Water Quality Issues
EPA’s Water Quality Standards Regulation Revision Process - Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Background: EPA is seeking through an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), views and recommendations on possible revisions to the Water Quality Standards regulation. EPA released a draft ANPRM in mid-March 1996 to all interested parties for comment over a two month period ending in early May 1996.
Status: On June 25, EPA’s long-awaited advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on water quality standards regulation was signed by EPA Assistant Administrator, Bob Perciasepe. The ANPRM requests public comment on EPA’s current thinking on possible regulation and policy changes to strengthen and modernize the water quality standards regulation, including facilitating a watershed approach. Six core areas are discussed in the document, including: designated uses, criteria, anti-degradation, mixing zones, wetlands, and independent application. EPA has requested comment on these areas and is also accepting comments on any other aspects of the water quality program. AMSA, with extensive member agency input, plans to file comments on the ANPRM within the 180-day comment period and will also ensure that AMSA members are represented during three public meetings on the ANPRM, the first to be held in Philadelphia, PA on August 27-28 (see http://www.epa.gov/OST/announce/rulemake.cfml for more information) For the benefit of AMSA members attending the public meetings, AMSA will provide a preliminary list of core issues and questions to aid in the discussions. The ANPRM will also be discussed at AMSA’s upcoming Summer Conference, Water Quality Criteria & Standards... Facing Challenges, Making Choices. AMSA’s Water Quality Committee is requesting that members review the ANPRM and forward comprehensive comments to the National Office by October 2, 1998. The Committee has formed five review teams, each concentrating on one issue area of the ANPRM, which will collate member agency comments and establish AMSA’s positions. AMSA transmitted the ANPRM via Regulatory Alert RA 98-12. CONTACTS: Rob Wood, EPA 202/260-9536 or Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/ 833-9106.
National Water Quality Monitoring Council
Background: The National Water Quality Monitoring Council is a multi-year cooperative effort involving federal, state, and local agencies and the private sector to review activities and provide guidance for improving the collection, management, and use of water-quality information. The Clean Water Action Plan has identified several activities for the Council including: 1) In 1999, assist in the standardization of monitoring and reporting by point source dischargers to support water quality and watershed management information needs; 2) By the end of 2000, compare sampling and laboratory methods and protocols, leading to performance-based acceptable methods establish reference parameters for specific monitoring purposes; identify core environmental indicators; establish consistent use of biological metrics, and develop guidelines on quality assurance and control. AMSA is represented on the Council by Norm LeBlanc, Hampton Roads Sanitation District, and Bob Berger of the East Bay Municipal Utility District.
Status: The NWQMC has held three meetings in full Council, plus a number of workgroup meetings. The Council is currently developing a workplan to guide its activities. The NWQMC is sponsoring a conference on "Monitoring: Critical Foundations to Protect our Waters," on July 7-9 in Reno, Nevada (see Water Quality Related Items of Interest for more information). CONTACT: Elizabeth Fellows, EPA 202/260-7062, or Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106.
Streamlining 301(h) Waiver Renewal Requirements - Anticipated Proposed Rule
Background: EPA is proposing to amend the Clean Water Act section 301(h) regulations. This proposal is designed to streamline the renewal process for POTWs with 301(h) modified permits. Section 301(h) provides POTWs discharging to marine waters an opportunity to obtain a modification of secondary treatment requirements if they demonstrate to EPA that they comply with a number of criteria aimed at protecting the marine environment.
Status: Proposal is planned for August 1998. CONTACT: Deborah Lebow 260-6419
Freshwater Ammonia Criteria Revisions
Background: Since EPA published its water quality criteria document for ammonia in freshwater, (Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - 1984, U.S. EPA 1985a), it has issued additional information concerning aquatic life criteria for ammonia (Heber and Ballentine, 1992; U.S. EPA 1989, 1996) and there have been various studies of ammonia toxicity that could affect the freshwater criterion. The purpose of EPA’s current efforts is to update U.S. EPA (1985a) and replace Heber and Ballentine (1992) and U.S. EPA (1996) by addressing various issues and assessing new data to the extent possible in a short-term effort. This short-term effort is addressing issues and data related to the Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC), Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC), and CCC averaging period, or the frequency of allowed exceedences. It is intended that a separate long-term effort will more completely evaluate relevant laboratory and field data, identify and conduct needed research, and replace U.S. EPA (1985a) and this latest addendum in five to ten years. A draft addendum updates the equations used in the ammonia criteria document (U.S. EPA 1985a) to address the temperature- and ph-dependence of ammonia toxicity in freshwater to take into account newer data and better approaches. A new CMC is derived based on these updated equations. Available chronic data is evaluated and used to derive a new CCC.
Status: EPA’s Office of Science and Technology is in the process of updating its freshwater ammonia criteria to account for newer data, better approaches, and to address temperature and ph-dependence of ammonia toxicity. The updated procedures are reflected in a draft addendum to EPA’s "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - 1984." A technical report has been completed. Although EPA had assured AMSA that an opportunity for full public review and comment would be sought after a technical peer review was completed, EPA was planning to publish the document via Federal Register notice as an interim final rule in June 1998. On May 28, 1998, AMSA transmitted a letter to EPA recommending that the Agency proceed with its original commitment to solicit public comment on the proposed revisions of the ammonia criteria document through a proposed rule process and allow adequate time for public review and comment. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA at 202/833-9106, or Charles Delos, EPA 202/260-7039.
Whole Effluent Toxicity
Background: On February 19, 1997 EPA released their draft whole effluent toxicity (WET) implementation strategy (distributed via Regulatory Alert RA 97-6). The draft strategy highlights five key areas of concern including: 1) national WET outreach and training program; 2) continue to encourage the development of water quality criteria & standards based on good science; 3) improved NPDES permits for WET; 4) enforcement; and, 5) fund research needs. In February 1996, EPA was sued by several groups, including the Western Coalition of Arid States (WESTCAS), and the Edison Electric Institute on the WET test procedures, which were promulgated on October 16, 1995. AMSA’s Board of Directors did not pursue litigation on WET based on the opportunity to resolve technical and policy issues with EPA.
Status: EPA and WESTCAS are poised to sign a settlement agreement regarding WET issues. A recent WET study sponsored by WESTCAS provided an impetus for EPA to resolve the litigation. The study quantified the level of biological variability which is intrinsic to whole effluent toxicity test organisms and test procedures. The study attempted to determine the rate of false-positive whole effluent toxicity (WET) test results on method blank samples containing no toxicants of any kind. Of the sixteen laboratories which participated in the study 40 percent concluded that the non-toxic sample water was toxic based on reproductive effects. The results have been used in WESTCAS settlement negotiations with EPA on WET and additional verification efforts may be conducted as a result of the study and the pending settlement agreement. AMSA members may be requested to participate in additional follow-up verification studies. Some of the EPA actions which the settlement agreement specifies include: 1) EPA will issue new rules mandating WET variability be accounted for in permit-related activities; 2) EPA issue new guidance recommending higher confidence intervals for streams with little or no dilution and for sub-lethal endpoints, and 3) EPA issue new guidance mandating demonstrable dose-response relationship before a toxicity test fails. Among several issues conceded by WESTCAS include: 1) no method-detection level is established for WET testing; 2) compliance status may still be assessed based on the outcome of a single WET test; and, 3) implementation issues (test conditions, test species, test appropriateness to ephemeral streams, independent applicability, etc.) were excluded from the settlement agreement. EPA plans to issue the revised WET Implementation Strategy following resolution of these issues. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106, Margarete Heber, EPA 202/260-7144.
FWS and NOAA Conclude That EPA Water Quality Criteria Inadequate to Protect Endangered Species
Background: On August 5, 1997, EPA published a proposed rule for the promulgation of water quality standards for the state of California. The proposal established numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants, and reflected the most up-to-date technical and scientific data. EPA proposed the water quality standards after a 1994 federal court ruling overturned California’s water quality standards. The proposal provides for the attainment of criteria no later than ten years after final adoption. Under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), are to be consulted if a federal action, such as EPA’s promulgation of water quality standards, may adversely affect endangered or threatened species. From February 1994 to October 1997, EPA, FWS and NOAA had informally attempted to resolve their differences on the proposed rule through several meetings and teleconferences. Unable to resolve their differences, the agencies initiated formal consultation in November 1997.
Status: On April 10, 1998, the FWS and NMFS issued a draft biological opinion on the California Toxics Rule (CTR) which includes findings that the proposed criteria will jeopardize the continued existence of 20 species and includes recommended reasonable and prudent alternatives be undertaken to remove the jeopardizing effects of the proposed action. In the opinion, the FWS and NMFS, question the adequacy of : 1) proposed acute and chronic selenium criteria; 2) proposed aquatic and human health criteria for mercury; 3) proposed criteria for pentachlorophenol; 4) factors used in the proposed formula based metals criteria (i.e, water effect ratio, total-to-dissolved conversion factors, and hardness dependency), and; 5) the use of translators to convert dissolved criteria into total-recoverable permit limitations. The FWS and NMFS cite a significant number of published scientific literature in establishing a basis for the jeopardy opinion. Among the reasonable and prudent alternatives which have been recommended to EPA include: 1) reducing the chronic selenium criteria from 5 ug/l to 2 ug/l; 2) promulgating a total mercury criterion of 2 ng/l within the range of 8 affected species, 3) deferring promulgation of metals criteria on a dissolved basis, and 4) deferring approval of site-specific water effect ratios. In addition to these recommendations, FWS and NMFS also recommend that EPA promulgate revised criteria based on bioaccumulative effects of selenium and mercury by June 2000 and perform additional review of metals formula criteria methodologies to ensure species are protected. The draft opinion will have national implications as the issue has been raised to senior water officials in EPA’s Headquarters, and could ripple throughout the regional offices of EPA, FWS, and NMFS. These national issues, including whether EPA should develop national wildlife criteria and compliance schedules for water quality standards may be addressed in a draft inter-agency memorandum of agreement (MOA) which describes EPA, FWS, and NMFS coordination in ensuring that Clean Water Act programs protect endangered or threatened species. EPA has discussed several options for resolving these issues including: 1) launching a joint research project to develop wildlife criteria under the MOA’ and, 2) promulgation of proposed standards with phased follow up on FWS/NMFS recommended reasonable and prudent measures. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106
AMSA’s Summer Conference to Focus on Water Quality Criteria & Standards
AMSA’s Board of Directors has approved a proposal to focus on water quality criteria and standards issues for AMSA’s 1998 Summer Conference to be held in Colorado Springs on July 14-17, 1998. The conference, titled, "Water Quality Criteria and Standards.... Facing Challenges, Making Choices," will highlight EPA’s upcoming Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and will discuss policy and implementation issues associated with water quality criteria & standards development, implementation, permitting, and enforcement. For more information on the upcoming conference, visit the Conferences & Meetings section of AMSA’s web site at http://www.amsa-cleanwater.org or contact AMSA at 202/833-AMSA. Conference flyers were mailed to the membership in May. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106.
Draft Water Quality Criteria and Standards Plan
Background: In early May 1998, EPA released a fact sheet announcing an upcoming plan for enhancing and improving the water quality criteria and standards program titled, "Water Quality Criteria and Standards Plan - Priorities for the Future."
Status: On June 22, EPA released a plan for enhancing and improving the water quality criteria and standards program titled, "Water Quality Criteria and Standards Plan - Priorities for the Future." During AMSA’s May 16-20 National Environmental Policy Forum, EPA’s Office of Science and Technology released an advance copy of a draft plan for working together with states and tribes to enhance and improve the nation’s water quality criteria and standards program. The plan describes seven new criteria and standards program initiatives that EPA, states, and tribes will embark on over the next decade. According to the plan, the Office of Water will emphasize and focus on the following priority areas for the criteria and standards program over the next decade including: 1) developing nutrient criteria and assessment methods; 2) developing criteria for microbial pathogens; 3) completing the development of biocriteria as an improved basis for aquatic life protection; 4) maintaining and strengthening the existing ambient water quality criteria for water and sediments; 5) evaluating possible criteria initiatives for excessive sedimentation, flow alterations, and wildlife; 6) developing improved water quality modeling tools to better translate water quality standards into implementable control strategies; and 7) assist States in implementing criteria as part of water quality standards. CONTACT: William Swietlik, EPA 202/260-9569 or Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106.
EPA Releases Regional Nutrient Strategy
Background: Nutrients have been cited as one of the leading causes of water quality impairment in the nation’s waterbodies. EPA’s 1994 National Water Quality Inventory cites that twenty-three percent of the rivers were impaired due to nutrient enrichment; forty-three percent of surveyed lakes; and forty-seven percent of surveyed estuaries were similarly affected by nutrients. To address nutrient problems, EPA has been directed by the President’s Clean Water Action Plan (released in February 1998) to implement a criteria system for nitrogen and phosphorus runoff for lakes, rivers, and estuaries by the year 2000. To meet this accelerated timeframe, EPA is developing a national strategy which focuses on the development of waterbody-type guidance, and region-specific nutrient criteria.
Status: On June 18, EPA released a national strategy outlining the process and approach for the development of numeric criteria for nutrients and adoption of nutrient provisions of state water quality standards. Under the approach described in the new nutrient strategy, EPA will develop nutrient guidance documents for various types of waterbodies (e.g. rivers, lakes, coastal waters, and wetlands) over the next several years. States will be able to use these guidance documents and target ranges as they develop numeric criteria for nutrients as part of state water quality standards. EPA has formed a National Nutrient Team to guide the nutrient criteria development process and is forming Regional Nutrient Teams in each EPA region. The Nutrient Strategy is being transmitted to the AMSA membership via Regulatory Alert RA 98-13, and is also available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/OST. AMSA will be discussing the development of nutrient criteria during a panel session at the upcoming AMSA summer conference, "Water Quality Standards. . . Facing Challenges, Making Choices..." to be held on July 14-17, 1998. CONTACT: Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106 or Bob Cantilli, EPA 202/260-5546.
EPA Proposes New Analytical Method for Mercury
Background: EPA has promulgated WQC for mercury at 12 parts-per-trillion (ppt) in the National Toxics Rule, and published guidance criteria for mercury at 1.8 ppt in the Water Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System. However, the most sensitive currently approved methods for mercury are capable of achieving a quantitation level of 200 ng/L (parts-per-trillion; ppt). Methods currently approved at 40 CFR part 136 measure mercury by purging mercury vapor from a water sample into a specially designed chamber placed in the light beam of an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
Status: In the May 26, 1998 Federal Register, EPA published a proposed new analytical method for mercury, EPA Method 1631; Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence. Method 1631 measures mercury by purging mercury vapor from a water sample onto a gold trap and thermally desorbing the mercury from the trap into an atomic fluorescence spectrometer. Purging the mercury onto the gold trap concentrates the mercury and allows water vapor from the sample to be vented, and use of atomic fluorescence provides an increased response compared to atomic absorption. As a result, EPA Method 1631 is approximately 200 times more sensitive than currently approved methods for determination of mercury. Method 1631 would need to be used in conjunction with clean sampling and laboratory techniques to preclude contamination at the low ppt levels necessary for mercury determinations. EPA has developed guidance documents on sampling and clean rooms for trace metals, including mercury. AMSA’s Water Quality Committee is reviewing the proposed analytical method. CONTACT: Maria Gomez-Taylor, EPA 202/260-1639 or Mark Hoeke, AMSA 202/833-9106.
Related Items of Interest
On July 7-9, the National Water-Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC) will host a conference on "Monitoring: Critical Foundations to Protect our Waters" at the Silver Legacy Hotel in Reno, Nevada. The conference will cover a variety of monitoring issues including science, policies and management. The importance of monitoring to ecosystem/infrastructure sustainability and the need for scientifically based monitoring to help make changes in water management policy and practices are among the numerous topics that will be the focus of the workshop. The NWQMC hopes the conference will: provide relevant data/information necessary to evaluate trends in the health of ecosystems and watershed; provide a forum for communication and collaboration among monitoring personnel and agencies, including participants from the volunteer monitoring community; encourage the sharing of successful monitoring designs, protocol, methods and innovative data management ideas using ongoing monitoring efforts as case studies; and, encourage public participation and raise awareness of the availability of electronic databases and how to utilize current technologies in sharing monitoring data in collaboration at the national, regional and local levels. For a copy of the agenda, registration information or online registration, please visit http://gwpc.site.net or call 405/848-0690.
The Advisory Committee on Water Information has scheduled a meeting for August 17-19, 1998, in Denver, Colorado. For more information, please contact Beth Cox, USGS at 703/648-6823 or bethcox@usgs.gov.
Bob Perciasepe, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water, and Dana Minerva, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water released EPA's National Water Program Agenda for 1998-1999 on June 10, 1998. The Water Agenda presents how the Clean Water Action Plan and the new Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments fit into EPA's Office of Water's broader planning activities for its goal to achieve clean and safe water. The Water Agenda highlights the objectives and general directions within the Clean Water Program, within the Safe Drinking Water Program, in EPA's work with states and tribes, and in EPA's system of planning and accountability. Over the coming year, EPA will finalize a multi-year plan that integrates the steps needed to implement the Clean Water Action Plan, the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments, the Office of Water's tribal strategy, and other long term activities of the Agency. The National Water Program Agenda can be found on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/OW/ownews/agenfin.cfml.
EPA is sponsoring a meeting on water quality standards titled, "Strengthening the Foundation of the Nation’s Water Quality Programs on August 24 - 27, 1998 in Philadelphia, PA. The meeting will provide an exchange of scientific, technical, and policy information on water standards, water quality criteria, and implementation including, water quality-based permitting. EPA is accepting pre-applications until Friday, August 14, 1998. For additional information, contact EPA’s contractor: Crystal Smith, Cadmus Group, 703/998-6862 x2190, or visit EPA’s web site at http://www.epa.gov/OST/announce/watrqlty.cfml.