1 / 12

Revising Water Quality Standards for Water-Based Recreation

Revising Water Quality Standards for Water-Based Recreation. Provided by Texas Water Conservation Association and Water Environment Association of Texas. May 16, 2007. Topics. Review of current standards Areas of concern with current standards Possibilities for improvement

lavada
Télécharger la présentation

Revising Water Quality Standards for Water-Based Recreation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Revising Water Quality Standards forWater-Based Recreation Provided by Texas Water Conservation Association and Water Environment Association of Texas May 16, 2007

  2. Topics • Review of current standards • Areas of concern with current standards • Possibilities for improvement • Process considerations – how to move forward?

  3. Current Standards • Uses limited to only two: • Contact recreation = “swimming” • Noncontact recreation = “boating or bank use” (rarely used, ship channels) • Criteria • CR: 126 colonies E. Coli per 100 mL • NCR: 605 col/100 mL • EPA 1986 criteria based on limited lake studies • Keystone Lake • Lake Erie

  4. Swimming Use Applicable to All Streams?

  5. Impacts to Water Quality Management Process • Distorts 303(d) list • Forces restoration activities on streams that may not be suitable for swimming use • Mandates load reductions on non-wastewater sources (storm water, wildlife, etc.) • May cause public expenditures to address non-human bacteria sources • May result in TPDES permit modifications

  6. Areas of Concern • Not all uses addressed in current designations • Swimming - CR • Wading – NCR, limited CR • Fishing - NCR • Boating - NCR • Swimming Use/Criteria not appropriate for all waters • Exposure assumptions not considered • Water (pathogen) ingestion rates (mL/day) • Eye, ear, skin contact

  7. Areas of Concern • Frequency of use of water body not considered • Limited epidemiological data for national criteria • Seasonal variations not considered • Swimming suitability not considered • Flow • Depth • Visibility • Temperature • Actual pathogens not considered

  8. Possibilities for Improvement • Define tiered uses • Swimming, Wading, Fishing, and Boating • Define associated criteria using • Exposure rates from literature or studies:reflective of recreational activities • Exposure frequency and durationi.e., designated beaches vs. urban streams • In-state epidemiological studiesif resources available • Support with Use Attainability Analyses (UAAs)

  9. Possibilities for Improvement • Include consideration of swimming suitability • Physical limitations (depth, flow, visibility) • Water not treated for ingestion • Commercial navigation conflicts • Discharges over international border • Access, alligators and nature preserve protection • Include seasonal use variations • Include high flow use cut-off

  10. There’s Hope • Kansas Approach • Primary Contact (depth > 18”) • A: Designated Swimming Beach, E coli 160 cfu/dL • B: Open access, 262 cfu/dL • C: Not open to public, 427 cfu/dL • Secondary Contact (depth<18”) • A: Open access, 2,358 cfu/dL • B: Not open to public, 3,843 cfu/dL • 19 states have seasonal criteria • Other states have tiered uses • Chicago is conducting epidemiology work on boating and fishing uses

  11. Process Considerations • Involve Clean Rivers Program to help • Establish regional stakeholder groups to refine uses and to conduct required UAA’s • Include local input and watershed knowledge • Support TCEQ/HGAC epidemiological study • Get EPA Region 6 involved upfront

  12. Topics • Review of current standards • Areas of concern with current standards • Possibilities for improvement • Process considerations – how to move forward?

More Related