Characterization of the Groundwater DischargeDischarge to MosesMoses Lake,Lake, Washington Quality Assurance Project Plan By Charles F. Pitz April 2001 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Assessment Program Olympia, WA 98504-7710 Approvals: Approved by: April 23, 2001 Dave Knight, ERO Regional OfficeOffice Date Approved by: April, 2001 Carl Nuechterlein, Section ManaManager,ger, ERO Regional OfficeOffice Date Approved by: April 23, 2001 Bob Cusimano, TMDL Project Manager,Manager, Watershed Ecology Section Date Approved by: April 17,17, 2001 Jim Carroll, TMDL Principal InvestInvestigator,igator, Watershed Ecology Section Date Approved by: April 17,17, 2001 Dale Norton, Unit Supervisor, Contaminant Studies Unit Date Approved by: April 24, 2001 Will Kendra, Section Manager, Watershed Ecology Section Date Approved by: April 19,19, 2001 Stuart Magoon, Director, ManchesterManchester Environmental Laboratory Date Approved by: April 17,17, 2001 Cliff Kirchmer, Ecology Quality Assurance OfficerOfficer Date Approved by: April 17,17, 2001 Charles F. Pitz, Project Lead, Contaminant Studies Unit Date Page 11 Background/Problem Statement Due to concerns regarding excess levels of aannualnnual nutrient loading to Moses Lake, the Eastern Regional OfficeOffice (ERO) of the Washington DepartmentDepartment of Ecology (Ecology) has asked the Environmental Assessment Program (EAP) to conduct a comprehensive fieldfield study of water quality conditions for the lake durduringing the 2001 water year (Figure 1)l).. The ultimate goals of this effort are the development of a water quality model, and an allocation strategy for nutrient loading to the lake (C(Carroll,arroll, et al., 2000). This allocation strategy will be formalized through the development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for nutrients. Project DescriptionDescription As an integral part of the EAP Moses Lake TMDL study, this project focuses on improving the understanding of the chemical quality of the direct groundwater inflowinflow to the lake, particularly with respect to nutrients (primarily phosphorus and nitrogen). While groundwater has been identifiedidentified as a significantsignificant contricontributorbutor to the annual nutrientnutrient load to the lake (Carroll et al., 2000), few samples of the groundwater discharging direcdirectlytly into the lake have been collected and analyzed. Characterization of thethe quality of the groundwater enterienteringng Moses Lake will assist in the development of an up-to-date,up-to-date, lake-wide nutrient budget. The primary goal of this study is to documedocumentnt the phosphorus and nitrogen content of the groundwater that is directly discdischargingharging into Moses Lake from the study area aquifer system. The data developed from this study may be used in the construction of a water quality model for the lake. To provide sufficientsufficient data for this purpose,purpose, a total of 1010 to 1515 samples of groundwater will be collected in the vicinity of the lake sshoreline,horeline, distributed throughout the study area. It should be noted that this study willwill not attempt to develop estiestimatesmates of the annual groundwater- derived discharge volume or nutrient mass loadloadinging to the lake. Water budget information developed through other activities of the TMDL ststudyudy will be integrated with the groundwater quality information collected during this study to develop loading estimates. The ERO has also expressed an interest in ididentifyingentifying the source of the elevated nutrient concentrations found in the springwater dischargdischarginging at the head of Rocky Ford Creek, which ultimately drains to Moses Lake. An extensextensiveive study of this question is beyond the current available resources of EAP. However,However, a limited effort to characterize the geochemical proprofilefile of the springwater, and compare that proprofilefile to the geochemistry of several suspected upgradient source lakes, is described in Appendix A. Responsibilities Dave Knight of the ERO Water Quality Program initiatinitiateded this project throthroughugh a request to the Environmental Assessment Program. Dave and his staff will help to: 1)I) arrange permission to access publicly or privately owned lalakeke shoreline property or wells, and 2) review drafts of the project QAPP and finalfinal report. Bob Cusimano is the overall project manager for the Moses Lake TMDL study. Bob will coordinate the various fieldfield inveinvestigationsstigations and sampling efforts that,that, combined, will provide the Page 2 basis for the development of a water quality modelmodel and the establishment of a TMDL for the lake. Bob will provide technical input on the groundwater sampling needs for the larger study. Jim Carroll is the principal investigator for the Moses Lake TMDL study. Jim will manage sampling of surface water for the study and will servservee as an additional point of contact for fieldfield sampling efforts. Charles Pitz will be the project lead for the groundwgroundwaterater portion of the Moses Lake TMDL and will have primary responsibility for project planning, data collection and evaluation, and reporting. Charles’ phone number is (360) 407-6775. CliffCliflKirchmer Kirchmer will assist in providing technical guidguidanceance regarding QA/QC issues or problems that arise during the project. CCliff’sliff’s phone number is (360) 407-6455. Bernie Strong will assist in the construction of fieldfield sampling equipment. Bernie’sBemie’s phone number is (360) 407-6571. Manchester Environmental LaboLaboratoryratory (MEL) will conduct the ananalysisalysis of all fieldfield samples collected during this study other than field-measuredfield-measured parameters. The phone number of the MEL is (360) 871-8800. Pam Covey of MEL will be responsibleresponsible for coordinating requests for analysis and providing access to project datadata.. Pam’s number is (360) 871-8827. Page 3 R City of Ephratav: ta o City 0 Eph c k y / F o r d C r e e k Grant County C 17 r óô Airport (Larson Am)AFB) a Airpofi b (‘233 A$ C r D e e k “9933 M o s e s L a k Study e Area rn o H r e k City of ar P Mo ses Lak e 90 n . r ,- o H n a c li e P Potholes Resevoir N Figure 11 -_ W E StudyStUdy Area S Location Map 303Miles0 3 Miles Moses Lake, WA Page 4 Schedule The anticipated project schedulschedulee is presented below. Task 2000 2001 2002 JASOND JFMAMJJASOND JFMAMJ Project Planning SO and Background Research QAPP Preparation ND Project Preparations JFJFMAMA •0 Equipment construction and testing •0 Remote Sensing Image analysis •0 Sampling point access arrangements •0 Field surveys to idenidentifytify discharge zones Project setup in EIM JFM Sampling Events M J O LIMS data migration to EIM J S D Compile and evaluate project data JJASOND JF Prepare draft report D JFJFMAMA Incorporate review comments and finalizfinalizee report AMJ Data Quality Objectives and DecisionDecision Criteria The primary objective of this study is to provide dadatata that are reasonably representativerepresentative of fieldfield conditions for input into a water quality model. Evaluation of the groundwater concentration range that has been reported in the study area, the anticipated variationvariation in the seasonal quality of the groundwater discharge, and the heterogeneityheterogeneity of the sampling media and environment all suggest that the precision and bias routinely obtained by the analytical methods selected are considered adequate for the purposes of this project. A variety of fieldfield and laboratory quality control steps will be taken to minimize and asseassessss error in the project data. EAP Watershed Assessment Section (WAS) protocols will be fofollowedllowed when measuring water quality fieldfield parameters, and standard methods will be used for sample collection, handling, preservation, and storage (WAS, 1993).1993). Table 11 describes the data qualiqualityty objectives for this project (equivalent to the laboratory measurement quality objectives). Routine laboratory quality control procedures will be used to estimate the accuracy, precision, and bias introduintroducedced by laboratory procedures and will be reported to the project lead foforr data analysis (MEL, 2000). Page 5 Table 1 —– Data Quality Objectives Parameter Accuracy Precision Bias Required (2*precision + (% RSD) (%) Reporting bias) Limit Total <35% <10 <15 1010 µug/Lg/L Phosphorus (TP) Orthophosphate <40% <10 <20 1010 µug/Lg/L -3 ((Ortho-PO4'3)Ortho-PO4 ) Ammonia <40% <10 <20 1010 µpg/g/LL (NH(NH3)3) Nitrate+nitrite <30% <10 <10 1010 µug/Lg/L - as N (NO(N03'3 + - N02)NO2 ) Total Kjeldahl <40% <10 <20 11 mg/L Nitrogen (TKN) Total Dissolved < 30% <15 <10 1010 mg/L Solids (TDS)(TDS) Chloride <30 % <10 <10 100100 µug/Lg/L A summary of the laboratory or fieldfield methods that will be used for analysis of selected parameters is presented in Table 2. Table 2 also presents the anticipated ranges for the parameters of interest. Field parametersparameters will be used primarily to establish adequate purge of sampling devices prior to collecticollectionon of samples for lab analysis. Page 6 Table 2 —– Summary of Field and LaboratoLaboratoryry Analytes, Methods, Sample Prep, and Anticipated Concentration Ranges Analyte Matrix Analytical Sample Prep Expected Range of Method Method Results* Field Measurements pH Water Field meter NA 5.5 —– 8.5 standard units SpecificSpecific Water Field meter NA 100-900100-900 Conductivity umhos/cm@25°Cumhos/cm@25oC Temperature Water Field meter NA 9-189-1 8°CoC Dissolved Oxygen Water Field meter NA