Presentation Abstract
We are now approaching a tipping point where priority pollutants may no longer be the primary driver of environmental impairment. Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) present a challenge to environmental monitoring and management programs because the rapidly emerging state of the knowledge requires an adaptive and transparent prioritization framework. The state of the science, treatment technologies, and regulatory policies are not well understood, CEC quantification is challenging and expensive, and the management approach is not simply a concentration based criteria, but may include biological end-points. The need for a shared responsibility and leveraging across many programs was evaluated through a series of webinars with other programs studying CECs including Columbia River Toxics Program, Washington Department of Ecology, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Southern California Coastal Waters Research Project, and San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program. The lessons learned were articulated into a 10-step prioritization framework. The critical lesson learned included: 1) Develop clear objectives, definitions of CECs, and target audience; 2) Identify conceptual models to provide a clear target for the appropriate media to monitor for various chemicals and at what frequency; 3) Define the chemical characteristics in terms of usage, persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity; 4) Develop a target CEC analyte list; 5) Screen and rank the CEC analyte list based on chemical characteristics, environmental concentrations, and state of the science; 6) Create a transparent prioritization process to include input from key stakeholders and end users that builds consensus during development; 7) Prioritize the chemical categories by using specific metrics such as available data, status of analytical methods, available thresholds, costs, programmatic concerns and opportunities for leveraging with other programs; 8) Identify potential biological end-points and other indicators; 9) Create a formal review process to support data and knowledge sharing, adaptively manage prioritization to include new science and critical research gaps; and 10) Develop a working group to facilitate leveraging of funds across many programs.
Session Title
Session S-09C: Occurrences and Impacts of Emerging Contaminants
Conference Track
Emerging Contaminants and Emergencies
Conference Name
Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference (2014 : Seattle, Wash.)
Document Type
Event
Start Date
2-5-2014 10:30 AM
End Date
2-5-2014 12:00 PM
Location
Room 606
Genre/Form
conference proceedings; presentations (communicative events)
Contributing Repository
Digital content made available by University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University.
Subjects – Topical (LCSH)
Environmental monitoring--Salish Sea (B.C. and Wash.)--Management; Pollutants--Salish Sea (B.C. and Wash.)--Management
Geographic Coverage
Salish Sea (B.C. and Wash.)
Rights
This resource is displayed for educational purposes only and may be subject to U.S. and international copyright laws. For more information about rights or obtaining copies of this resource, please contact University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225-9103, USA (360-650-7534; heritage.resources@wwu.edu) and refer to the collection name and identifier. Any materials cited must be attributed to the Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference Records, University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University.
Type
Text
Language
English
Format
application/pdf
Evaluating a Prioritization Framework for Monitoring Chemicals of Emerging Concern in the Salish Sea Based on Lessons Learned from Western States Programs
Room 606
We are now approaching a tipping point where priority pollutants may no longer be the primary driver of environmental impairment. Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) present a challenge to environmental monitoring and management programs because the rapidly emerging state of the knowledge requires an adaptive and transparent prioritization framework. The state of the science, treatment technologies, and regulatory policies are not well understood, CEC quantification is challenging and expensive, and the management approach is not simply a concentration based criteria, but may include biological end-points. The need for a shared responsibility and leveraging across many programs was evaluated through a series of webinars with other programs studying CECs including Columbia River Toxics Program, Washington Department of Ecology, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Southern California Coastal Waters Research Project, and San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program. The lessons learned were articulated into a 10-step prioritization framework. The critical lesson learned included: 1) Develop clear objectives, definitions of CECs, and target audience; 2) Identify conceptual models to provide a clear target for the appropriate media to monitor for various chemicals and at what frequency; 3) Define the chemical characteristics in terms of usage, persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity; 4) Develop a target CEC analyte list; 5) Screen and rank the CEC analyte list based on chemical characteristics, environmental concentrations, and state of the science; 6) Create a transparent prioritization process to include input from key stakeholders and end users that builds consensus during development; 7) Prioritize the chemical categories by using specific metrics such as available data, status of analytical methods, available thresholds, costs, programmatic concerns and opportunities for leveraging with other programs; 8) Identify potential biological end-points and other indicators; 9) Create a formal review process to support data and knowledge sharing, adaptively manage prioritization to include new science and critical research gaps; and 10) Develop a working group to facilitate leveraging of funds across many programs.
