|
<br />51404
<br />
<br />Federal Regi ler I Vol. 48. No, 217 I Tuesday. November 8, 1983 I Rules, arid Regulations
<br />
<br />......
<br />"CO
<br />W
<br />o
<br />
<br />of fish, shellfish and wildlife and! or
<br />recreation in and on the Water.
<br />Third, EPA has retained the concept
<br />of allowing a State to select specific
<br />water hodies for an in'depth review of
<br />the appropriateness of the:water quality
<br />standard. This was done in order to
<br />make maximum use of limited resources
<br />and ensure that the most critical
<br />environmental problenisare addressed.
<br />This review could include $0
<br />examination of the use, thq existing
<br />water quality criteria, and lhe need for
<br />revised or additional criterfa on
<br />segments where the standdrds are not
<br />projected to be achieved with'
<br />
<br />implementa/ion of the technology-based
<br />requirements of the Act.. Factors which
<br />may cause a State to seJect a water
<br />body for review include areas where
<br />advanced tr.8atment and combined
<br />sewer overflow funding: decisions are
<br />pending, major water quality~based
<br />permits Bre scheduled for issuance or-
<br />renewal, toxic pollutants have been
<br />identified or are suspected of precluding
<br />the attainment of wafer quality
<br />standards. This list' is not meant to be all
<br />inclusive, and a State may have other
<br />reasons for examining a particular
<br />standard. The procedures esta blished
<br />for identifyjng and reviewing such water
<br />
<br />bodies should be in,curporated info the
<br />State's Continuing Planning Proc~ss.
<br />There were numerQUS comments
<br />either advocating mechanisms to:ensure
<br />the right of dischargers to petilio!! the
<br />State to review particular standards or
<br />advocating the burden of proof be on the,
<br />discharger to justify any changes in
<br />standards. EPA does not believe that it
<br />should dictate particuiar adminisfrative
<br />mechanisms that States use to initiate'
<br />the r~view of standards on parUddar
<br />water bodies. However, we do believe
<br />that whatever mechanism theSta/e
<br />uses, it should be made ,known IQ'tbe
<br />public an.d included in the State's ,
<br />Continuing Planriing Process document.
<br />
<br />:'\(
<br />
<br />SUMMARY OF THE CH,ANGES MADE' IN THE PROPOSED REGULAflON
<br />
<br />Section Section
<br />No. in
<br />the >>0. In
<br />proposed ttleflnal
<br />regulatlon regulatIOn
<br />131.1 131.1
<br /> 131.2
<br />131.2 131.3
<br />131.3 131.4
<br />131.4 131.5
<br />131.5 131.6
<br />
<br />Title
<br />
<br />Summary 01 changes
<br />
<br />Scope................"...... No change made.
<br />Purpose .............;...... N_ section Purpose. Deflnee the dual purpose of water quality standards. Standards establish" the water quality goals lot 8 speclflc w~ter body
<br />and serve as a regulatOl)' basis 101 ti:le establlstrnent 01 water quality based controls beyond the technology required onder the Act oenslstent
<br />with Section 101(8)(2) and 303(e) of the Act.
<br />Definitions... ......~..." M!fIOl' changes.made ill the definitions 01 "criteria", "Section 304{a) Criteria" and "water quality 'standards". 0&fInIti0n at "uses" and '''attaln'' wme
<br />removed A definition 01 a "Use Attainability Analy&ls" was- added. - "-, '. "
<br />Slate AuthorilY",~.... Word "revIewll1jJ" added to sentence "States are responsibfe lot revlEl~ establishing and revising water quaNty standard.. ,
<br />EPA Aulhorlly......,,,.. The wording Of this section has bElen slightly revised to show that ,EPA makes a determination Of ''whett1er'' State 8landards meet !he fiwt.crft~
<br />Subsection -(e) revised to read "'Whether the State has fOItowsd its legal procedures for /'6VIsing or adoptmg stanctarct& .
<br />~ (d) modl~ed to:read "Whether the State standards are based on appropriate technical and -SCienUfic data and lilnalyses" rather INn
<br />lNhether the decision Il'IlIklog ,pr'008.ss Is based on appropriate technical and stientillc data and analyses..
<br />Sub8ec1lon (8) added to includE!. mlnlmum requlrement._,or State submission. .
<br />UI'\der (d) the--stateinent now reads: "An AnUdegradatiOn policy consIsten~ with 1131.1'2."
<br />Under (e) after Att~ Genel8l the phrase "or other appropriate leg91 authorlty within the Stale" W8:$ added.
<br />
<br />Mlnlmom "
<br />Requirements :
<br />for Water
<br />OUalltyStds.
<br />SUbmlsslons.
<br />
<br />131.10
<br />
<br />131.10 Deslgnstionol
<br />U_
<br />
<br />Statement added to (a) prohibiting de$lgnatlng a stroam lor waste transport or assimilation.
<br />
<br />;-~
<br />
<br />Added a.new (b), that In designating uses of a water bodY and ~ appropriate-criteria, States jtI'e to GflSlJI'8 the attainment and maintenance ,01
<br />downstream standardS. .
<br />Rel'l'lOVOO (c). The Antldegraclatlon Policy Is now described in f 131.12.
<br />Section (b) renumbered (el, removed (e). SectIOn (I) renumbered (e). and Section (g) renumbered (f).
<br />Paragraph (h) now (g) has boon changed. It. now requires that a State must demonstrate that the designated u&,e. whICh Is not an- elCisting use, is'
<br />not allainable. lIems .. and 6 werE) also reworded, Item .. now readS that changes in- uses' can be justllled it dams, ~. or other'types 9f
<br />hydrologic modIllcatlona Pf6C/IJd6 the attainment of a use rather than just interfere With the att8lnment of a use. Item 5'1iriWts the ~Uol\
<br />of physk:allaetora to lJ-qualic Nle prOtection uses. Item 6 has bElen tOtally' changed. It now reads that changes in U$8S-ean be made il:;tontJ'Ol$
<br />n'Iore strIngerIt than tf:\OSe required by SectlOlf3Q1(b) and 306 oflhe'Act-would result in substantial and widespl'ead economic lind 8Oclafimpact.
<br />In paragraph (I) npw (h), (21 and (3) are consolidated. Subparagraph (4) has been eliminated because 01 the re\llsion to the Antidegl'8da1iQil POucv_
<br />(see '131.12). Subparagraph (5) now appe~ In f 131.6(b).
<br />New paragrapll (I) requir~ States 10 revise their stan~. to reflect improvem9nts In water qlJanty.
<br />In paragraph (I). EPA lias dellnecl1hat states must conduct a Use At!alnabiUty Analysis it designallng uses no! specified ItI Secllon 101(al(~ of the
<br />Acl, when removing a use specified In Sectlon,101(a)(2) or If modify!llsruses 8p9cffied in Section 101(a)(2) by requiring less Stringent;,Ol'iterla.
<br />Paragraph (k) clarifies that Stat911 are not requlfed to Conduct a Use Attainability AnaIy$18 when deslgnatir'lg uses specified in SecUon 101(a)(2)
<br />ollheAct
<br />Enmated.
<br />
<br />.. Ana!ysealor
<br />Changing or
<br />Modifying Uses.
<br />131.11 Criteria ...................,;, Efimlnated.
<br />under (al(1)'~ phrase "are compatible with" has been removed and loIlOwing the first senteQC8 the followInQ has been added: "Such,orlterte
<br />must be based on sound scientific rallonale and must contain suflioient parameters or consUtutenlJ to protect !he designated "Use. FOr waler
<br />wtlh multiple use designatIOns. the criteria shall sUpport' the most sensitive use." .
<br />S;ubperagraph (a)(2) has been revised to read that States muS! review waler_ quality data al'ld Information and where Iollie pollutants ~ay be
<br />adver&ely alfsctlng the attalnmenl 01 the 'water qUllllty or the attainment of the designated use or whete the levels 01 toxic pollutants 4fe at <I
<br />level 10 warrant concern' must adopt criteria for the toldc pollutants. Where States adopt narrallve criteria for toldc poIlu1ants, the Sla~ lnust
<br />adopt a poIlcy -lndenUfying the method by which !he State intends to regulate point source discharges based on SlIGh narrallve criteria.
<br />SubP.arts' (b)(2J and (3) 'were combined.
<br />- Paragraph (c) hillS been rerT)Oved'beCause the concepts are now Included In,paragraph la). ,/
<br />131.12 Anlldegradallon The Anlldegradallon Policy found in tlle lormer 40 OFR 35..1550(e) tias been adopted into the final Regulallon with-several modillcallol'\$, The
<br />POlicy. ptlra8& "interfellt'wiltl or beconw!'Injorlousto" was removed, a phrase. was added-in (aI11), (2). and (3) to malntain and prot9Ctlnstream._w&ter
<br />' quality to protect j)lllsting uses" in' {a)(21 "important" replaces "significant" In tile phrase on economk: and social development. arid "no
<br />, . degradation" was, deletel:1lrom (8)(:,1).
<br />131.13 General Policies "..' Paragraph (a) revllied to c1anfy that General Policies if adopted are to be Included In '8 State's water quahty standards and ,are sUbject to EPA,
<br />'-revi8warn:t approval. .' , .
<br />Sub~tions (b)(C)(d) removed
<br />Par(I,Qraph ,(a) Slate Revlewhas_been rewritten 10, trillek the wording in the Act on lhe1hree year review 01 water quanty star\dards. States are
<br />required to revieW eve"ty three years State standards on segments that do not include uses specilied In Section' 101(a)(21 of the Act 't!='
<br />de~ermlne whethe~ lhese.standards are stili appropriate. FInally ,a statement has t}eoo'added thai procedures Statas use to Identify wal9r bodie's
<br />for JevIew ,8hoUId. be incorporated into their Continuing. Planning l3rOC&$s document. . _ "
<br />U'IldEll" para9!~ (~) atter 30 days we addect 8 :phrase; "01 ~ fm~l Sta\6 action to adopt and certify" to clarify when the 30 day time period starts.
<br />
<br />1:)1,11
<br />
<br />131.12
<br />
<br />13t.13
<br />
<br />l:ij,20
<br />
<br />13t.,2O
<br />
<br />Stale Aevlew,and
<br />Revis/onot
<br />Water Ouality.
<br />Stfl'ldalds.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br /> J
<br /> ':-~i
<br /> H
<br /> 0'
<br /> J
<br /> 1
<br /> "
<br /> 'f
<br /> ,
<br /> ,~
<br /> :~
<br /> ,
<br /> f
<br /> !
<br /> '11
<br />, :~
<br /> .
<br /> 4
<br /> -',j
<br />
<br />
|