The National Water Quality Monitoring Network

forU.S. Coastal Waters and their

Tributaries

Presentation for _______August 28, 2007

Background

Network Design

Pilot Phase– Network Refinement– Inventory and Gap Analysis

Presentation Outline

22,000 water bodies are not attaining water quality standards

Widespread nutrient over-enrichment– Oxygen depletion– Loss of sea grass beds– Harmful algal blooms

Toxic contamination and pathogens– Closed beaches and shellfish beds– Fish and shellfish consumption advisories

Habitat alterations– Wetland loss– Invasive species

Why do we need the Network

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy– Chapter 15, Creating a National Monitoring Network

U.S. Ocean Action Plan– Advancing our Understanding of the Oceans, Coasts, and

Great Lakes– Create a National Water Quality Monitoring Network

Network Origins

Charge from Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) formally accepted in February, 2005

ACWI delegated responsibility to National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC)

Report accepted by ACWI and presented to CEQ and NSTC in April, 2006

CEQ and ACWI authorize Pilot Phase in January 2007

Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI)Charged with Network Design

Participant Affiliation

Federal

Academia

State &Tribal

40%

28%23%

7%Industry 2%Local

80 Participants in the Design Effort

Council on Environmental Quality National Science and Technology Council:

– SWAQ Ocean Action Plan Oversight Groups:

– Joint Subcommittee on Science and Technology (JSOST)– Subcommittee on Integrated Management of Ocean

Resources (SIMOR)– Interagency Subcommittee on Ocean Science and

Resource Management Ocean Research and Resources Advisory Panel Internal USGS, EPA, and NOAA groups

Network Presentations

National Water Quality Monitoring Conference– May, 2006– Approximately 900 attendees from Federal,

Tribal, and State agencies, academia, private sector, volunteer monitoring community

– Plenary presentation– 4 special sessions with open dialogue

Network Presentations

Phase I - Network Design (FY 05 & 06) Phase II - Develop and carry out Pilot Studies

(FY 07 & 08) Phase III - Demonstration Projects (FY 08& 09) Phase IV – Implementation; fill gaps and

provide necessary enhancements to existing monitoring programs (FY 10 and beyond)

Multi-year Effort

Links inland, coastal, and ocean monitoring Comparable and quality-controlled data

across regions and resource compartments Resolution at several scales Includes targeted and probability based

monitoring Relevant to management issues (National and

Regional) Builds on existing programs Includes data management and access

Design Features

What is the condition of the Nation’s waters?

Where, how, and why are water quality conditions changing over time?

Are strategies to protect water quality working?

Are we meeting water quality goals and standards?

Network will Address Management Questions

Estuaries Near-shore waters Off-shore waters Great Lakes Coastal beaches Wetlands Flow and flux from

– Streams– Ground water– Atmospheric deposition

Resource Compartments

Constituent Categories

1. Physical: Flow magnitude and direction, physical habitat, sediments

2. Chemical:• Inorganic: Water-quality characteristics, major ions,

nutrients, metals and metalloids • Organic: Bulk organics, volatile organic compounds,

pesticides, halogenated hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, contaminants with new and emerging concerns

3. Biological: Diversity, toxicity

In-depth assessment of the water quality and health of the Nation’s coastal waters

– Identify pollution loading patterns– Describe status– Detect change

Data sharing and comparability among agencies Data made accessible

– Quality assurance and quality control plans Support water resources protection and restoration

decisions Minimize duplicative or ineffective monitoring; improve

coordination

What are the Benefits?

Sites in Network estuaries 18 of 149 Network estuaries illustrated

50 sites per IOOS Region; probability-based selection

50 sites per estuary; probability-based selection

About 15 sites selected to monitor flow and transport with at least 2 continuous sites to monitor short-term variability in each estuary

Monitoring Estuaries

Monitoring Near Shore

This slide shows 14 of the 50 sites needed to cover each IOOS Region

Great Lakes Nearshore and Offshore Sites

Proposed Riverine Stations

Proposed Riverine Stations – Great Lakes

Proposed Riverine Stations Alaska

Focus on direct discharge to coastal waters

Local expertise used to determine significance of this source

Where significant, determine flow and loads

Ground Water

Design places major emphasis on storage and access– Built on ACWI’s Water Quality Data Elements

for content, metadata– Assumes web services will be the data

exchange mechanism

Network Data Management

Provide data on all water resources– Small rivers– Local aquifers– Lakes and Reservoirs

Replace State Clean Water Act Requirements– 305 (b)– 303 (d)

Replace Compliance Monitoring

The Network Will Not

ORPP Near-term Priority: Forecasting the response of coastal ecosystems to persistent forcing and extreme events

Network will provide:– Consistent, multidisciplinary and multi-media data– Observations of physical, chemical, and biological

characteristics and processes– Data on flux of material from watersheds and airsheds– Links between environmental observations and public-health

issues such as beach closures and fish and shellfish advisories

Relevance to Ocean Research Priorities Plan

Integrates watershed, marine, and estuarine elements

Provides information on land-based sources of contamination

Ensures comparable scales of data Supports effective data management and

dissemination Supports development of Regional Coastal

Ocean Observing Systems

Relevance to IOOS

Outreach Agency staff to coordinate implementation

– OSTP, NOAA, EPA, USGS Network refinement workgroups

– Further develop selected details of the Design– Nutrients, Contaminants, Wetlands, Beaches,

Groundwater, Atmospheric Deposition, Biology, Data Management

Efforts Underway in 2007

Delaware Bay, San Francisco Bay, Lake Michigan No new Federal funds provided to pilots Conduct inventory of on-going monitoring Gap Analysis: compare inventory to design Identify management issues in pilot areas:

– Habitat degradation, fresh-water flows, nutrient enrichment, contaminants, ground-water contribution, beach quality, effects of stressors on biology

Estimate cost of current and needed monitoring

Efforts Underway in 2007Pilot Studies

Results from Pilot Studies

Presentations at conferences organized by professional organizations

Reports for CEQ Journals and other technical publications National Water Quality Monitoring Conference

– May 19-22, 2008– Atlantic City, New Jersey

Interagency Coordination and Responsibilities

All work coordinated by Interagency Working Group consisting of NOAA, USGS, and EPA with participation by OSTP

Federal, state, and local agencies and non-governmental partners (approximately 60 organizations) are contributing to the Pilot Phase

Lead Federal agency or agencies:– NOAA: near-shore and off-shore marine waters; estuaries and Great

Lakes (joint with EPA)– EPA: wetlands and beaches; estuaries and Great Lakes (joint with

NOAA)– USGS: streams and ground water– National Atmospheric Deposition Program-National Trends Network

partners: atmospheric deposition Data Management (EPA, NOAA, USGS, States, other non-Fed)

More information

http://acwi.gov/monitoring/network/design