WV NUTRIENT CRITERIA COMMITTEE

2005 Minutes

 Back to Nutrient Criteria Committee Home Page 

 

Table of Contents

 

FINAL

January 20, 2005
Nutrient Criteria Committee
Meeting Minutes

Committee Members Present:  Matt Monroe, WV Department of Agriculture Evan Hansen, WV Rivers Coalition Margaret Janes, Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment Randy Sovic, WV DEP, Division of Water and Waste Management Michael Hawranick, WV Bureau for Public Health Jeremiah Johnson, WVMWQA Dave Clark, Canaan Valley Institute, (Meeting Facilitator) Tom Brand, West Virginia University, (Committee Chairman) Neil Gillies, Cacapon Institute Roger Sherman, WV Forestry Association

Others in Attendance: Penny Hott, WV Department of Agriculture (Note-taker) Edward Snyder, WV Environmental Quality Board (Board member), Shepherd University Meredith Pavlick, WV Rivers Coalition Doug Chambers, USGS Scott Simonton, WV Environmental Quality Board (Board member), Marshall University

 

1. Review and approval of December 16, 2004 meeting minutes.

  • Page 2 – Update on Chesapeake Bay - First bullet, changed the main focus to another aspect of the Bay. - Second bullet, changed determines how to proceed to answer some of West Virginia’s questions concerning the model.

  • Page 2 – Update on Point Source Innovation Committee, delete second bullet. This group is going to establish point sources for cap loads that WV will be required to achieve.

  • Page 4 – Report on lake sampling data - Third bullet, changed our to previously - Fourth bullet, removed study the lake year data points - Page 3 – Continued discussion regarding development of criteria, moved third, fourth and fifth bullet under heading Develop study to analyze data for human health. Changed MIV to MIB in the fifth bullet.

2. Committee Reports

  • Randy Sovic spoke with Bob Miltner from Ohio, and he will attend the March NCC meeting to speak to the group about Ohio’s TMDL work and nutrient criteria development.

  • The Mid-Atlantic Regional Biology Workshop is scheduled for March. A nutrient session is currently scheduled for the Friday following the workshop. Randy with check with John Wirts on a definite date and notify the group once it has been finalized.

3. Update NCC committee member list

  • Randy Sovic updated the EQB on the NCC’s outcomes and results to date at its last meeting. The EQB is concerned about committee members that have not been regularly attending meetings.

  • The membership list was reviewed to determine which members are active and which are inactive. The group made suggestions for alternates, members that should be removed and individuals that should be added to the list.

  • Ed Snyder and Scott Simonton will contact academic institutions to determine who would be appropriate to invite to NCC meetings and send this list to the NCC committee members before the February meeting.

  • Scott Simonton will contact USACE. Mike Hawranick will talk to rural water.

  • Randy Sovic advised that EPA has personnel in Wheeling. Randy suggested recommending participation from someone in that office if Tiffany Crawford isn’t able to attend.

  • EQB will update the letter requesting participation and re-send to the inactive committee members as well as make phone contact with these individuals. Active participation on a regular basis will be stressed.

4. Update on ORSANCO efforts on nutrient criteria – WVDEP

The second steering committee meeting is scheduled. Nothing has occurred since the last update.

 

5. Update on Chesapeake Bay nutrient criteria development –WVDA

  • WV is continuing to work on the implementation plan.

  • The cap load has not yet been met. Scenarios are being run to determine what it might take to reach the goal.

  • A cap load maintenance plan will be developed to determine how the cap load will be maintained once it’s achieved.

6. Update on periphyton project - WVDEP

  • EPA has decided to keep this project in-house, it was originally going to be contracted out. The study will use WV’s data to develop an index for periphytons.

7. Update on Point Source Innovation Committee

The committee is continuing to meet and discuss options to meet load caps.

Joe Hankins is the chair of the committee. Alana Hartman is also participating.

 

8. Continued discussion regarding development of criteria for rivers and streams

b) Generate Speaker’s List .

  • Representative from Ohio will be attending the March meeting.

  • Doug Chambers will ask Nancy Rybicki to attend either the February or April NCC meeting.

c) Evan Hansen distributed Studying impairment of the Public Water Supply Designated Use.

  • The overall goal would be to collect more data at public water supplies reservoirs to try to develop actual relations between nutrient levels and the effect on public water supplies.

  • The document is structured as a grant proposal in anticipation of possible funding.

  • Evan will forward comments from the group to Martin. Clarification is needed on tasks three and five. Martin will have the document updated by January 24, 2005. Martin, John and Randy will meet on January 28, 2005 to discuss the final document.

  • Randy Sovic will check with other states for collaboration on this project.

  • Roger Sherman asked if we should be developing a standard for Chlorophyll A instead of Phosphorous. Neil Gillies responded that this issue was discussed at the lakes meeting and EPA replied that they would not support criteria that didn’t include nutrients. Roger is not convinced that we can develop a numerical standard.

9. Report on lake sampling and user survey data analysis

  • Evan Hansen distributed and went over Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs.

  • Small lakes would fall under rivers and streams criteria.

  • The criteria recommended for lakes is less stringent that what EPA plans to propose.

  • Matt Monroe believes the report should have been written in scenario format and include multiple scenarios for the group to review and comment on.

  • Category B Questions/Additions

    • Nitrogen curves 

    • Implications of 5 versus 6 mg/L DO 

    • Break out phosphorous points, Disaggregate averages, have more data points, better relationships. 

    • Look at lake data collected in the summer, determine how many would violate the 51 standard if we use the standard matrix.

  • Category C 

    • Evan received the completed user surveys from the WVU students. 

    • He expanded the analysis on the surveys and developed a series of rules to eliminate the bad data. 

    • There was discussion about the correlation between user surveys and developing criteria.

  • Randy Sovic suggested that the group consider using 51 as a TP standard for both categories B and C.

  • Any other proposals for criteria should be written up with justifications and sent to the group before the next meeting.

  • Evan encouraged everyone to read the text in the proposal and send comments to him before the next meeting.

 

10. Update on possible data collection in rivers and streams by the West Virginia Coal Association (WVCA), Larry Emerson

  • The Coal Association will have a formal meeting in February. An update will be provided at the February NCC meeting.

11. Update on contacts with other states regarding possible collaborative research proposal  

  • Martin Christ updated the document on studying impairment of the public water supply.

  • Randy Sovic will be able to contact other states after he reviews this document.

12. Establish agenda for next meeting

  • Redraft of lake criteria proposal

  • Possible USGS speaker

Materials passed out during the meeting:

  • Meeting Agenda

  • Studying impairment of the Public Water Supply Designated Use – Evan Hansen

  • Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs – Evan Hansen

~ Meeting Adjourned ~

 

Top of Page

 

 

 

February 17, 2005

Nutrient Criteria Committee

Meeting Minutes

 

Committee Members Present

Matt Monroe, WV Department of Agriculture

Doug Chambers, USGS

Neil Gillies, Cacapon Institute

Joe Hankins, TCF/Freshwater Institute

Wayne Appleton, WVMA/WVCOC

Evan Hansen, WV Rivers Coalition

John Wirts, WV DEP, Division of Water and Waste Management

Martin Christ, WV Rivers Coalition

Margaret Janes, Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment

Dave Clark, Canaan Valley Institute, (Meeting Facilitator)

Tom Brand, West Virginia University, (Committee Chairman)

John Rowe, WV Division of Forestry

Bob Williams, WV Farm Bureau

Roger Sherman, WV Forestry Association

Michael Hawranick, WV Bureau for Public Health

Jeremiah Johnson, WVMWQA

 

Others in Attendance

Penny Hott, WV Department of Agriculture (Note-taker)

 

1.  Review and approval of January 20, 2005 meeting minutes.

-         There were changes to January 20, 2005 minutes.

-         Changes were necessary on the December 16, 2004 minutes: Page 3, third bullet changed mg/L to μg/L.

 

2.  Committee Reports

-         Neil Gillies is scheduled to facilitate a discussion at the Freshwater Nutrient Criteria Workshop on March 23 at Cacapon State Park. He distributed an agenda for the meeting and asked the group for input for the scheduled discussion.

 

3.  Update on ORSANCO efforts on nutrient criteria – WVDEP

-         Matt Monroe reported that there is an Ohio River Sub Basin Steering Committee Meeting scheduled for the end of February.

 

4.  Update on Chesapeake Bay nutrient criteria development –WVDA

-         The Bay office sent a strawman proposal of a mix of BMP’s to illustrate what we need to meet the cap load. WV will look at the mix of BMP’s and try to develop a mix that’s more attainable in WV.  Even though it is unclear how WV will proceed, projects are still being implemented. Some of these projects include a buffer demonstration in partnership with NRCS and a project at Spring Run Hatchery with participation from WV Conservation Agency, WVDA, and Cacapon Institute.

 

 

5.  Update on periphyton project - WVDEP

-         John Wirts had no new developments. DEP is working to get periphyton data to EPA.

-         Neil Gillies is resubmitting his proposal to look at periphyton community changes in non point environments.

 

6. Update on Point Source Innovation Committee

-         The next scheduled meeting is on March 3, 2005. The group is having a difficult time coming up with innovations. Long discussions have been held on trading. There have been a few useful suggestions, but no major policy changes. The committee has a few more meetings and must then get back to WVDEP with suggestions.

 

7.  Review draft proposal for regional research project – Martin Christ

-         Martin has submitted a draft proposal with the updates that he received from the group. John Wirts reported that Randy sent the proposal to other states and has only heard back from Delaware.

-         Martin will contact Randy to determine what needs to be done next to go forward with this proposal.

 

8.  Update on contacts with other states regarding possible collaborative research proposal – Randy Sovic, John Wirts, WVDEP

-         There was no update. This will be discussed at March meeting.
 

9.  Update on possible data collection in rivers and streams by the West Virginia Coal Association (WVCA), Larry Emerson

-         There was no update.

 

10.  Continued discussion on developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs.

-         Evan distributed Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs, Draft document dated February 15, 2005, and went over the changes from the last draft. Evan received the final data from John Wirts and redid all of the calculations. The following list of questions was generated for each category:

-         Category B

1.      Use of 6 mg/L Do vs. 5 mg/L

2.      Need for ground truthing proposed criteria

3.      Bear Rocks inclusion – exclude for comparison

4.      Possibility of calibrating 2004 chlorophyll numbers, consider nitrate levels

5.      Define other accumulated assumptions

6.      Standard as average, given other averaged numbers used

7.      Run numbers without samples below MDL

a.                   Use other correlation methods

8.      Clear relationship between N and P

-         Category C

1.      Use the same number for both categories B and C.

2.      Consistent level of impairment across parameters and categories (Evan and Martin)

3.      Consistent with literature (Evan and Martin will research)

-         Wayne Appleton had questions about the assumptions using 6 mg/L CO as opposed to the state standard of 5 mg/L.

-         Roger Sherman is concerned about the accumulated assumptions that have been made.

-         Margaret Janes is concerned that waters will be under protected if we use 6 mg/L DO instead of 5 mg/L.

-         Wayne Appleton asked about using P to determine N. The Manufacturer’s Association would like more time to look at the data. The association may/may not develop a different set of numbers.

-         The group will continue to work towards consensus, but any dissent must be defensible with scientific background. All alternative opinions should be discussed with the group first and not given to the NCC separately.

-         Joe Hankins felt that we should be conservative and test any criteria that we develop. We need to try to establish a nutrient standard that protects the 5 mg/L DO standard.

-         John Wirts will send out the diel data that DEP has.

-         Wayne Appleton thinks using 6 mg/L instead of 5 mg/L will be difficult to defend. A criteria based on a number that may be objective will be difficult to get through the legislature.

-         Martin Christ explained that we must be careful with DO because of diurnal variation and the fact that the sampling program was not designed to catch the lows.

-         Neil reminded the group that we knew that we would have a large dataset for West Virginia. We began with a literature review and looked at our data to determine if it was consistent with the level of limnology available.

-         Roger Sherman believes that we don’t have enough information to pick a different target for D.O.

-         Numbers calculated with 5 mg/L vs. 6 mg/L DO

      DO                  TP                    Chl                   Secchi              TN

      5                      82                    12.0                 2.1                   .98

      6                      33                    7.1                   3.3                   .67

-          Needs for DO:

1.        Variation data (John Wirts - diurnal data, Martin will look at USACE data)

2.        DEP’s impaired list (John Wirts)

3.        Apply DEP’s matrix for impairment to our old data (Evan and Martin)

4.        DEP’s data for listing the lakes.

-         Answers for Category B

            2) Use of 6 mg/L Do vs. 5 mg/L – really need Bret Preston and Mike Arcuri involved.

3) Ground truthing proposed criteria – Martin will research

4) Calibrating 2004 chlorophyll – Evan will determine if this can be done

5) Define other accumulated assumptions – Evan generated list

8) Relationship between N and P – Evan and Martin, Martin will forward data to Doug Chambers. Doug will look for other methods.

-         Category C – Tomlinson was excluded because it had <14 day resident time.

-         Category C Question – Should we use the same number for both categories B and C?

 

 

11.  Establish agenda for next meeting

-         Bob Miltner’s Presentation

-         Update on contacts with other states regarding possible collaborative research proposal

-         Continued discussion on developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs

 

Materials passed out during the meeting:

§         Meeting Agenda

  • Freshwater Nutrient Criteria Workshop Agenda – Neil Gillies

  • Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs, Draft document dated February 15, 2005 – Evan Hansen

 

 

~ Meeting Adjourned ~

Top of Page

 

 

 

DRAFT

 March 17, 2005

Nutrient Criteria Committee

Meeting Minutes

 

Committee Members Present

 

Joe Hankins, TCF/Freshwater Institute

Doug Chambers, USGS

Randy Sovic, WV DEP, Division of Water and Waste Management

Neil Gillies, Cacapon Institute

Martin Christ, WV Rivers Coalition

Margaret Janes, Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment

Larry Emerson, WV Coal Association

Dave Clark, Canaan Valley Institute, (Meeting Facilitator)

Tom Brand, West Virginia University, (Committee Chairman)

Roger Sherman, WV Forestry Association

John Rowe, WV Division of Forestry

Matt Monroe, WV Department of Agriculture

Michael Hawranick, WV Bureau for Public Health

John Wirts, WV DEP, Division of Water and Waste Management

 

Others in Attendance

Edward Snyder, WV Environmental Quality Board (Board member), Shepherd University

Penny Hott, WV Department of Agriculture (Note-taker)

Meredith Pavlick, WV Rivers Coalition

Lisa Burgess, WVMA/WVCOC

Bob Miltner, Ohio EPA

 

1.  Review and approval of February 17, 2005 meeting minutes.

-         Page 2, Review of draft proposal, changed second sentence in first bullet to John Wirts reported that Randy contacted other states and outlined the concepts of the proposal. He has only received feedback from Delaware.

-         Page 3, second bullet, changed CO to DO.

-         Page 3, third bullet, changed 6 mg/L DO to 5 mg/L DO and 5 mg/L DO to 6 mg/L DO.

-         Page 3, fifth bullet, changed NCC to EQB.

-         Page 3, sixth bullet, changed we would have a large dataset to we would have a small data set.

-         Page 3, last bullet, changed Do to DO.

 

2.  Committee Reports

-          No reports given.

 

 

3.  Update on ORSANCO efforts on nutrient criteria – WVDEP

-          The second meeting of the steering committee was held. An outline of a nutrient reduction strategy was developed. The four workgroups were given guidance as to what needs to be done.

-          Randy Sovic will represent West Virginia on the Inventory Workgroup with point sources.  Teresa Koon (WVDEP) will participate in the non point issues. Matt Monroe (WVDA) will also participate in the point sources.

-          ORSANCO only has funding until October of this year. Future funding must be secured.

-          ORSANCO will try to define Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology (BADCTC) for waste water treatment plants.

-          The steering committee will be reconvening but the future is unclear due to funding.

-          The five sub-basin commissions will be addressing issues individually and then collectively addressing the Gulf hypoxia issue.

-          ORSANCO is funded by the states but seeks funding from EPA for programmatic functions.

 

4.  Update on Chesapeake Bay nutrient criteria development –WVDA

-         The next input is being generated but is not yet complete.

-         Neil Gillies gave an overview of a project at the Spring Run Hatchery that is being initiated by the West Virginia Conservation Agency, the West Virginia Department of Agriculture, Cacapon Institute and Friends of Spring Run.

 

5.  Update on periphyton project - WVDEP

-         No Update.

 

6. Update on Point Source Innovation Committee

-         The committee is continuing to meet and look for viable ways to meet load caps. Trading is being looked out but no conclusions have been made. The next meeting is scheduled for March 23, 2005.

 

7.  Update on contacts with other states regarding possible collaborative research proposal – Randy Sovic, John Wirts, WVDEP

-         No Update.

 

8.  Update on possible data collection in rivers and streams by the West Virginia Coal Association (WVCA), Larry Emerson

-          Larry is intending to solicit support from members of the WVCA to collect water quality data for first, second and third order streams. He has not had the opportunity to present the whole plan of sampling to the association but is committed to promoting the idea.

-          Larry distributed data sets from Mountain Top Mining EIS database. This data includes summaries of the data that is available from this program and is currently in the draft state. The data was collected in 1999-2000. Larry offered this data to the NCC for considered inclusion in the streams data that will be used when establishing criteria.

-          Joe Hankins asked where the committee could send letters of support. Larry will draft a letter of support and send it out to the committee. The letter will them be sent to the EQB.

 

9.  Presentation – Bob Miltner, Ohio EPA

-          Bob Miltner gave a presentation on Ohio’s progress with nutrient criteria. This presentation is on file and will be posted to NCC’s web page.

 

10. Continued discussion on developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs.

-          Martin Christ distributed Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs, Draft document dated March 14, 2005. Changes from the last meeting have been incorporated into the document. Martin went over the document and pointed out the changes.

-          Roger Sherman is concerned that the rational is more driven to defend the choice of a number rather than to arrive at that number.

-          Lisa Burgess is unsure of using a minimum DO coupled with an average nutrient value to arrive at a number. She feels the correlations should be statistically significant. The numbers must be scientifically defensible.

-          Neil Gillies reminded the committee that we always understood that we had a weak dataset in West Virginia with a limited amount of information. Our discussion and understanding from the beginning is that we would have problems with the statistics. We were looking to see if our data realistically conforms to the existing limnology data on lakes.

-          Joe Hankins is concerned about 2/3 down in the water column if the surface DO is 6 mg/L. He feels that this number is unlikely to be protective. Martin Christ explained that we designed criteria to protect lakes with a minimum DO.

-          Lisa Burgess suggested classifying lakes.

-          Tom Brand asked Randy Sovic how a TMDL would be written for Spruce Knob Lake since there are no sources of contamination. Randy explained that air, rocks and atmospheric sources would be a target in a TMDL.

-          Martin Christ’s proposal remains to submit this document as criteria.

-          Dave Clark read the email sent to the group by Bret Preston that explained DNR’s position on the document.

-          Neil Gillies reminded the group that we will never have sufficient resources to collect “perfect” data. We are charged to develop criteria in a time frame. We could have gone with EPA’s recommended numbers. We are missing the connection to the literature. We should look at the data that we knew would be limited and determine if it is reasonably consistent with the literature.

-          Randy Sovic explained that the committee could recommend a 5mg/L DO be a criteria in certain regimes of the lake and different in others. If we don’t select a number, EPA will establish the criteria and their numbers are far stricter.

-          Randy Sovic advised the EQB at the last board meeting that the committee has climatic conditions that caused problems in the data we collected and that we may need additional data collection. The EQB seemed receptive that we may need another year of data collection and that we may need more time for Categories B and C.

-          The following list of questions was generated. The first four items are to be addressed now and the remainder will be discussed at a later date. The draft document is to be used as a basis for answering these questions. The committee will review these questions prior to the next meeting and be prepared to continue the discussion.

1.      5 v 6 v 7 DO – Diurnal swings

2.      Strong relationship – statistically significant

3.      Surface DO (as surrogate)

4.      Mixing minimums and averages

To be discussed later:

-         Classification of Lakes (ie geographically, physically, characteristics)

·         Flexibility; allow for later revision with new data

·         Data limits

-         Selecting criteria between proposed P criteria (23-82)

-         Category (user surveys? Ohio model?)

-         Schedule in relation to plan

 

In addition, Neil, Martin, and Lisa agreed to draft a literature review in light of the

available data.

 

 

11.  Establish agenda for next meeting

-          Continue discussion on draft document

 

Materials passed out during the meeting:

§         Meeting Agenda

§         Recommended Nutrient Criteria for West Virginia Lakes and Reservoirs, Draft document                              dated March 14, 2005 – Martin Christ

§         Data sets from Mountain Top Mining EIS database – Larry Emerson

 

 

 

~ Meeting Adjourned ~

Top of Page

 

 

 

Minutes from October 20, 2005 NCC Meeting in Buckhannon

 

Attendance:    Tom Brand                   John Rowe

                        John Wirts                    Martin Christ

                        Matt Monroe                Mike Hawranick

                        Dave Clark                  

                        Lance Lin

           

Summary of recent happenings.

 

  • Sept 22 Meeting – Review and answered questioned regarding WVU proposal

    • Unofficial award (no money now) not going to stop WVU from proceeding.

    • Discussed timeline for work to be completed by April in order to get thru legislative process (public comment periods, etc)

    • Other topics from EPA letter from Tiffany (9/21/05), including need to revise ‘Criteria Development Strategy’ to reflect change in WQS  authority from EQB to DEP

 

  • Reviewed intent of letter from Director McClung to NCC regarding future of NCC.

  • DEP has posted the position for the Water Quality Standards lead.

 

Review of Virginia ACC documents

 

  • There was some confusion regarding the 2 different documents.  It appeared that one was a reply to EPA questions, the other incorporated these comments into a stand-alone document.

  • Doesn’t include numbers for Nitrogen – most lakes P limited.

  • Group struggled with discussions – most had not read them very thoroughly or recently enough to understand many of Virginia’s decisions. 

  • Determined need to get VA ACC rep to explain.  Suggestion was made that Randy ask for rep to attend Dec. 1st meeting.

 

WVU Study Timeline – reviewed expectations of researchers

  • ~ Feb 1 – WVU to present findings of literature review and other efforts as directed at the Dec. 1st meeting.

 

Is Bear Lake worth looking at more closely in order to understand why the data is so different from most others?  A: Probably

 

Getting DNR participation.  Specifically, descriptions of fishing quality for list of lakes.   Tom Brand offered to talk to Secretary Timmermeyer about requesting the assistance of DNR fisheries biologists.  Basically asking her to forward the lake list to DNR and ask them to fill in a spreadsheet.  Martin will send list to Tom next week.

 

Set Agenda for Dec 1st meeting.  (Announcement will stress importance of this meeting – include brief timeline for when tasks need completed in order to get to 2007 legislative session)

 

  • Discussion of alternative means of looking at existing WV data – Lin & Petty.

  • Further review of Virginia documents with VA representative present (or on call).

  • Exposure duration and allowable exceedence frequency and Acute vs. Chronic standards discussion. 

  • Someone from DEP Permitting will be asked to attend.

  • Status of effort for obtaining DNR fisheries information.

 

Top of Page