Document jBR1vKkEmopkVbv0a58eRmM35

> 1 0 JON 1574 DSAFT WATER STRATEGY PAPER Second Edition EE[a[g[2i2[E)[a[g[a[3 A STATEMENT OF POLICY FOR IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 1972 FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT ' AMENDMENTS AND CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS OF THE 1972 MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARCH, AND SANCTUARIES ACT U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Washington,D.C. 20460 MQNS 039406 PREFACE This February IS, 1974 edition of the Water Strategy has been prepared for use and review by Federal, State, and local government officials end for the information of the public. Major changes to the previous 1973 edition have been made. This edition has also been expanded to include many areas of program activities that were not previously covered. This edition of the Strategy reflects the final decisions on the Federal Government's FY 1975 budget. Persons using the Strategy are reminded that the Strategy, while based on the law, is not the law, nor is it a regulation mandated by the law. It is guidance prepared for use by government agencies in implementing the Acts. The Strategy Paper is written under the aegis of the WateT Planning Division in EPA Headquarters. While much of the work under taken in its development has been performed by people within this Division, it more fully reflects the work of individuals within all EPA Headquarters program areas, and the participation of EPA's Regional Offices and the States. Cements on the Strategy are welcomed. They should be addressed to: kfalter S. Groszyk, Jr. Chief, Water Program Planning and Accomplishment Branch Water Planning Division (AW-454) Environmental Protection Agency Room 815, East Tower, Waterside Mall 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 A limited number of'additional copies of the Strategy Paper are available, and can be had upon request by writing to the above address. For those seeking a more general discussion of this area, EPA's Office of Public Affairs has prepared several pamphlets describing the provisions of the Act, and will have available a summary primer cov ering the contents of this Strategy Paper. HONS 039407 PURPOSE The Water Strategy Paper is designed to play an important part in imple menting the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. As a part of the management system for their implementation, the Paper will ensure that program activities, by conforming to a single strategy, are consistent among each other. It will further serve as a means of promoting awareness and encouraging public participation. The principal emphasis of the Strategy is on the implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, for which EPA has the major Federal responsibility. EPA's role under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act in regulating ocean dumping is also included. lloweveT, specific programs governing the protection of public water supplies are not included in this Paper. CONTENTS I. Strategic Overview A. Major Themes for FY 75 B. Sequence of Implementation through 1983 C. Program Outputs D. The Water Problem--The Current Condition II. Individual Program Strategies yK. Basis for Effluent Limitations - 1. Effluent Standards > 2. Water Quality Standards - 3. Toxic and Thermal Standards; Limitations Above BPWIT 6 BAT `''B. Permits and Compliance * C. Municipal Facilities--Grants and Operations '!>. Planning, Management, and Reporting - 1. Basin and Regional Planning ^ 2. The Management Stucture 3. Monitoring F.. Diffuse and Intermittent Sources /1. Non-Point Sources and Lake Restoration / ^2. Spills and In-Place Pollutants *f. Oceans and Groundwater G. Research and Development H. Institutional and Associated Program Areas Appendix: III. IV. V. VI. Program Summary Activity Schedules Index of Legislative and Program Requirements and Accomplishments Non-Point Sources: Specific Program Description Management Reporting System HONS 039A0d II. INDIVIDUAL PROGRAM STRATEGIES The basic elements of the Strategy for controlling water pollution are set by the scope and emphasis of the Act itself. Of all receiving voters, the Act focusses (Federal) attention on navigable waters first. Of all dischirgers into these navigable waters, the Act assigns highest priority to point sources for control. . . Accordingly, the initial sections of this part of the Water Strategy concern programs for the control of stationary point sources, discharging inland to streams, lakes, and rivers. Later sections deal with sources which are diffuse or intermittent, and with the pollution of oceans and groundwater. The Act's primary mechanism for controlling point source discharges into inland and coastal waters is the National Pollutant Discharge Elim ination System. Under NPDES, permits are issued stating the limits of allowable discharge in 1977 and 1963 (the general target dates of the Act) and a schedule of interim dates and allowable discharges. Section A explains the basis for the final effluent limitations contained in these NPDES permits. A. The Basis for Effluent Limitations Subject to certain cutoffs for ease in administering the program, under the Act every point source is subject to an effluent standard ar.d a wator quality standard. The effluent, or technology, standard states what is economically achievable in pollutant reduction for that class and type of discharger, nationally. The water quality standard can be used to deter mine what is environmentally necessary to achieve in pollutant reduction, if the particular stretch of water on which a discharger is located is to be used for its designated purpose (agriculture, swimming, etc.). The effluent limitation which is contained in a discharger's permit is calculated by comparing the technology standard for the source category with the water quality standard for the receiving waters, and adopting whichever implied level of control is more stringent. In prac tice, the technology standard is used as the base level for limitations. Its. provisions are tightened where necessary to meet water quality standards. The concept of base-level limitations unrelated to local water quality is one of the major innovations of the Act. It represents a depar ture from water pdllution control practice prior to the 1972 Amendments, when water quality standards alone were the basis for effluent limitations. MQNS 039409 t case, every review of potential new source impacts must consider downstream fs well as local effects./ / f A.3. Toxic Effluent Standards. Strategic Guidance By section 307(a) EPA is required to set effluent standards which will end the discharge into waters of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts. This has been intepreted as essentially an environmental and not an economic mandate, and the effluent standards which will result are so oriented. Toxic effluent standards are based on receiving water quality rather than available control tedinology. They typically consider the physical, chemical, and biological parameters which are to be protected, the assimilative capacity of the receiving water in terms of these parameters, and the ambient improvements to be derived. The list of toxic pollutants for which effluent standards are promulgated is dynamic. To the initial list of nine pollutants others will be added, as the following criteria are satisfied: 1) data from laboratory or field studies indicate that a pollutant could constitute a serious environmental threat if discharged into water (these would include data on bioaccumulation, teratogenicity, mutagenicity, carcino genicity, and high acute toxicity), 2) the pollutant is discharged, or has the potential of being discharged, from point sources, 3) data are available to establish effluent standards meeting the requirements of the Act, and 4) standards-settin;; under section 307(a) is appropriate because the prospective timing and effectiveness of abatement actions under other provisions of the Act are not commensurate with the seriousness of the problems identified by the above criteria. . For a toxic pollutant, the standards-setting methodology will begin with the determination of a concentration safe from undesirable effects (equivalent to the water quality criterion for that pollutant). If such a level cannot be established the effluent standard will be set or no discharge. If such a level can be established, than a model ecosystem will be constructed to find the particular limiting concentration for tile most sensitive species that is considered important and which can be adversely affected. In some cases this may be an aquatic organism; in others, through bioaccumulation or HONS 0 3 9 4 1 0 1 exposure, it Fay be man. Each toxic standard will be expressed as a maximum allowable concentration, based on acute effects, and as a maximum allowable daily amount, based on clironic effects and the dilution characteristics of the water'body on which a discharger is located. Toxic effluent standards will apply to the significant classes of toxic pollutant discliargers-sources which are also covered by municipal and industrial guidelines. Toxic standards will bear no necessary relation to the removal levels of the other standards, because they are conceived on a different methodological basis (environmental damage vs. economic feasibility). Toxic standards will have uniformly stricter timetables, however: Congress provides that they be met within a year of final promulgation, as opposed to 1977 for other standards. Toxic effluent standards, in effect, provide a short-cut to the . control of the most dangerous individual pollutants presently being dis charged into navigable waters. The legislative history is a record of Congress' concern on this subject, which is borne out by the requirement for a year's compliance with promulgated standards. Toxic effluent standards serve the same function, however, as water quality standards could theoretically serve: both are meant to achieve criteria levels in ambient waters. Water quality standards as an instrument of toxic control still face a variety of problems, including use designations not compatible with the Act's 1983 goals, the absence of toxic criteria from most standards, and technical difficulties in toxic modelling and load allocation. The ' final relationship for 1983 between toxic effluent standards and water quality standards has not been worked out yet. EPA's strategy will depend in part on the resolution of these issues. Approach Step 1 - EPA promulgated the following initial list of toxic pollutants on September 7, 1973: Aldrin-Dieldrin Benzidine Cadmium Cyanide DDT (DDD, DDE) Endrin Mercury Polychlorinated Biphenlys Toxaphene Step 2 - EPA published proposed effluent standards for materials on the toxic pollutants list on 27 December 1973. MONS 039411 Step 3 - EPA will promulgate final toxic effluent standards for initial list by June 1974. Step 4 - EPA will add materials to the list of toxic pollutants to be controlled by effluent standards as information on effects to substantiate a standard becomes available. . Thermal Limitations. Act treats dischargekof heat differently from'Vdier pollutants. Control technology-related efflHent standards do not necessarily provide the base pgyel of limitations. Moreover, because long lead lines are needed for tie planning and construction of facilities having\ajor thermal discharge co:n^snents (principally powb^plants), longer immunity^rcia other requirements nay be provided. Thermal EfflueSt Standards. Guidelines for on^cf the major sources ofNjiernial effluents--the electric power industry-\i 11 establish definitions of BPT, BAT, and new Source performance standard^* These will be consistent with the Administrator statutory responsibility to identify the degree of efnUient reduction ar^inable by various industry, independent of water quality considerations. tiermal hater Quality Stand^Ws. Few\tatcs currently have wateraiuality standards for teflterature that are aatnuate to assure the 1983 goal of aquatic life protection. Deficiencies IKist in some areas bccausV the waters arc not classified for aquatic lift^ises; in others, although the waters are so classrfced, the established dh^eria do not provide tnC^necessary level of protection. Water quality criteria which the Administrator has publislied pursuaS to section 304(a) of th^tet address temperatu;^ These arc interim inal, tnCwwill supersede EPA's\pn'.er recommendations 1968 NTAC aeport. Water quality standards which are to the new\cconmendations will provide more site-specific igenous populations by determining, rbr each waterway, Msh which siiould^tt protected as an indiSotor of the on. For each specks the new criteria li>t weekly average ratures allowable ir^hc summer and reproductive season, e temperatures for tney/inter months. Zones^f passage 1 plume or mixing zone must also be determined pursuant tions. The new thcnVl criteria recommcndationsN^hcu Id be integrated into each State's standards ah the first review. Standarah will be revised according to applicable statutory requirements, including public participation. HONS 039412