protecting ground water via pesticide registration in new york

Post on 25-Feb-2016

22 Views

Category:

Documents

1 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York. Presentation to the Cornell Pesticid e Users March 29 , 2013 Soil & Water Group Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering. Outline. Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Protecting Ground Water via Pesticide Registration in New York

Presentation to the Cornell Pesticide UsersMarch 29, 2013

Soil & Water GroupDepartment of Biological and Environmental

Engineering

Outline Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Vulnerable formations: karst New initiatives Outreach

Long Island pesticide data: tracing past contamination

Sampling intensity

hi

low

Pesticide detection patterns in Suffolk County groundwater

From data Suffolk County submitted to New York State, 2000-2010

Preliminary: Percentage of pesticide analysesreported as above detection limit

Current Pesticide Use in NY

Derived from New York Pesticide Sales and Use Reporting system published data.

Mobility & persistence are combined in the Groundwater Ubiquity Score (GUS) factor

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5

Low HighVery Low Medium Very High

* Imazethapyr * Carbofuran * Atrazine * Alachlor * Chlorothalonil* Glyphosate

Pesticide use weighted by GUS

Upstate monitoring strategyNot looking for:•Average groundwater concentrations•Spills or violations

But rather sampling well water in areas deemed vulnerable due to:• high pesticide use• groundwater (soil/aquifer) characteristics that favor transport

Working premise

If well water in vulnerable areas is of good quality, then we can have high confidence that well water in less vulnerable areas is also of good quality

Cortland County cornfield that dominates hill above shallow wells

Outline Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

County-based sampling

Schenectady

Orange

Cayuga

Cortland

Genesee Wayne

Partnering with local S&WCD’s, WQCC and DOH

Testing for ... DEC lab (to 2009): 93 active ingredients DEC lab since 2010: shorter priority list of 51 AIs and degradates (metabolites)

Cornell Soil & Water Laboratory: -- Selected active ingredients using higher

resolution ELISA immunoassay methods-- Nitrates, anions (IC)

Findings in six counties ...

DEC broad-based scans:One detection of one active ingredient in 240 samples (reporting limits 1 μg/L (1 ppb) or less). Degradation products detected in 5 of 41 wells tested in Wayne County

No exceedance of any of 15 NYS ground water standards or guidance levels

Wayne County wells with detections or high NO3-N Land use: CC - corn/grain cash crop rotation O - orchards (apple) M -muckland vegetables W - wooded

Depth (ft)

Land Use NO3-N Metolachlor (µg/L) AlachlorESA

(µg/L)Atrazine (µg/L)(mg/L) OA ESA1 2

4-6 O CC 14 ND < 0.1 ND < 0.1 ND < 0.1 ND

40-45 CC W 24 4.4 4.6 ND < 0.1 trace<0.1

40 CC O <0.5 ND < 0.1 0.2 ND < 0.1 ND

42 CC O 1 0.2 0.6 0.1 ND

12 M CC 1 0.2 0.2 ND < 0.1 ND

22 CC O <0.5 0.1 1.9 ND < 0.1 trace <0.1

Cornell ELISA assay results for select AI’s

Nitrates typical for rural NY

* * SO4 interference

Interpretation to date Upstate rural wells – even vulnerable shallow wells surrounded by fields and having elevated nitrate – are in good shape relative to current groundwater pesticide standards.

There are frequent low traces of atrazine and some metolachlor in agricultural areas, as found nationally.

Ongoing county-level workRevisiting selected wells in view of:

Improved DEC lab reporting limits (0.1 ppb starting with Wayne Co.)Addition of key pesticide degradation products (metabolites) which can have greater mobility and/or toxicity than original AITime-of-sampling studies – repeated at several month intervals (Orange County)

Questions so far? Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

Karst (carbonate) ground water Objective: determine if karst requires

special registration consideration Genesee county hydrogeologic setting Interim results

Lots of carbonate in Upstate NY

Dark hatching is carbonate; Source: USGS

Karst: Solution conduits in limestone

Carbonate western NY

Genesee karstFlow in limestone; losing reaches

Genesee karst: sampling sites

Genesee karst: sampling depths

Onondaga

Shale

Unconf

Genesee karst: 16 months overall: atrazine

5/22 detects to 0.05 ppb

7/19 detects

0/9 detects

Metolachlor similar: 6/13, 5/11, 0/6 respectively

Genesee karst: atrazine seasonality (% of samples)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Ju

ne10

-Top

(n=6

)

June

10-M

id (6

)

June

10-D

eep

(3)

July

10-T

op (6

)

July

10-M

id (6

)

July

10-D

eep

(3)

Sept

10-T

op (5

)

Sept

10-M

id (7

)

Sept

10-D

eep

(2)

Dec

10-T

op (4

)

Dec

10-M

id (2

)

Dec

10-D

eep

(1)

Sep1

1-To

p (5

)

Sep1

1-M

id (7

)

Sep1

1-D

eep

(2)

% o

f sam

ples

by

inte

rval

Time and vertical layer

Detect

Trace

ND

Jun10 Jul10 Sep10 Dec10 Sep11

Detect >=0.1Trace >=0.05ND <0.05 ppb

Geneva AES limestone?

Questions?

Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

Looking ahead: New initiatives

I - Lakeshore water supplies II - Greenhouse leaching III - DEC modeling support

Objective Assess the standard pesticide environmental fate model toolkit used in the NY registration process.

Toolkit =leaching models +conservative environmental scenarios

Leaching Model Support

Modeling tasks

• Specify evaluation criteria with DEC• DEC staff workshop – walk through current

goals, assumptions, & input scenarios• Stakeholder roundtable – solicit input on

model and design scenarios

• Model and scenario evaluation - retrospective cases, new scenarios

• DEC workshop to walk through and evaluate findings, make draft recommendations

• Report with new model + scenario packages if merited

More modeling tasks

Leaching models

1980’s traditionalLEACHP, PRZM

Leaching models improved

1980’s traditionalLEACHP, PRZM

2000’s with preferentialFlow paths, tile drains,fragipans, i.e. shortcircuits and lateral lossesto streams

Scenarios: conservative case(s) of usage, soil, climate, and depth to ground water. Do we need new upstate scenarios?

LongIsland(Riverhead)Upstate carbonate

(Batavia)

Upstatetile drains(Willsboro)

Willsboro Farm: Atrazine measured in tile drains

ConcentrationVersus time

Aldicarb at CU Riverhead – simulated with DEC scenario

Recharge

Leachateconcentration

Atrazine leaching: thin soil at Batavia

Atrazine leaching: Long Island

Questions?

Overview: Pesticides in groundwater Upstate monitoring by county Karst formations New initiatives Outreach

Publications• Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation research articles• NY Veg Growers News

Events• 2011 Empire Farm Days booth• Cornell in-service training• NY State Soil & Water Conservation Committee• September 2012 Northeast Pesticides C&T Meeting

Webpagesoilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/

http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/

Thanks toFunding NYS DECNYS WRI directors Keith Porter & Susan Riha, who delegated to BEECounty Partners Cortland, Schenectady, Orange, Cayuga, Genesee, and Wayne County Soil & Water Conservation Districts. Genesee County Health Dept. Many private well owners.Karst partner: Paul Richards, College at Brockport, Dept of Earth SciencesCornell Pesticide Management Education Program for help using the PSUR databaseNYS Soil & Water Conservation Committee for early endorsementCornell students Ian Toevs, Tony Salvucci, Ben Liu, Sophia Garcia, Mike Sinkevich, Ivy Tsoi, Zia Ahmed, Sheila Saia, Austin Merboth, Cedric Mason

Thank You!

Contacts

Brian Richards (bkr2@cornell.edu) Steve Pacenka (sp17@cornell.edu) Tammo Steenhuis (tss1@cornell.edu)

http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pesticides/

top related