncontact recreation. Fecal coliform shall not exceed 2,000 per 100 ml as a geometric mean. In addition, single samples of fecal coliform should not exceed 4,000 per 100 ml. SOURCE: http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=4&ti=30&pt=1&ch=307&rl=Y NEW MEXICO STANDARDS SOURCE: http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title20/20.006.0004.pdf 10
- 11. ARKANSAS STANDARDS SOURCE: http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/regs/files/reg02_final_071125.pdf ARKANSAS STANDARDS SOURCE: http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/regs/files/reg02_final_071125.pdf 11
- 12. ARKANSAS STANDARDS SOURCE: http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/regs/files/reg02_final_071125.pdf LOUISIANA STANDARDS SOURCE: http://deq.louisiana.gov/portal/Portals/0/planning/regs/title33/33v09.pdf 12
- 13. LOUISIANA STANDARDS SOURCE: http://deq.louisiana.gov/portal/Portals/0/planning/regs/title33/33v09.pdf IMPAIRMENTS NATIONALLY Total number of causes of impairment reported nationally is 70,000 Pathogens reported as the cause of impairment 10,000 times Pathogens are the number one impairment cause nationally More pathogen TMDLs have been adopted than any other pollutant SOURCE: Section 305(b) report available on EPA website. See http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T 13
- 14. EPA Region 6 Statistics OK TX NM LA AR Rank of Pathogens Among Impairments 1 1 NA 2 NA Total No. of Pathogens Impairments 549 437 NA 106 NA Total No. of Impairments 1,640 882 NA 479 NA Adopted TMDLs for Bacteria* 160 45 NA 70 NA Total No. of Adopted TMDLs 191 131 NA 665 NA *Includes E. Coli, Fecal Coliform, and Enterococcus bacteria. SOURCE: Section 305(b) report available on EPA website. See http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T SUMMARY OF BACTERIA LEVELS OBSERVED IN REPRESENTATIVE MONITORING CONDUCTED BY MEDIUM AND LARGE MS4 OPERATORS SOURCE: Pitt, R. 2007. Website: http://unix.eng.ua.edu/~rpitt/Research/ms4/mainms4.shtml 14
- 15. BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf 15
- 16. BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) BLEST means BACTERIA LOAD ESTIMATION SPREADSHEET TOOL SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) BLEST means BACTERIA LOAD ESTIMATION SPREADSHEET TOOL SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf 16
- 17. BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf 17
- 18. BUFFALO & WHITEOAK BAYOUS (HOUSTON, TX) SOURCE: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/water/tmdl/22buffalobayou/22-bbbwbtmdl_adopted.pdf JTF MS4 Permit Impacts Prior to TMDL adoption Prior to Implementation Plan adoption Develop and implement Interim Bacteria Reduction Plan Identify and remove impediments to Green Infrastructure Revise post-construction BMP manuals Develop measurable goals Assess potential bacteria sources Develop interim controls for bacteria sources SOURCE: Hosch, C., 2008. Conditional No Objection to Draft Permit TXS001201. Letter to Chris Linendoll, Section Manager, Wastewater Permitting Section, TCEQ from Claudia Hosch, US EPA. October 3. 18
- 19. Justification Proceeding with interim bacteria reduction activities in the permit at this time, in advance of bacteria TMDLs, supports the statutory and regulatory requirements for MS4 permits to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practical; effectively prohibit the discharge of non-storm water into the MS4; ensure discharges do not cause or contribute to violations of water quality standards; and contribute to necessary pollutant reductions identified by the TMDLs as they are completed. SOURCE: Hosch, C., 2008. Conditional No Objection to Draft Permit TXS001201. Letter to Chris Linendoll, Section Manager, Wastewater Permitting Section, TCEQ from Claudia Hosch, US EPA. October 3. Other Thoughts General Permits will be impacted also Construction General Small MS4 General Permits Wastewater permits have been impacted Monitoring Effluent limits SOURCE: Hosch, C., 2008. Conditional No Objection to Draft Permit TXS001201. Letter to Chris Linendoll, Section Manager, Wastewater Permitting Section, TCEQ from Claudia Hosch, US EPA. October 3. 19
- 20. TOPICS Technical basis for freshwater criterion Research for new standard Current Region 6 standards Region 6 contact recreation impairments Recent bacteria TMDLs Implications for MS4 permits FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Michael F. Bloom, P.E., CFM Senior Associate PBS&J 1250 Wood Branch Park Drive, Suite 300 Houston, TX 77079 281-529-4202 mfbloom@pbsj.com 20