Nutrient Criteria Stakeholders Agenda
May 16, 2006
Elm Street DNR Building
Route 66 Mtg Room
Jefferson City, MO
1-3:30 p.m.

In Attendance: Greg Anderson, MDNR; Georganne Bowman, MDNR; Cindy DiStefano, MDC; Peter Goode, Washington University; Candi Lordo, LMVP; Randy Lyman, City of Springfield; Mark Osborn, MDNR; Buffy Santel, St Louis MSD; Tony Thorpe, UMC; Kristen Veum, UMC; Gary Welker, EPA; Betty Wyse, ERC.

Presentation by guest speaker Kristen Veum.

Kristen is completing her Masters and preparing to start on her PhD. She will discuss chlorination by-products and how they relate to water quality in Missouri reservoirs. Her presentation is available at http://lmvp.org/nutrientcriteria/documents/VEUM-EPA_DBPFinal.pdf

Open Discussion Chl-A values for Drinking water lakes.

During the 4/18/06 meeting, Mark mentioned a paper cited in the Oklahoma nutrent criteria development that established the limit of 10ug/l Chl-A value in drinking water. The Oklahoma paper may not be valid for our discussion. The OK paper examined lakes only – no reservoirs were used. Gary will contact the author to determine why reservoirs were excluded.

Tony stated that 10ug/l of CHL is not practical for Missouri.
Gary asked if 10ug/l was a function of depth
Tony – yes
Gary – maybe we could tier lakes on depth.
Kristen – hydrology is very important. Especially the surface area and flushing rate. Also, there is more reactive carbon inputs in the Ozarks.
Tony will look at the hydrology of drinking water lakes – and report back to the group.

Review of previous discussion/clarification of Matrix. The group will review the notes and handouts from last month’s discussion and clarify as needed. The group needs more information on the process used to determine the target values, and how the lakes were assigned to specific groups. The group also needs the formulas used to figure these values.
Gary will work with the Center for Bio Assessment to see if they can run some numbers for the matrix.

How do we take reservoir age into consideration? If most reservoirs were built as 80 year structures, then the older structures would be more nutrient rich.

Use an UAA approach to deal with older reservoirs?

Site specific – for example a change of depth over time (as the reservoir silts in)

Or a tiered approach

Discussion of the probability of completing the rulemaking language by the end of June. Group vote on progress, and likelihood for completion.

Anti-deg is floundering. It is going to be hard to complete by the end of the year – with full time being devoted to the issue. This and all the stakeholder groups trying to get rules ready for the june CWC are meeting at the next Clean Water Forum (June 5). The status of Nutrient Development will be discussed during that meeting. There is a good chance that this will be delayed until the fall.

Mark will schedule meetings into the fall.