Puget Sound Nutrient Source Reduction Project
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like246 views
This document summarizes a presentation about developing a nutrient source reduction project for Puget Sound. It discusses using a Salish Sea water quality model to evaluate nutrient reduction scenarios and set targets. It outlines engaging stakeholders through a Nutrient Forum and developing an implementation strategy to identify key actions and monitoring to meet water quality standards and protection goals by 2040. Bounding scenarios using the model evaluated the relative impacts of marine and watershed sources and potential reductions from wastewater treatment plants. Permitting options and rulemaking will be discussed further. The overall goals are to reduce human-caused nutrients affecting dissolved oxygen levels in Puget Sound.
Puget Sound Nutrient Source Reduction Project
- 1. Puget Sound Nutrient Source Reduction Project March 16, 2018 Presented to the Nisqually River Council by Dustin Bilhimer, Water Quality Program 1
- 2. Near the mouth of the Elwha Photo Courtesy: CMAP, SEA Program, Department of Ecology Salish Sea Model Modeling Team Members With past contributions from: Taeyun Kim, Ph.D. Rochelle Labiosa, Ph.D. Mindy Roberts, Ph.D, P.E. Brandon Sackmann, Ph.D. Taiping Wang, Ph.D. Zhaoqing Yang, Ph.D. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Tarang Khangaonkar, Ph.D, P.E. Wen Long, Ph.D. Laura Bianucci, Ph.D. Washington State Department of Ecology Anise Ahmed, Ph.D, P.E. Teizeen Mohamedali, P.E. Greg Pelletier, P.E. Cristiana Figueroa-Kaminsky, P.E. With support from: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ben Cope 2
- 3. Data, Monitoring Tools, and Observations Ecology’s Marine Monitoring Unit – data received from Mya Keyzers, Julia Bos, Skip Albertson, Carol Maloy, Christopher Krembs http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/mar_wat/index.html Ecology’s Freshwater Monitoring Unit – Marcus Von Prause, Dave Hallock, Bill Ward http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/fw_riv/index.html Fisheries and Oceans Canada http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/index-eng.htm Padilla Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve System – data downloaded online, with assistance from Nicole Burnett and Jude Apple http://cdmo.baruch.sc.edu/ King County – data from Stephanie Jaeger and Kim Stark http://green2.kingcounty.gov/marine/Monitoring/Offshore University of Washington – UW PRISM cruise data in collaboration with NOAA, data from Simone Alin (NOAA) and Jan Newton (UW), Parker MacCready provided Matlab scripts http://www.prism.washington.edu/home Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program http://www.ecy.wa.gov/PROGRAMS/WQ/psmonitoring/index.html Many staff members of the wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), particular in South and Central Puget Sound – provided data and assistance in collecting samples as part of the South Puget Sound Dissolved Oxygen Study for their facilities, which are the basis of some of the nutrient load estimates used in the model. Ecology staff collected information under the separate South Puget Sound Dissolved Oxygen Study that was used as a basis for load analyses in the Salish Sea Model: • Karen Burgess and Greg Zentner managed communications with the WWTPs through the permit writers (Mahbub Alam, Mike Dawda, Dave Dougherty, Alison Evans, Mark Henley, Tonya Lane), and Marc Heffner provided input regarding the Simpson industrial discharge. • Chuck Hoffman analyzed and performed WWTP regressions. • Ryan McEliece, Chris Moore, and Brandon Slone conducted all freshwater monitoring, including coordinating with WWTP staff for composite sample collection, in South and Central Puget Sound. • Steve Golding helped develop the South and Central Puget Sound WWTP monitoring program. • Dave Hallock and Bill Ward coordinated supplemental freshwater monitoring in South and Central Puget Sound. Peer Reviewers Simone Alin - Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Bob Ambrose, Ben Cope - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Stephanie Jaeger - Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Water and Land Resources Division, King County Christopher Krembs, Tom Gries, Will Hobbs, Dustin Bilhimer - Washington Department of Ecology Parker MacCready - University of Washington Brian Rappoli - Ocean and Coastal Acidification and Coral Reef Protection Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Randy Shuman - King County Samantha Siedlecki - Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, University of Washington Funding & In-kind Contributions Framework Development Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Washington State Department of Ecology United States Environmental Protection Agency Individual Project Applications National Estuarine Program Nature Conservancy National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NW Straits Commission Skagit River System Cooperative Skagit Watershed Council Tulalip Tribe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Additional Support Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PIC) program: http://pic.pnnl.gov/ NW Regional Modeling Consortium http://www.atmos.washington.edu/cliff/consortium.html Salish Sea Model Contributors – thank you! 3
- 4. Salish Sea Model Timeline • 2008-2014 • South Sound DO Model • Salish Sea Model (Circulation and WQ models) • 2014-2017 • Sediment Diagenesis Module added to SSM • Ocean Acidification Module added to SSM • Intermediate Grid to improve resolution and skill at ocean boundary • 2017-2018 (Begin Puget Sound Nutrient project) • Bounding Scenarios completed with new modules • 2019-2020 • Optimization Scenarios using refined model inputs • Increased resolution (smaller cell sizes) in South Sound and along nearshore areas 4 Model Development Model Application
- 5. Puget Sound Nutrient Source Reduction Project Phases Develop and implement a Puget Sound nutrient source reduction plan to guide regional investments in point and nonpoint source nutrient controls so that Puget Sound will meet DO water quality criteria and protect aquatic life designated uses by 2040 1. Communicate and share science with the public and stakeholders 2. Collaboratively develop a MWQ/Nutrient Implementation Strategy 3. Implement nutrient reduction actions that meet our water quality goals 5
- 6. WQ Dissolved Oxygen Standards in Puget Sound • 7.0 mg/L - most of Puget Sound and the Straits • 6.0 mg/L – Bellingham Bay, Samish Bay, Skagit Bay, around Whidbey, other inlets/bays • 5.0 mg/L - Commencement Bay, Budd Inlet, and portions of some inlets • 4.0 mg/L – very tiny finger of Commencement Bay 6
- 7. Water Quality Goals • Ecology’s Regulatory Goals • Meet Dissolved Oxygen Criteria • Protect designated aquatic life and aesthetic uses • Puget Sound Action Agenda Goals • Improve Puget Sound’s health with respect to nutrient over-enrichment and related effects • Salish Sea Model evaluates anthropogenic DO depletion • Reduce anthropogenic nutrient sources so that total local human sources do not lower DO by more than 0.2mg/L below the numeric criteria or reference/natural condition, whichever is lower 7
- 8. Excess nutrients are a problem Eutrophication Low dissolved oxygen (2014 water quality assessment) 8
- 9. Sources of nutrients in Salish Sea ModelAtmospheric Deposition Deposition of atmospheric nutrients natural sources plus emissions) onto watersheds and directly onto marine waters Net Ocean Exchange Nutrients from the Pacific Ocean and Puget Sound get exchanged at the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Admiralty Inlet Rivers Includes all upstream sources that drain into rivers, and are transformed by stream dynamics, before entering Puget Sound at their mouths WWTPs + other point sources Human wastewater and industrial point sources with outfalls in marine waters Sources included implicitly: • near-shore septic systems • direct marine discharge of groundwater Sources not included: • net pens • vessel discharges • Combined sewer outflows 9
- 10. cold water natural nutrients Estuaries and Bays Basins Droughts increase the human burden on water quality Ocean Rivers are dry, water residence time is high Changes to snowpack and river flows Weather and Ocean Patterns Climate Change Drawn by: Christopher Krembs Productive foodweb regeneration Less desirable foodweb Magnify human pollutants With a weaker connection to coastal upwelling: Water stagnant, warm Pollutants magnify Nutrient balance shift Low Dissolved Oxygen Different food web Toxics increase in fish 10
- 11. Seasonality of river and WWTP nitrogen loading Monthly DIN loads entering Puget Sound south of Admiralty Inlet 11 Source: Mohamedali et al, 2011 (ECY publication 11-03-001)
- 12. Watershed nutrient flux • Watershed nutrient attenuation processes • Physical, chemical, and biological transformation and attenuation of nutrients in watersheds • Channel geometry, travel time, flood plain connectivity, hyporheic exchange • Human land use impacts that reduce natural attenuation in in watersheds1 • Agriculture and forestry are potential sources when not managed properly • Impervious surfaces increase and concentrate polluted urban runoff • Lack of riparian buffers and decreased channel complexity 121(USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5074)
- 13. June 2013 Eyes Over Puget Sound Up-to-date observations of visible water quality conditions in Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca Flight log Weather Water column Aerial photos Ferry and Satellite Moorings sail boat Eutrophication indicator Noctiluca impacts: • food web structure • nutrient cycling • low food quality 13
- 14. Two differently colored red-brown blooms and abundant jellyfish patches. Location: Across Butler Cove, Budd Inlet (South Sound), 12:31 PM. Bloom jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish 2 NavigateAerial photography 9-26-2016 Field log Climate Water column Aerial photos Continuous monitoring Streams jellyfish jellyfish boat marker jellyfish Bloom boat boat jellyfish jellyfish Two eutrophication indicator species: Jellyfish and flagellates often thrive together 14
- 15. 7 NavigateAerial photography 4-29-2015 Red bloom and patches of jellyfish. Location: Kitsap Marina, Sinclair Inlet (Bremerton), 9:52 AM. jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish jellyfish barge barge jellyfish Bloom jellyfish Hypothesis EOPS People Climate Beach Water column Aerial photos Flagellates thrive: • in water with WWTP • stagnant water • low food quality 15
- 16. 16 Navigate Extensive accumulations of organic debris, a brown algal bloom, and a large oil sheen. Location: Between Port Madison and Shilshole (Central Sound), 3:05 PM. Aerial photography 7-6-2015 Field log Climate Water column Aerial photos Continuous monitoring Streams boat boat Debris Bloom oil sheen Macro-algae: • eutrophication indicator • low food quality 16
- 17. • Fecal Indicator Bacteria are highest in beach wrack, • Enterococci and Escherichia coli show increased persistence. G.J. Imamura et al. 2011. Wrack promotes the persistence of fecal indicator bacteria in marine sands and seawater. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 40-49. Macro- algae and exposure to pathogens are connected Algae washed up on beaches in thick layers and rotting. Location: Edmonds Underwater Park, Snohomish County, July 2016. FIB 10 times higher with beach wrack! 17
- 18. Hypothesis: Changes in the lower foodweb • A less favorable food web that keeps material at the surface. • Potential for toxics to enter the pelagic food web (vs animals in the sediment) • Climate could accelerate changes 18
- 19. Sluggish water exchange increases human burden on oxygen. Model and monitoring results agree. Eutrophication Indicators 19
- 20. What we know about the nutrient over- enrichment problem • The ocean is the largest source of nitrogen, but… • Salish Sea Model results show total additional nutrients from human sources are depleting DO more than allowed • Nitrogen and Carbon • Circulation and Residence Time are key factors that regulate the effect of nutrients in the Salish Sea • Need to consider different temporal and spatial scales • Negatively affects multiple aspects of Puget Sound health It is time to figure out the best way to reduce human sources of Nitrogen and Carbon to improve DO 20
- 21. Estimating Reference (Natural) Conditions 21 ConcentrationofDO(mg/L) CumulativeDayslessthan6mg/L Provisional Data
- 22. Spatial and Temporal DO Problems 22 Change in DO due to human sources Provisional Data
- 23. Lon Lat 250 200 150 100 50 0 Days Cumulative days with DO depletion > 0.2 mg/l during 2006 23 • DO depletion due to human sources that is greater than what our standards allow • Biggest effects and longest durations in shallow inlets and bays with long residence time • Our goal is to reduce magnitude and duration of DO depletion Provisional Data
- 24. Looking to the future for WWTPs • Loading will nearly double by 2070 • Bottom chart shows potential gains from biological nutrient removal (BNR) if WWTPs • Upgrading to BNR would more than offset increase in nitrogen loading due to population increases Nitrogen reductions will give the region room to grow 24Source: Roberts, et al 2014 (ECY 14-03-007)
- 25. Watershed nutrient sources are important too • Expected increase in watershed nutrient loading due to changes in watershed land use/cover • Increasing point and nonpoint source nutrient loading 25 Source: Roberts, et al 2014 (ECY 14-03-007)
- 26. What we are doing about it Sharing science and promoting dialogue; Engaging stakeholders; Developing, evaluating, and implementing nutrient source reductions 26
- 27. Nutrient over-enrichment affects almost every Puget Sound recovery activity Excessive nutrients from human sources is a cross-cutting issue • Yellow area is the Vital Sign we are focusing on • Red areas are pressures affecting the MWQ Vital Sign • Green areas can be improved by reducing human sources of nutrients 27
- 28. 28 PSNSRP Phase 2 Marine Water Quality Implementation Strategy • Interdisciplinary group • Focused on developing Action Agenda products • Broader Puget Sound restoration focus and connection with National Estuary Program (NEP) • Smaller group size Puget Sound Nutrient Forum • Broad representation of stakeholders and tribes • Discuss regulatory aspects of nutrient issues • Advise Ecology and MWQ IS on strategies to implement point and nonpoint source reductions • Larger group size Puget Sound Action Agenda Process Ecology’s Public Advisory Committee Process Inform and Collaborate • Cross-membership • Both have input on work products Salish Sea Model (SSM) used to evaluate nutrient reduction options to ensure water quality criteria and Puget Sound recovery goals are met
- 29. Multiple Benefits • MWQ/Nutrient IS supports the Action Agenda • Nutrient Forum provides transparency and opportunity for stakeholder and tribal participation • Collaborative development built from the combined knowledge and experience of participants • Build regional momentum for action 29
- 30. • Regular meeting series from Spring 2018 – Spring 2019 • Objectives • Conduct a transparent process to engage stakeholders, tribes, and the public with Ecology • Discuss and understand the issues • Develop recommendations for Ecology to consider when deciding on regulatory actions to pursue • Integrate with the MWQ IS process by providing a broader forum that will inform the IS and vice versa 30 Puget Sound Nutrient Forum
- 31. MWQ/Nutrient IS Objectives • Nutrient reduction targets for marine and watershed sources • Key nutrient reduction actions to meet target reductions • Strategy that addresses watershed nutrient reductions • Monitoring plan to track progress • Building blocks for regulatory action 31
- 32. MWQ/Nutrients IS Starter Package • Defining the problem and impacts to MWQ Vital Sign • State of Knowledge • Nutrient permit options and current nonpoint approaches • Bounding Scenarios evaluated with Salish Sea Model • WQ Standards • Data gaps 32
- 33. • Evaluate upper and lower bounds of large categorical changes in nutrient sources using latest model improvements • Answer the questions: • What would Puget Sound water quality be like if all marine WWTPs are at design capacity? • What is the relative difference between marine and watershed sources? • What would Puget Sound have been like in 2014 if the largest marine sources of nitrogen loading were reduced to a technologically feasible level? 33 Objectives for Modeling Bounding Scenarios
- 34. Nutrient Permitting Options • Process oFormation of a Policy Forum to engage with Stakeholders oDiscuss permitting options with Wastewater Treatment Plants • Actions oDetermine additional modeling scenarios oVet different paths: Program Policy v. Rulemaking v. TMDL oDetermine necessary level of certainty for permittees oConsider interim permit conditions and requirements 34
- 35. Programmatic Watershed Approach 1. Reduce Human Loading • Implement Nutrient BMPs for Agricultural Sources • Support forestry practices that reduce nutrients • Urban Growth (LID, OSS to sewer, WWTPs) • Stormwater management 2. Restore Watershed Function • Floodplains by Design program • Instream channel improvements (Salmon Recovery) • Riparian buffers • Estuary restoration 35
- 36. • Assessment of key pressures driving the problem and sequence of actions that will lead to improvement • Defined key strategies for nutrient source reduction actions • Assessment of ongoing programs and how to integrate strategies into existing and new programs • Numeric nitrogen and carbon reduction targets for marine sources and watersheds • Monitoring and adaptive management strategy to continue learning • Direction and momentum behind a permitting approach 36 Implementation Strategy Content
- 37. Optimizing Load Reductions Using SSM • Multiple scenarios of marine and watershed source reductions will be evaluated • Final solution set includes regulatory requirements and considers costs, feasibility, priority, and sequencing 37 Reference Condition Best DO Worst DO Future Condition, Status Quo Loading Assimilative capacity to not lower DO by more than 02.mg/L Current Loading Margin for Growth Model scenario outcomes
- 38. PSNSRP Phase 2 Milestones • Starter Package (January through August 2018) • Nutrient Forum kick-off (Late-April 2018) • Kick-off MWQ IS Workshops(Late August 2018) • Optimization Modeling Begins (April 2019 through March 2021) • Complete Draft IS document for review by October 2021 • Ecology decision how to implement regulatory parts of IS • Finalize IS document by end of 2021 – early 2022 • Begin implementation 38 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
- 39. What will implementation look like? Point and Nonpoint source nutrient reduction activities Nutrient allocations that meet marine water quality objectives Solutions/reductions will drive how implementation happens Objective: Implement the right actions, in the right sequence, to get started on water quality improvement as soon as possible. 39
- 40. We want to collaboratively develop and implement solutions to improve and protect it A healthy Puget Sound is an integral part of our identity 40
- 41. Questions? Contact: Dustin Bilhimer, PSNSRP Project Manager WA Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program (360) 407-7143 Dustin.Bilhimer@ecy.wa.gov 41
Editor's Notes
- #8: RCW 90.48.010 “…maintain the highest possible standards to insure the purity of all waters of the state consistent with… the propagation and protection of wild life, birds, game, fish and other aquatic life…”.
- #9: Nutrients are an important part of the productivity of Puget Sound Eutrophication occurs when excess nutrients fuel algae growth, and when these algae decompose, they deplete DO levels particularly in the bottom waters While some areas of PS do have natural low DO, excess nutrient exacerbate the low DO problem
- #35: Applicability of reclaimed water Evaluate compliance – what is the allowable frequency of exceedance? How do we account for variations in treatment efficiencies? Incorporate growth Focus on facilities with most impact – WLA equivalents (numeric targets) Do facility sizes or locations matter more? Combination of both? What’s the feasibility of site specific criteria? Where do other point source impacts besides treatment plants (e.g. hatcheries) fit?
- #40: Some actions will take longer than others 1-3 Permit cycles Funding