Standards Handbook Handbookintro

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    1/16

    Introduction

    INTRODUCTION

    HISTORY OF THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS PROGRAM

    Statutory HistoryThe first comprehensive legislation for waterpollution control was the Water Pollution ControlAct of 1948 (Public Law 845, 80th Congress).This law, passed after a half century of debate onthe responsibility of the Federal Government forresolving water pollution problems, adoptedprinciples of State-Federal cooperative programdevelopment, limited Federal enforcementauthority, and provided limited financialassistance. These concepts were continued in theFederal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) of1956 (Public Law 660, 84th Congress) and in theWater Quality Act of 1965. Under the 1965 Act,States were directed to develop water qualitystandards for interstate waters. As a result ofenforcement complexities and other problems,however, this approach was not sufficientlyeffective. In the FWPCA Amendments of 1972(Public Law 92-500), Congress established adischarge permit system and provided a broaderFederal role through more extensive Federalgrants to finance local sewage treatment systemsand through Federal (EPA) setting oftechnology-based effluent limitations. The 1972Amendments extended the water quality standardsprogram to intrastate waters and provided forimplementation of water quality standards throughdischarge permits.Section 303(c) of the 1972 FWPCA Amendments(33 USC 1313(c)) established the statutory basisfor the current water quality standards program.It completed the transition from the previouslyestablished program of water quality standards forinterstate waters to one requiring standards for allsurface waters of the United States.

    Although the major innovation of the 1972FWPCA was technology-based controls, Congressmaintained the concept of water quality standardsboth as a mechanism to establish goals for theNations waters and as a regulatory requirementwhen standardized technology controls for pointsource discharges and/or nonpoint source controlswere inadequate. In recent years, Congress andEPA have given these water quality-based controlsnew emphasis in the continuing quest to enhanceand maintain water quality to protect the publichealth and welfare.Briefly stated, the key elements of section 303(c)are as foIlows:

    (1) A water quality standard is defined as thedesignated beneficial uses of a watersegment and the water quality criterianecessary to support those uses;

    (2) The minimum beneficial uses to beconsidered by States in establishing waterquality standards are specified as publicwater supplies, propagation of fish andwildlife, recreation, agricultural uses,industrial uses, and navigation;

    (3) A requirement specifies that State standardsmust protect public health or welfare,enhance the quality of water, and serve thepurposes of the Clean Water Act;

    (4) A requirement specifies that States mustreview their standards at least once each 3-year period using a process that includespublic participation;

    (9/15/93) INT-1

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    2/16

    Water Quality Standards Handbook - Second Edition(5) The process is described for EPA review of

    State standards that might ultimately result inthe promulgation of a superseding Federalrule in cases where a States standards arenot consistent with the applicablerequirements of the CWA, or in situationswhere the Agency determines that Federalstandards are necessary to meet therequirements of the Act.

    The Federal Water Pollution Control Act,including the major 1977, 1981, and 1987Amendments are commonly referred to as theClean Water Act (the Act or CWA).On February 4, 1987, Congress enacted the WaterQuality Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-4), makingsubstantial additions to the Clean Water Act anddirectly affecting the standards program.Congress concluded that toxic pollutants in waterconstitute one of the most pressing water pollutionproblems. The Water Quality Act provided a newapproach to controlling toxic pollutants byrequiring. . . States to identify waters that donot meet water quality standards due to thedischarge of toxic substances, to adopt numericalcriteria for the pollutants in such waters, and toestablish effluent limitations for individualdischarges to such water bodies (from SenatorMitchell, 133 Congressional Record S733). Asnow amended, the Clean Water Act requires thatStates adopt numeric criteria for toxic pollutantslisted under section 307(a) of the Clean Water Actfor which section 304(a) criteria have been

    published, if the presence of these pollutants islikely to adversely affect the water bodys use.Guidance on these changes is discussed in detailin section 3.4 of this Handbook. Additionally,for the first time, the Act explicitly recognizesantidegradation (see section 303(d)(4) of the Act).

    Regulatory HistoryEPA first published a water quality standardsregulation in 1975 (40 CFR 130.17, promulgatedin 40 F.R. 55334, November 28, 1975) as part ofEPAs water quality management regulations,mandated under section 303(e) of the Act. Thefirst Water Quality Standards Regulation did notspecifically address toxic pollutants or any othercriteria. It simply required appropriate waterquality criteria necessary to support designateduses.In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the public andCongress raised concerns about toxic pollutantcontrol. EPA realized that promulgating effluentguidelines or effluent standards under section 307of the Act would not comprehensively addresstoxic pollutants. So, EPA decided to use thestatutory connection between water qualitystandards and NPDES permits provided by section301(b)(1)(C) to effectively control a range of toxicpollutants from point sources. To best accomplishthis process, the Agency decided to amend theWater Quality Standards Regulation to explicitlyaddress toxic criteria requirements in State

    INT-2 (9/15/93)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    3/16

    htroductionstandards. Other legal and programmatic issuesalso necessitated a revision of the StandardsRegulation. The culmination of this effort wasthe promulgation of the present Water QualityStandards Regulation on November 8, 1983 (54F.R. 51400).The present Water Quality Standards Regulation(40 CFR Part 131) is a much more comprehensiveregulation than its predecessor. In subpart B, theRegulation addresses both the designated usecomponent and the criteria component of a waterquality standard. Section 131.11 of theRegulation requires States to review availableinformation and . . . to identify specific waterbodies where toxic pollutants may be adverselyaffecting water quality . . . and must adoptcriteria for such toxic pollutants applicable to thewater body sufficient to protect the designateduse. The Regulation provides that either or bothnumeric and narrative criteria may beappropriately used in water quality standards.Since the middle of the 1980s, EPAs annualprogram guidance to the States reflected theincreasing emphasis on controlling toxics. Stateswere strongly encouraged o adopt criteria in theirstandards for the pollutants listed pursuant tosection 307(a) of the Act, especially where EPAhas published criteria guidance under section304(a) of the Act.State reaction to EPAs initiative was mixed.Several States proceeded to adopt large numbersof numeric toxic pollutant criteria, ahhoughprimarily for the protection of aquatic life. OtherStates relied on a narrative free from toxicitycriterion, using so-called action levels for toxicpollutants or for calculating site-specific criteria.Few States specifically addressed human healthprotection outside the National Primary DrinkingWater Standards promulgated under the SafeDrinking Water Act.In support of its 1983 regulation, EPAsimultaneously issued program guidance entitledWater Qua&y Sramiards Handbook (December1983). The foreword to the guidance noted that

    EPAs approach to controlling toxics includedboth chemical-specific numeric criteria andbiological testing in whole-effluents or ambientwaters. More detailed programmatic guidance onthe application of biological testing was providedin the Technical Suppon Documeru for WaterQuality-based Toxics Control (EPA 4414-85-032,September 1985). This document provides theinformation needed to convert chemical-specificand biologically based criteria into permit limitsfor point source dischargers.State water quality standards reviews submittedbegan o show the effects of EPAs efforts. Moreand more numeric criteria for toxics were beingincluded in State standards as well as moreaggressiveuseof the free from toxics narrativesin setting protective NPDES permit limits.However, because of perceived problems inadopting numeric toxic pollutant criteria in Staterulemaking proceedings, many States werereluctant to adopt numeric toxics criteria. Thus,in 1987, Congress responded to the lack ofnumeric criteria for toxic pollutants within Statestandards by mandating State adoption of suchcriteria.In response to this new congressional mandate,EPA redoubled its efforts to promote and assistState adoption of water quality standards forpriority toxic pollutants. EPAs efforts includedthe development and issuance of guidance to theStates on December 12, 1988, which containedacceptable mplementation procedures for severalnew sections of the Act, including sections3WWW).

    (9/15/93) INT-3

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    4/16

    Water Quality SM Handbook - Second EditionEPA, in devising guidance for section303(c)(2)(B), attempted to provide States with themaximum flexibility that complied with theexpress statutory language but also with theoverriding congressional objective: promptadoption and implementation of numeric toxicscriteria. EPA believed that flexibility wasimportant so that each State could comply withsection 303(c)(2)(B) and to the extent possible,accommodate ts existing water quality standardsregulatory approach. The options EPA identifiedare described in section 3.4.1 of this Handbook.EPAs December 1988 guidance also addressedthe timing issue for State compliance with section303(c)(2)(B). The statutory directive was clear:all State standards triennial reviews initiated afterpassage f the Act must include a consideration ofnumeric toxic criteria.States significantly responded to the 1987requirement for numeric criteria for toxicpollutants. For example, in 1986 on average,each State had 10 numeric criteria for freshwateraquatic life. By February 1990, the averagenumber of freshwater aquatic life criteria wasincreased to 30. Also, States averaged 36numeric criteria for human health in February1990. However, by September 1990, many Stateshad failed to fully satisfy the requirements ofsection 303(c)(2)(B).The addition of section 303(c)(2)(B) to the CleanWater Act was an unequivocal signal to the Statesthat Congress wanted toxics criteria in the Stateswater quality standards. EPA, consistent withthis mandate, initiated Federal promulgation oftoxic criteria for those States that had notcomplied with the Act. EPA proposed Federalcriteria for toxic pollutants for 22 States andTerritories, based on a preliminary assessment fcompliance, on November 19, 1991 (56 F.R.58420), and promulgated toxic criteria for 14 ofthose States on December 22, 1992 (57 F.R.60848).

    INT-4 (9/15/93)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    5/16

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    6/16

    Watm Quality FAandukWbook-SeccmdEdilioohas not been substantively changed.Adoption of criteria for toxic pollutants isdiscussed n sehon 3.4.

    Variances in Water Quality Standurdr (USEPA,1985g), reinterprets the factors that could beconsidered when granting water qualitystandardsvariances. Va.riances re discussedin section 5.3.

    Anti&gradation, Waste Iootir, a& Pennits(USEPA, 1985h), ckuifies that thean idegradation policy is an integralcomponent of water quality standards andmust be considered when developing wasteload allocations and NPDES permits.Antidegradation is discussed n chapter 4.Questions and Answers on Aruidegradafion(Appendix G), provides guidance on variousaspects of the antidegradation policy wherequestions had arisen since the 1983Regulation and Handbook were published.Antidegradation Policy (USEPA, 1985i),reiterates the need for all States o have: (1)an antidegradation policy that fully complieswith the Federal requirements, and (2) aprocedure for consistentiy implementing that

    policy.Answers to Questions on Nonpoint Sources and

    WQS (USEPA, 1986e), responded to twoquestions on nonpoint source pollution andwater quality standards. The relationshipbetween nonpoint source pollution and waterquality standards s discussed n section 7.Determination of Existing Uses for Purposes ofWater Quality Standards Implementation

    (USEPA, 1986f), responds to concernsexpressed to EPA on the interpretation ofwhen a recreational use becomes anexisting use as defined by the Regulation.Discussion of existing uses is contained insection 4.4.

    Nonpoint Source Controls und Water QualityStandards (USEPA, 1987d), provides furtherguidance on nonpoint sources pollution andwater quality standards reflecting therequirements of section 319 of the CWA asadded by the 1987 CWA amendments.

    EPA Designation of Outstanding NationalResource Watery (USEPA, 19890, restatesthe basis for EPAs practice of notdesignating State waters as OutstandingNational ResourceWaters (ONRW) where aState does not do so. ONRWs are discussedin section 4.6.Guidance for the Use of Condirioncl Apptowls

    for Star4 WQS (USEPA, 1989g), providesguidelines for regional offices to use ingranting State water quality standardsapprovals conditioned on the performance ofspecified actions by the State. Conditionalapprovals are discussed n section 6.2.3.

    Applicufion of Anti&gradation Policy to theNiagara River (USEPA, 1989c), providesguidance on acceptable nterpretations of theantidegradation policy to help attain theCWA objective to restore and maintain theintegrity of the Nations waters.

    Designation of Recreation Uses USEPA, 1989h),summarizes previously issued guidance, andoutlines a number of acceptableState optionsfor designating recreational uses. The usedesignation process s discussed n chapter 2.

    Biological Criteria: National Program Guidancefor Surfac Waters (Appendix C), providesguidance on the effective development andapplication of biological criteria in the waterquality standards program. Biologicalcriteria are discussed n section 3.5.3.

    National Guidance: Water Quality Standards forWetlands (Appendix D), provides guidancefor meeting the EPA priority to developwater quality standards or wetlands.

    MT-6 (9115193)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    7/16

    Section 401 certification and FERC licenses(USEPA, 1991h), clarifies the range ofwater quality standards elements that Statesneed to apply when making CWA section401 certification decisions. Section 401 ofthe CWA is discussed in section 7.6.3.Technical Support Document for Warer Quality-based Toxics Control, (USEPA, 1991a),provides technical guidance for assessing ndregulating the discharge of toxic substancesto the waters of the United States.Policy on the Use of Biological Assessments and

    Criteria in the Water Quality Program(USEPA, 1991i), provides the basis forEPAs policy that biological surveys shall befully integrated with toxicity and chemical-specific assessmentmethods in State waterquality programs. Further discussion of thispolicy is contained in section 3.3.

    NUJTIQ~CWater Quulity Criteria for Wetlands(Appendix E), evaluates EPAs numericaquatic life criteria to determine how theycan be applied to wetlands. Wetland aquaticlife criteria are discussed n section 3.5.6.Endangered Species Act Joint Guidance

    (Appendix F), establishes a procedure bywhich EPA, the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService, and the National Marine FisheriesService will consult on the development ofwater quality criteria and standards.OflcQ of Water Policy and Technical Guidance on

    Iruerpretation and implementation of AquuticLife Metals Criteria (USEPA, 19930,transmits Office of Water (OW) policy andguidance on the interpretation andimplementation of aquatic life criteria for themanagement of metals. Section 3.6discussesEPAs policy on aquatic life metalscriteria.

    lntroducfionthe antidegradation policy in 40 CFR131.12(a)(2) as it relates to nonpointsources. Antidegradation and nonpointsources are discussed n Section 4.6.

    Interim Guidance on Determinufion and Use ofWater-Eflect Ratios for Metals (AppendixL), provides nterim guidance concerning theexperimental determination of water-effectratios (WERs) for metals and supersedes llguidance concerning water-effect ratios andthe Indicator Species Procedure in USEPA,1983a and in USEPA, 1984f. It alsosupersedes the guidance in these earlierdocuments for the Recalculation Procedurefor performing site-specific aquatic lifecriteria modifications. Site-specific aquaticlife criteria are discussed n Section 3.7.

    The guidance contained in each of the abovedocuments is either incorporated into the text ofthe appropriate section of this Handbook orattached as appendices (see Table of Contents).The reader is directed to the original guidancedocuments for the explicit guidance on the topicsdiscussed. Copies of all original guidancedocuments not attached as appendices may beobtained from the source isted for each documentin the Reference section of this Handbook.The Wuter Quality Star&& Handbook - SecondEilition is reorganized from the 1983 Handbook.An overview to Water Quality Standards andWater Quality Management programs has beenadded, and chapters 1 through 6 are organized toparallel the provisions of the Water QualityStandards Regulation. Chapter 7 brieflyintroduces the role of water quality standards nthe water quality-based approach to pollutioncontrol.The Water Quality Stundura3 Handbook - SecondEdition retains all the guidance in the 1983Handbook unless such guidance was specificallyrevised in subsequentyears.

    IntQr

    (

    pretation of Federal AntidegradationRegulatory Requirement (USEPA, 1994a),provides guidance on the interpretation of

    8l15194) INT-7

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    8/16

    Water Quality Standards Handbook - Second EditionOVERVIEW OF THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS PROGRAM

    A water quality standard defines the water qualitygoals of a water body, or portion thereof, bydesignating the use or uses to be made of thewater, by setting criteria necessary o protect theuses, and by preventing degradation of waterquality through antidegradation provisions. Statesadopt water quality standards to protect publichealth or welfare, enhance the quality of water,and serve the purposes of the Clean Water Act.Serve the purposes of the Act (as defined insections 101(a), 101(a)(2), and 303(c) of the Act)means hat water quality standards:l include provisions for restoring and

    maintaining chemical, physical, andbiological integrity of State waters;a wherever attainable, achieve a level of waterquality that provides for the protection andpropagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife,and recreation in and on the water(fishable/swimmable); and0 consider the use and value of State watersfor public water supplies, propagation of fish

    and wildlife, recreation, agriculture andindustrial purposes, and navigation.Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act providesthe statutory basis for the water quality standardsprogram. The regulatory requirements governingthe program, the Water Quality StandardsRegularion, are published at 40 CFR 131. TheRegulation is divided into four subparts (Athrough D), which are summarized below.General Provisions (40 CFR 131 - Subpart A)Subpart A includes the scope (section 131.1) andpurpose (section 131.2) of the Regulation,definitions of terms used in the Regulation(section 131.3), State (section 131.4) and EPA(section 131.5) authority for water qualitystandards, and the minimum requirements for aNT-8

    State water quality standards submission (section131.6).On December 12, 1991, the EPA promulgatedamendments to Subpart A of the Water QualityStandards Regulation in response to the CWAsection 518 requirements (see 56 F.R. 64875).The Amendments:l establish a mechanism to resolveunreasonable consequences hat may resultfrom an lndian Tribe and a State adoptingdiffering water quality standardson commonbodies of water (section 131.7); and0 add proceduresby which an Indian Tribe canqualify for the section 303 water qualitystandards and section 401 certificationprograms of the Clean Water Act (section131.8).The sectionsof Subpart A are discussed n chapter1.Establishment of Water Quality Standards -(Subpart B)Subpart B contains regulatory requirements thatmust be included in State water quality standards:designated uses (section 131. o), criteria thatprotect the designated uses (section 131.1 ), andan antidegradation policy that protects existinguses and high water quality (section 131.12).Subpart B also provides for State discretionarypolicies, such as mixing zones and water qualitystandardsvariances (section 131.13).Each of these sections is summarized below anddiscussed in detail in chapters 2 through 5respectively.

    Designation of UsesThe Water Quality StandardsRegulation requiresthat States specify appropriate water uses to be

    (9 15/93)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    9/16

    achieved and protected by taking intoconsideration the use and value of the water bodyfor public water supply, for propagation of fish,shellfish, and wildlife, and for recreational,agricultural, industrial, and navigational purposes.in designating uses for a water body, Statesexamine the suitability of a water body for theuses based on the physical, chemical, andbiological characteristics of the water body, itsgeographical setting and scenic qualities, and thesociakconomic and cultural characteristicsof thesurrounding area. Each water body does notnecessarily require a unique set of uses. Instead,the characteristics necessary o support a use canbe identified so that water bodies having thosecharacteristics might be grouped together assupporting particular uses.Any water body with standardsnot consistent withthe section 101(a)(2) goals of the Act must bereexamined every 3 years to determine if newinformation has become available that wouldwarrant a revision of the standard. In addition,the Regulation requires that where existing waterquality standardsspecify designateduses ess thanthose which are presently being attained, the Stateshall revise its standards to reflect the usesactually being attained.When reviewing uses, States must perform andsubmit to EPA a use attainability analysis if:0 either the State designatesor has designateduses that do not include the uses specified insection 101(a)(2) of the Act;0 the State wishes to remove a designated usethat is specified in section 101(a)(2); or0 the State wishes to adopt subcategories of

    uses specified in section 101(a)(2) thatrequire less stringent criteria than arecurrently adopted.States may adopt seasonalusesas an alternative toreclassifying a water body or segment thereof touses requiring less stringent criteria. In no casemay a State remove an existing use. No use

    attainability analysis is required when designatinguses that include those specified in section101(a)(2) of the Act.Criteria Development and Review

    States adopt water quality criteria with sufficientcoverageof parametersand of adequatestringencyto protect designated uses. In adopting criteria toprotect the designated uses, States may:l adopt the criteria that EPA publishes undersection 304(a) of the Act;l modify the section 304(a) guidance to reflectsite-specific conditions; orl use other scientifically defensible methods.Section 131.11 encourages States to adopt bothnumeric and narrative criteria. Numeric criteriaare important where the cause of toxicity isknown or for protection against pollutants withpotential human health impacts or potential forbioaccumulation. Narrative toxic criteria, basedon whole-effluent toxicity (WET) testing, can bethe basis for limiting toxicity in waste dischargeswhere a specific pollutant can be identified ascausing or contributing to the toxicity but thereare no numeric criteria in the State standards orwhere toxicity cannot be traced to a particularpollutant. Whole-effluent toxicity testing is alsoappropriate for discharges containing multiplepollutants becauseWET testing provides a methodfor evaluating synergistic and antagonistic effectson aquatic life.Section 303(c)(2)(B) requires States to adoptcriteria for all section 307(a) toxic pollutants forwhich the Agency has published criteria undersection 304(a) of the Act, if the discharge orpresence of the pollutant could reasonably beexpected to interfere with the designated uses ofthe water body. The section 307(a) list contains65 compoundsand families of compounds, whichthe Agency has interpreted to include 126priority toxic pollutants for regulatory purposes.If data indicate that it is reasonable to expect that

    (9/15/93) MT-9

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    10/16

    Water Quality Standards Handbook - Second Editionone or more of the section 307(a) toxic pollutantswill interfere with the attainment of the designateduse, or is actually interfering with the designateduse, then the State must adopt a numeric limit forthe specific pollutant. Section 303(c)(2)(B) alsoprovides that where EPA-recommended numericcriteria are not available, States shall adoptcriteria based on biological monitoring orassessmentmethods.

    Antidqradation Policy and Imple-mentation Methods

    Water quality standards nclude an antidegradationpolicy and methods through which the Stateimplements the antidegradation policy. Section131.12 sets out a three-tiered approach for theprotection of water quality.Tier 1 (40 CFR 13 .l2(a)( 1)) of antidegradationmaintains and protects existing uses and thewater quality necessary o protect these uses. Anexisting use can be established by demonstratingthat fishing, swimming, or other uses haveactually occurred since November 28, 1975, QIthat the water quality is suitable to allow suchuses to occur, whether or not such uses aredesignated uses for the water body in question.Tier 2 (section 131.12(a)(2)) protects the waterquality in waters whose quality is better than thatnecessary o protect fishable/ swimmable usesof the water body. 40 CFR 131.12(a)(2) requiresthat certain procedures be followed and certainshowings be made (an antidegradation review)before lowering water quality in high-qualitywaters. In no case may water quality on a Tier IIwater body be lowered to the level at whichexisting uses are impaired.Tier 3 (section 131.12 (a)(3)) protectsoutstanding national resource waters (ONRWs),which are provided the highest level of protectionunder the antidegradation policy. ONRWsgenerally include the highest quality waters of theUnited States. However, the ONRWantidegradation classification also offers specialprotection for waters of exceptional ecological

    significance, i.e., those water bodies which areimportant, unique, or sensitive ecologically, butwhose water quality, as measured by thetraditional parameters such as dissolved oxygenor pH, may not be particularly high. Waters ofexceptional ecological significance also includewaters whose characteristics cannot adequately bedescribed by traditional parameters (such aswetlands and estuaries).Antidegradation implementation proceduresaddress how States will ensure that the permitsand control programs meet water quality standardsand antidegradation policy requirements.

    General PoliciesThe Water Quality Standards Regulation allowsStates o include in their standards State policiesand provisions regarding water quality standardsimplementation, such as mixing zones, variances,and low-flow exemptions subject to EPA reviewand approval. These policies and provisionsshould be specified in the States water qualitystandards document. The States rationale andsupporting documentation should be submitted toEPA for review during the water quality standardsreview and approval process.

    Miring ZonesStates may, at their discretion, allow mixingzones for dischargers. The States water qualitystandards should describe the methodology fordetermining the location, size, shape, outfalldesign, and in-zone quality of mixing zones.Careful consideration must be given to the

    IN-T-10 (9/15/93)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    11/16

    appropriateness of a mixing zone where asubstance discharged is bioaccumulative,persistent, carcinogenic, mutagenic, orteratogenic.L4.Jw470wF%misions

    State water quality standardsshould protect waterquality for the designated and existing uses incritical low-flow situations. Statesmay, however,designate a critical low-flow below whichnumerical water quality criteria do not apply.When reviewing standards, States should reviewtheir low-flow provisions for conformance withEPA guidance.Water Quality Standads Variances

    As an alternative to removing a designateduse, aState may wish to include a variance as part of awater quality standard, rather than change thestandard across the board, because the Statebelieves that the standard ultimately can beattained. By maintaining the standard rather thanchanging it, the State will assure that furtherprogress is made in improving water quality andattaining the standard. EPA has approved State-adopted variances in the past and will continue todo so if:

    the variance is included as part of the waterquality standard;the variance is subjected to the same publicreview as other changes in water qualitystandards;the variance is granted based on ademonstration that meeting the standard isnot feasible due to the presenceof any of thesame conditions as if the State wereremoving a designated use (these conditionsare listed in section 131.10(g) of theRegulation); andexisting uses will be fully protected.

    InIruducfionWater Quality Standards Review and RevisionProcess - (Subpart C)The Clean Water Act requires States to hold apublic hearing(s) to review their water qualitystandardsat least once every 3 years and revisethem if appropriate. After State water qualitystandards a officially adopted, a Governor ordesignee submits the standards to the appropriateEPA Regional Administrator for review. EPAreviews the State standards to determine whetherthe analyses performed are adequate. TheAgency also evaluateswhether the designatedusesand criteria are compatible throughout the waterbody and whether the downstream water qualitystandards are protected. After reviewing thestandards, EPA makes a determination whetherthe standards meet the requirements of the lawand EPAs water quality standards egulations. IfEPA disapprovesa standard, the Agency indicateswhat changesmust be made for the standard 10beapproved. If a State fails to make the requiredchanges, EPA promulgates a Federal standard,setting forth a new or revised water qualitystandard applicable to the State.

    State Review and Revision

    States dentify additions or revisions necessary oexisting standards based on their 305(b) reports,other available water quality monitoring data,previous water quality standards reviews, orrequests rom industry, environmental groups, orthe public. Water quality standards reviews andrevisions may take many forms, includingadditions to and modifications in uses, n criteria,in the antidegradation policy, in theantidegradation implementation procedures, or inother general policies.Some States review parts of their water qualitystandards every year. Other States perform acomprehensive review every 3 years. Suchreviews are necessarybecause new scientific andtechnical data may become available.Environmental changes over time may alsonecessitate he need for the review.

    (9/15/93) NT-11

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    12/16

    Water Quality Standuds H&boo& - Secoad EdithEPA Review

    When Statesadopt new or revised WQS, the Stateis required under CWA section 303(c) to submitsuch standards to EPA for review andapproval/disapproval. EPA reviews andapproves/disapproves the standards based onwhether the standards meet the requirements ofthe CWA. As a result of the EPA reviewprocess, three actions are possible:l EPA approval (in whole or in part) of thesubmitted State water quality standards; orl EPA disapproval (in whole or in part) of thesubmitted State water quality standards; orl EPA conditional approval (in whole or in

    ~~~sthe submitted State water quality.Revisions to State water quality standards thatmeet the requirements of the Act and the WQSRegulation are approved by the appropriate EPARegional Administrator. If only a partial approvalis made, the Region, in notifying the State,identifies the portions which should be revised(e.g., segment-specific requirements).If the Regional Administrator determines that therevisions submitted are not consistent with or donot meet the requirements of the Act or the WQSRegulation, the Regional Administratordisapproves the standards within 90 days with awritten notification to the State. The letternotifies the State that the Administrator willinitiate promulgation proceedings f the State failsto adopt and submit the necessary evisions within90 days after notification. The State water qualitystandard remains in effect, even thoughdisapproved by EPA, until the State revises it orEPA promulgates a rule that supersedes he Statewater quality standard.

    Federally Promulgated Water QualityStandards - (Subpart D)As discussedabove, EPA may promulgate FederalWater Quality Standards. Section 303 of theClean Water Act permits the Administrator topromulgate Federal standards:l if a revised or new water quality standardssubmitted by the State is determined by theAdministrator not to be consistent with theapplicable requirements of the Act; orl in any case where the Administratordetermines that a new or revised standard snecessary to meet the requirements of theAct.Federal promulgations are codified under SubpartD of the Regulation.

    NT-12 (9115193)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    13/16

    InmxiucrionTHE ROLE OF WQS IN THE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENTPROGRAM

    State water quality standards play a centralrole in a States water quality managementprogram, which identifies the overall mechanismStates use to integrate the various Clean WaterAct quality control requirements into a coherentmanagement framework. This frameworkincludes, for example:

    setting and revising standards for waterbodies;Water Quality Assessments to determineattainment of designated uses;CWA section 305(b) water qualitymonitoring to provide information uponwhich water quality-based decisions will bemade, progress evaluated, and successmeasured;calculating total maximum daily loads(TMDLs), waste load allocations (WLAs)for point sources of pollution, and loadallocations (LAS) for nonpoint sources ofpollution;developing a water quality managementplan,certified by the Governor and approved byEPA, which lists the standards andprescribes the regulatory and constructionactivities necessary o meet the standards;preparing section 305(b) reports and liststhat document the condition of the Stateswater quality;developing, revising, and implementing aneffective CWA section 319 program andCZARA section 62 17 program to controlNPS pollution;

    l making decisions involving CWA section401 certification of Federal permits orlicenses; andl issuing NPDES permits for all point sourcedischarges. Permits are written to meetapplicable water quality standards.The Act provides the basis for two different kindsof pollution control programs. Water qualitystandardsare the basis of the water quality-basedcontrol program. The Act also provides fortechnology-based imits known as best availabletreatment technology economically achievable forindustry and secondary treatment for publiclyowned treatment works. In some cases,application of these echnologically basedcontrolswill result in attaining water quality standards.Where such is not the case, the Act requires thedevelopment of more stringent limitations to meetthe water quality standards.Regulations, policy, and guidance have beenissued on all the activities mentioned in thissection. Chapter 7 contains a brief discussion ofhow water quality standards relate to many ofthese activities in the water quality-basedapproach to pollution control, but additionaldetails on these other programs is beyond thescopeof this Handbook. For further information,see the EPA guidance documents referenced inchapter 7.

    (9115193) IN-F-13

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    14/16

    water Quality Smdarda H&boo& - Saxod EdiliobFUTURE PROGRAM DIRECTIONS

    Since the 1960s, the water science program hasmoved from solving a limited set of problems ina limited set of waters to one that is solving abroad range of complex problems in categoriesofU.S. waters and addressing cross-mediaaspectsofwater quality decisions. Initial efforts focused onthe more visible sources of pollution such asorganic loadings, solids, oil, and grease, and thenshifted to toxics and more complex mixtures ofpolhnants.Developments in two areas have significantlyaffected the scientific underpinnings of the waterprogram. First is the science of risk assessmentused to estimate risk to human health and theenvironment from exposure to contaminants.Second is our ability to measure pollutants in theenvironment at an increasing level of precision.The evolution of methods and capabilities withinthese two scientific disciplines has significantlyadvanced the sophistication of scientific analysesused to manage the water program.As the water science program moves toward the21st Century, we must provide technicalinformation and tools that allow States, theregulated community, and the public tounderstand and apply the methods, criteria, andstandards to environmental systems. Thisincludes updating science and adaptingtechnologies as appropriate to keep the foundationof our program solid as well as employing ormodifying these approacheswhen appropriate fornew problems.The CWA provides broad authority through itsgoals and policy, such as:

    . . . to restore and maintain thechemical, physical, and biologicalintegrity of the Nations waters (section101(a)); and

    . . . wherever attainable . . . waterquality which provides for the

    protection and propagation of fish,shellfish, and wildlife . . . to protectthe water of the United States (sectionWa)W

    The breadth of this authority is also reflected inspecific EPA mandates such as those in section304(a):

    [EPA] shall develop and publish . . .criteria for water accurately reflectingthe latest scientific knowledge (A) onthe kind and extent of all identifiableeffects on health and welfare . . . (B)on the concentration and dispersion ofpollutants . . . through biological,physical, and chemical processes; and(C) the effects of pollutants onbiological community diversity,productivity, stability . . . includingeutrophication and rates of . , .sedimentation . . . (CWA section3@WN1)); and[EPA] shall develop and publish . . .information (A) on the factorsnecessary to restore and maintain thechemical, physical, and biologicalintegrity . . . (B) on the factorsnecessary for the protection andpropagation of shellfish, fish, andwildlife . . . and to allow recreationalactivities in and on the water . . . .)(304(a)(2))(CWA section 304(a)(2))

    EPA has traditionally focused on criteria forchemical pollutants, but has also developedcriteria for a limited number of physical (e.g.,color, turbidity, dissolves solids) and biological(bacteria, free from nuisance aquatic life)parameters (NAS/NAE, 1973; USEPA, 1976).However, as EPAs water quality protectionprogram has evolved, it has become apparent thatchemical criteria alone, without the criteria for thebiological and physical/habitat components ofIN-F-14 (9/15/93)

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    15/16

    huroduaionwater bodies, are insufficient to fully achieve thegoals of the CWA.Future directions in the criteria and standardsprogram will focus on providing scientific andtechnical tools to aid regional, State, and localenvironmental managers n (1) implementating thestandards program, and (2) developing newscience and technology that will reduce humanand ecological risks resulting from exposure tounaddressed contaminants and prevent pollutionfrom point and nonpoint sources.Setting future national program priorities will bebased on the consideration of risk assessment;statutory and court-mandated obligations; theexpressed needs of regional, State, and localenvironmental managers and the regulatedcommunity; and the potential effectiveness of aprogram to influence real environmentalimprovement.EPA will be developing methodologies andcriteria in areas beyond the traditional chemical-specific type criteria of the past. Areas ofscientific examination and potential regulatorycontrols include criteria to protect wildlife,wetlands, and sediment quality; biological criteriato better define desired biological communities inaquatic ecosystems; and nutrient criteria. EPAhas also moved in the direction of the physicaland habitat componentsof water quality protectionin other water quality programs. For example,the CWA section 404(b)(l) Guidelines (40 CFR230) evaluate physical characteristics (such assuspended particulates, flow, and hydroperiod),and habitat components (such as food weborganisms, breeding/nesting areas, and cover).Implementation of these various types of criteriawill be influenced by the environmental concernsin specific watersheds.To protect human health, program emphasis willshift to focus on the human health impacts ofpathogenic microorganisms in ambient waters thatcause llness in humans, and will addressconcernsabout the risk that contaminated fish may pose to

    sensitive populations whose daily diet includeslarge quantities of fish.In an expanded effort to protect ecology, therewill be increasing emphasis on the watershedapproach by assessing all potential and actualthreats to a watersheds integrity. Riskassessment f the watershed and setting prioritiesbased on those risks will become increasinglyimportant in future program efforts in criteria andstandardsas supporting elements to the watershedapproach.Over the next few years, there will be moreemphasis on developing effective risk reductionstrategies that include both traditional and non-traditional controls and approaches.Future program directions in criteria developmentand then adoption and implementation of waterquality standardswill be based on the principle ofecological and human health risk reductionthrough sound and implementable science.Endangered Species ActAn important consideration in future criteria andstandardsdevelopment will be the conduct of theconsultation provisions of the Endangered SpeciesAct (ESA) and the implementation of anyrevisions to standards resulting from thoseconsultations. Section 7 of the EndangeredSpecies Act requires all Federal agencies, inconsultation with the Fish and Wildlife Serviceand the National Marine Fisheries Service (theServices) to assure that any action authorized,funded, or implemented by a Federal agency doesnot jeopardize the existence of endangered orthreatened species or result in the destruction oradverse modification of their critical habitat. Thedefinition of a Federal action is very broad andencompasses virtually every water programadministered by EPA.The responsibility for ensuring that consultationoccurs with the Services lies with EPA, althoughin fulfilling the requirements a non-Federalrepresentative may be designated for informal

    (9115193) RR-15

  • 8/13/2019 Standards Handbook Handbookintro

    16/16

    Water QuaIity Standards Handbook - Second Editionconsultation. (Note: Consultation may be formalor informal; the latter form is the most prevalent.)Protection of threatened and endangered speciesand their habitat is a critical national priority, andthe criteria and standards programs can beeffective tools to meet this national priority. Allaspects of standards, including aquatic lifecriteria, uses,antidegradation, and mplementationactions related to the standards are subject toconsultation. All future revised aquatic lifecriteria, sediment, wildlife, and biological criteriawill be subject to the consultation requirements aswill their adoption into enforceable standards.To form an effective partnership between theServices and EPA in creating a framework formeeting the responsibilities under section 7 of theEndangered Species Act and applicable EPAregulations, the Services and EPA entered into ajoint guidance agreement in July 1992 (seeAppendix F). This agreement sets forth theprocedures to be followed by the Services andEPA to assure compliance with section 7 of theESA in the development of water quality criteriapublished pursuant to section 304(a) of the CWAand the adoption of water quality standardsundersection 303(c). This agreement also indicated thatthe regional and field offices of EPA and theServicescould establish sub-agreements pecifyinghow they would implement the joint nationalguidance.During the preparation of this second editionHandbook, the Services and EPA initiated a work

    group to develop a more extensive jointagreement. This group was charged with theresponsibility of reviewing the July 1992agreement, making appropriate revisions to thewater quality criteria and standards sections, andadding a new section discussing the consultationprocedures o be followed for the NPDES permitprogram. When the revised agreement isapproved by the Agencies, it will replace theagreement ncluded in this Handbook as AppendixF.Both the current agreement and the proposedrevision seek to ensure a nationally consistentconsultation process hat allows flexibility to dealwith site-specific issues and to streamline theprocess to minimize the regulatory burden. Theoverriding goal is to provide for the protectionand support of the recovery of threatened andendangeredspeciesand the ecosystemson whichthey depend.

    -.

    MT-16 (9/l 5/93)