Program Information

What is RMP? | Objectives | RMP Administration & Structure | Participants | Program Elements for Current Year

(Program Manager: Jay Davis)

What is the RMP?

An innovative partnership
The RMP has combined shared financial support, direction, and participation by regulatory agencies and the regulated community in a model of collective responsibility. The RMP has established a climate of cooperation and a commitment to participation among a wide range of regulators, dischargers, industry representatives, community activists, and scientists. The RMP provides an open forum for interested parties to communicate about contaminant issues facing the Bay. The RMP works in close collaboration with the recently established Clean Estuary Partnership (CEP), a group of representatives from wastewater treatment plants, stormwater agencies, and the Regional Board. The CEP was formed in 2001 to provide information to facilitate the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and other water quality attainment strategies for the Bay.

An adaptive, long term program of study in support of management
Stable funding has allowed the RMP to develop an efficient structure that enables the Program to adapt to changing management priorities and advances in scientific understanding. RMP committees and workgroups meet regularly to keep the Program efficient, focused on the highest priority issues, and to ensure that the RMP is based on sound science. The RMP has continually improved since its inception in 1993.

A high quality body of knowledge
The RMP has produced a world-class dataset on estuarine toxic contamination. Monitoring performed in the RMP determines spatial patterns and long term trends in contamination through sampling of water, sediment, bivalves, and fish, and evaluates toxic effects on sensitive organisms and chemical loading to the Bay. The Program combines RMP data with data from other sources to provide for comprehensive assessment of chemical contamination in the Bay.

A portal to information about contamination in San Francisco Bay
The RMP provides information targeted at the highest priority questions faced by managers of the Bay. The RMP produces an Annual Monitoring Report that summarizes the current state of the Estuary with regard to contamination, a summary report (Pulse of The Estuary), a quarterly newsletter, technical reports that document specific studies and synthesize information from diverse sources, and journal publications that disseminate RMP results to the world’s scientific community. The RMP web site provides access to RMP products and links to other sources of information about water quality in San Francisco Bay. 

top

Program Objectives

Every five years, an outside group of scientific experts reviews the RMP to ensure it is fulfilling its objectives and providing useful and timely information regarding the Estuary. As part of the 2003 Program Review, the Review Panel stated “… that the Program must continue to evolve to ensure its long-term relevance.” In response to this comment, the RMP reviewed lessons learned from data collected over the last ten years and developed a new set of management objectives based on this data and water quality management questions (see the 2005 Pulse for further discussion). These new management objectives were reviewed by the Technical Review and Steering Committees and approved in 2005.

1. Describe the distribution and trends of pollutant concentrations in the Estuary

1. Which pollutants should be monitored in the Estuary, in which media, and at what frequency?
2. Are pollutants of concern increasing, decreasing, or remaining the same in different media?
3. How are contaminant patterns and trends in the Estuary over time affected by remediation and source control or pollution prevention in the watersheds?
4. Do pollutant concentration distributions indicate particular areas of origin of regions of potential ecological concern?
5. What effects on beneficial uses or attainment of Water Quality Standards will occur due to large-scale habitat restoration in the Estuary in decades to come?

2. Project future contaminant status and trends using best understanding of ecosystem processes and human activities

1. Can reasonably accurate recovery forecasts be developed for major segments and the Estuary as a whole under various management scenarios?
2. Can potential impairment and degradation be better anticipated in the face of projected changes in land and water use and management, as well as product use and disposal?
3. Which pollutant categories are predicted to accumulate in the Estuary faster than they can be assimilated?
4. Do pollutant trends reflect historical changes in use patterns, transport and transformation processes, or control actions?
5. How will the importance of each pathway change through time under various management and development scenarios?
6. What is the projected future loading of pollutants of concern under various management and development scenarios?
7. What are the likely consequences of various management actions or risk reduction measures?
8. Do pollutants show existing contributions that fit our current understanding or models of their origin, loads, and transport?
9. What changes in loadings or ecosystem characteristics (e.g., extent of restored tidal marsh, Estuary circulation and flushing, food web shifts) would reduce or increase pollutant exposures and effects?
10. How are distributions and long-term trends in pollutants affected by current and predicted estuarine processes (e.g., sediment erosion, deposition, river inflows)?

3. Describe sources, pathways, and loading of pollutants entering the Estuary

1. Where are/were the largest pollutant sources, in what context are/were these pollutants applied or used, and what are/were their ultimate points of release into the aquatic environment?
2. What are the circumstances and processes that cause the release of pollutants from both internal and external source areas?
3. Once released, how do pollutants travel from source areas to the Estuary, what are the temporal and spatial patterns of storage, and are they transformed along the way or after deposition?
4. What is the annual mass of each pollutant of concern entering the Bay from each pathway?
5. Can data with high temporal resolution from a few watersheds be projected to other watersheds and the Basin as a whole?
6. For each pollutant of concern, what forms are released from each pathway and what are the magnitude and temporal variation of concentrations and loadings?
7. How do loads change over time in relation to management activities?
8. What is the relative importance of pollutant loadings from different sources and pathways, including internal inputs, in terms of beneficial use impairment?

4. Measure pollution exposure and effects on selected parts of the Estuary ecosystem (including humans)

1. How are emerging problems reflected in exposure and effects measurements?
2. Which (co-)factors (e.g., food web structure) influence exposure and effects of specific pollutants on biota?
3. What ecological risks are caused by pollutants of concern?
4. What human exposure to pollutants of concern results from consumption of fish and game?
5. To what extent does exposure to multiple pollutants lead to effects?
6. Which forms of pollutants cause impairment?
7. To what extent do factors other than specific pollutants (invasive species, flow diversions, land use changes, toxic algal blooms) contribute to beneficial use impairment?

5. Compare monitoring information to relevant benchmarks, such as TMDL targets, tissue screening levels, water quality objectives, and sediment quality objectives

1. What percentage of the Estuary is supporting beneficial uses?
2. Which segments should be considered impaired and why, and how do segments compare in terms of recovery targets?
3. How can specific source limitations, controls, and mitigation be best linked to appropriate beneficial use endpoints and recovery targets?

6. Effectively communicate information from a range of sources to present a more complete picture of the sources, distribution, fate, and effects of pollutants and beneficial use attainment or impairment in the Estuary ecosystem

This objective applies to all of the questions listed under objectives 1 – 5.

This new generation of questions will guide the RMP during its next five years and set the stage for adjustments to the monitoring program, designing special studies capable of testing specific hypotheses prior to implementing management actions or revising policies, and communicating key messages to policy-makers and the public.

top

Program Administration & Structure

The RMP is managed by the Program Manager, Dr. Jay Davis. Many scientists at SFEI participate in the RMP to create a successful and scientifically sound program. The work at SFEI is overseen by the Technical Review Committee, the Steering Committee, and the three Work groups which consist of invited experts. The three workgroups are: Sources, Pathways and Loadings Workgroup, Exposure and Effects Workgroup, and Contaminant Fate Workgroup.

The three Workgroups address the three main technical subject areas covered by the RMP. Workgroups consist of local scientists and regulators and invited scientists recognized as leaders and their field. The Workgroups directly guide planning and implementation of pilot and special studies. Activities of the Workgroups and the technical content of the RMP as a whole are directed by the Technical Review Committiee. The Steering Committiee determines the overall budget, allocation of program funds, tracks progress, and provides direction to the Program from a manager's perspective.

top

RMP Participants

top

RMP Program Elements for the Current Year

The RMP has two major program elements: 1) Status and Trends Monitoring; and 2) Pilot and Special Studies. The Status and Trends portion of the Program includes elements that are part of long-term monitoring of the Bay, and is relatively constant from year to year. The Pilot and Special Studies portion of the Program changes every year and have allowed it to adapt in response to changes in the regulatory landscape, advances in understanding of the Estuary, and a continual drive to adjust the Program to better meet its objectives. For more information, see 2010 RMP Program Plan.

top