Proposed Assessment MethodologyProposed Assessment Methodologyforfor

2012 Delaware River and Bay2012 Delaware River and BayWater Quality Assessment ReportWater Quality Assessment Report

Delaware River Basin CommissionDelaware River Basin CommissionJohn Yagecic, P.E.John Yagecic, P.E.Supervisory, Standards & Assessment SectionSupervisory, Standards & Assessment SectionErik Silldorff, Ph.D.Erik Silldorff, Ph.D.Aquatic BiologistAquatic BiologistSeptember 21, 2011September 21, 2011

This PresentationThis Presentation

•• Process, purpose, and coordinationProcess, purpose, and coordination•• Differences from state Integrated AssessmentDifferences from state Integrated Assessment

•• Proposed assessment methodology for 2012 Proposed assessment methodology for 2012 report;report;

•• Answer questions;Answer questions;•• Solicit input and comments.Solicit input and comments.

Major Differences between DRBCMajor Differences between DRBC’’s s report and statesreport and states’’ Integrated AssessmentIntegrated Assessment

DRBC has no 303d list DRBC has no 303d list –– Only the states can list;Only the states can list;Provide our report for the states to consider in Provide our report for the states to consider in their listing decisions with EPA;their listing decisions with EPA;Different states have different EPA approved Different states have different EPA approved methodologies;methodologies;DRBC assesses mainstem Delaware DRBC assesses mainstem Delaware –– States States assess tribs (even where DRBC has criteria).assess tribs (even where DRBC has criteria).

ScheduleSchedule

DateDate MilestoneMilestone

July 6, 2011July 6, 2011 Draft Methodology on DRBCDraft Methodology on DRBC’’s web sites web site

August 12, 2011August 12, 2011 Federal Register Notice and data solicitationFederal Register Notice and data solicitation

August 31, 2011August 31, 2011 Comments due to DRBCComments due to DRBC

December 14, 2011December 14, 2011 Draft assessment report due to states for Draft assessment report due to states for consultationconsultation

April 1, 2012April 1, 2012 Assessment Report submitted to EPAAssessment Report submitted to EPA

Data utilizedData utilized

•• Readily available data;Readily available data;•• Sources from past assessments include:Sources from past assessments include:

•• DRBC monitoring programs (Boat run, scenic DRBC monitoring programs (Boat run, scenic rivers, Tri state);rivers, Tri state);

•• Automatic monitors (USGS and NOAA PORTS);Automatic monitors (USGS and NOAA PORTS);•• State data (WQN, STORET);State data (WQN, STORET);•• USGS data (NWIS).USGS data (NWIS).

Assessment UnitsAssessment Units

254.75 254.75 –– 217.0 217.0 1C1C

289.9 289.9 –– 254.75 254.75 1B1B330.7 330.7 –– 289.9 289.9 1A1A

Location (River Location (River MileMile

WQM zoneWQM zone

48.2 48.2 –– 0.0 0.0 6678.8 78.8 –– 48.2 48.2 55

95.0 95.0 –– 78.8 78.8 44

108.4 108.4 –– 95.0 95.0 33133.4 133.4 –– 108.4 108.4 22

183.66 183.66 –– 133.4 133.4 1E1E

217.0 217.0 –– 183.66 183.66 1D1D254.75 254.75 –– 217.0 217.0 1C1C

289.9 289.9 –– 254.75 254.75 1B1B330.7 330.7 –– 289.9 289.9 1A1A

Location (River Location (River MileMile

WQM zoneWQM zone

48.2 48.2 –– 0.0 0.0 6678.8 78.8 –– 48.2 48.2 55

95.0 95.0 –– 78.8 78.8 44

108.4 108.4 –– 95.0 95.0 33133.4 133.4 –– 108.4 108.4 22

183.66 183.66 –– 133.4 133.4 1E1E

217.0 217.0 –– 183.66 183.66 1D1D

Designated UsesDesignated Uses

DesignatedDesignatedWater UseWater Use DRBC WQM Zone or AUDRBC WQM Zone or AU

1A1A 1B1B 1C1C 1D1D 1E1E 22 33 44AA 55B 66

Aquatic LifeAquatic LifeXX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX

Drinking WaterDrinking WaterXX XX XX XX XX XX XX

Primary Primary RecreationRecreation XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX

SecondarySecondaryRecreationRecreation XX XX

Fish Fish ConsumptionConsumption XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX

Shellfish Shellfish ConsumptionConsumption XX

A – Primary recreation below RM 81.8, Secondary contact recreation above RM 81.8

B – DO criteria changes in Zone 5

Shellfish Consumption use in Zone 6Shellfish Consumption use in Zone 6

•• Numerous shellfish Numerous shellfish management subareas in management subareas in Zone 6;Zone 6;

•• DRBC assesses DRBC assesses individual shellfish individual shellfish management areas for management areas for the shellfish assessment, the shellfish assessment, rather than Zone 6 as a rather than Zone 6 as a whole. whole.

Methodology for 2012Methodology for 2012

•• Essentially the same as for the 2010 ReportEssentially the same as for the 2010 Report

•• But 2010 implemented some changes from past But 2010 implemented some changes from past reports including:reports including:•• Data WindowData Window•• TemperatureTemperature•• pHpH•• Toxics (Zone 1)Toxics (Zone 1)•• Biological AssessmentBiological Assessment

Data WindowData Window

•• For 2012 using a 5For 2012 using a 5--year data window ending September year data window ending September 30, 2011;30, 2011;

•• Better consistency with states;Better consistency with states;•• Reduces unassessed units;Reduces unassessed units;•• More current information;More current information;

•• Biological monitoring data window remain 3 years for ongoing Biological monitoring data window remain 3 years for ongoing development;development;

•• Toxics no more than 1 exceedence in any 3 year period.Toxics no more than 1 exceedence in any 3 year period.

pH AssessmentpH Assessment

•• Previous assessment indicated frequent Previous assessment indicated frequent violations in nonviolations in non--tidal, including Zone 1A;tidal, including Zone 1A;

•• pH alone is not very informative;pH alone is not very informative;•• This time, pH in conjunction with biological This time, pH in conjunction with biological

assessment, other evidence:assessment, other evidence:•• Less than 10% of the samples per AU fail the Less than 10% of the samples per AU fail the

criteria, criteria, unless evidence shows that pH violation are unless evidence shows that pH violation are the result of natural conditionsthe result of natural conditions and biological and biological communities are not impairedcommunities are not impaired

Toxics AssessmentToxics Assessment

•• DRBC narrative standard applicable to Zones DRBC narrative standard applicable to Zones 1A1A--1E, but not numerical criteria:1E, but not numerical criteria:• “the waters shall be substantially free from …substances in

concentrations or combinations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal, plant, or aquatic life…”

•• NonNon--tidal Mainstem Delaware not assessed by tidal Mainstem Delaware not assessed by states for toxicsstates for toxics

Toxics AssessmentToxics Assessment

•• For 2012 assessment, DRBC will utilize EPA For 2012 assessment, DRBC will utilize EPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria National Recommended Water Quality Criteria to implement its narrative standard;to implement its narrative standard;

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/wqctable/#cmchttp://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/wqctable/#cmc

Bioassessment for Aquatic Life UseBioassessment for Aquatic Life Use

•• Aquatic Life historically assessed via WQ parameters Aquatic Life historically assessed via WQ parameters (e.g., DO, pH, TDS, Alk)(e.g., DO, pH, TDS, Alk)

•• Biological Monitoring started in 2001Biological Monitoring started in 2001•• annual surveys annual surveys above headabove head--ofof--tidetide (Trenton)(Trenton)•• benthic macroinvertebrates since 2001benthic macroinvertebrates since 2001•• periphyton added in 2005periphyton added in 2005

•• As of 2011, up to 8 years of bio data at 25 stationsAs of 2011, up to 8 years of bio data at 25 stations•• Data analysis and work with Bio Subcommittee led to Data analysis and work with Bio Subcommittee led to

biocriteria document in May 2009, and July revisionbiocriteria document in May 2009, and July revision•• Today: briefly describe data, biocriteria & assessmentToday: briefly describe data, biocriteria & assessment

BiomonitoringBiomonitoring•• 25 stations in non25 stations in non--tidal rivertidal river

•• Targeted riffle sampling Targeted riffle sampling (1 to 3 ft/s, 1 to 2 ft depth)(1 to 3 ft/s, 1 to 2 ft depth)

•• 595 595 µµm netm net

•• 2 ft x 2 ft sampling area2 ft x 2 ft sampling area

•• Composite 3 samplesComposite 3 samples

•• Lab sorting under Lab sorting under magnificationmagnification

•• GenusGenus--level taxonomylevel taxonomy

Biocriteria Biocriteria Development: Development:

Reference Reference DesignationDesignation

Callicoon (RM 305)Callicoon (RM 305)

to to

Lehigh R. (RM 184)Lehigh R. (RM 184)

Biocriteria DevelopmentBiocriteria Development

•• Metrics in use by 1 or more Basin StatesMetrics in use by 1 or more Basin States•• Selection of final metrics based largely on variability:Selection of final metrics based largely on variability:

•• amongamong--year variability at reference sitesyear variability at reference sites•• amongamong--site variability within contiguous reference areassite variability within contiguous reference areas•• amongamong--replicate variability at all sitesreplicate variability at all sites•• low correlation with other metrics & important biological infolow correlation with other metrics & important biological info

•• Scaling metrics from 0Scaling metrics from 0--toto--1010•• 1010--score set at 75score set at 75thth percentile of reference samplespercentile of reference samples•• 00--score set at 5 st.devs. below reference meanscore set at 5 st.devs. below reference mean

•• Final IBI: 6Final IBI: 6--metrics averaged & expanded to 0metrics averaged & expanded to 0--100 scale100 scale•• Richness, EPT Rich, Shannon, BI, Intol % Rich, Scraper RichRichness, EPT Rich, Shannon, BI, Intol % Rich, Scraper Rich

020

4060

8010

0

136.

914

1.8

155.

616

0.8

166.

6

177.

618

118

4.3

194.

9

207.

321

0.8

215

228.

523

3.6

247.

524

9.9

255

269

279

293.

5

304

315

325

EBr

WBr

6‐Metric IB

I

River Mile  (station locations labeled)

Lehigh

 R

Delaware WatergapNational Recreation Area

Upper DelawareScenic & Recreational River

IBI Performance at Reference Sites

0 2 4 6 8 10

020

4060

8010

0

DRB

C  6‐m

etric  IBI

NYDEC  BAP  for  Riffle Samples

R2 = 0.69

0 20 40 60 80 100

020

4060

8010

0

DRB

C  6‐m

etric  IBI

PADEP IBI for  Freestone  Streams

R2 = 0.84

IBI Performance: Comparison to StatesIBI Performance: Comparison to States

NYDEC BAP vs DRBC IBI PADEP IBI vs DRBC IBI

020

4060

8010

0

136.

914

1.8

155.

616

0.8

166.

6

177.

618

118

4.3

194.

9

207.

321

0.8

215

228.

523

3.6

247.

524

9.9

255

269

279

293.

5

304

315

325

EBr

WBr

6‐Metric IB

I

River Mile  (station locations labeled)

Lehigh

 R

Delaware WatergapNational Recreation Area

Upper DelawareScenic & Recreational River

10th percentile reference

Bioassessment MethodologyBioassessment MethodologyThreshold: 10th percentile of reference samples for 2001-2006 dataDecision Rule: 30% of samples from 2007-2009 below Threshold

020

4060

8010

0

136.

914

1.8

155.

616

0.8

166.

6

177.

618

118

4.3

194.

9

207.

321

0.8

215

228.

523

3.6

247.

524

9.9

255

269

279

293.

5

304

315

325

EBr

WBr

10th percentile reference

Bioassessment MethodologyBioassessment MethodologyThreshold: 10th percentile of reference samples for 2001-2006 dataDecision Rule: 30% of samples from 2007-2009 below Threshold

6-M

etric

IBI

River Mile (station locations labeled)

Proposed Assessment MethodologyProposed Assessment Methodologyforfor

2012 Delaware River and Bay Integrated List 2012 Delaware River and Bay Integrated List Water Quality Assessment ReportWater Quality Assessment Report

Questions & DiscussionQuestions & Discussion

Delaware River Basin CommissionDelaware River Basin CommissionJohn Yagecic, P.E.John Yagecic, P.E.Supervisory, Standards & Assessment SectionSupervisory, Standards & Assessment SectionErik Silldorff, Ph.D.Erik Silldorff, Ph.D.Aquatic BiologistAquatic BiologistSeptember 21, 2011September 21, 2011