Water Resources Workshop

1
Water Resources Workshop

• Standards, Use Attainability, Impairments
• and TMDLS
• Richard Eskin
• Maryland Department of the Environment
• February 20, 2004

2
Triennial Review

• Currently underway for uses, criteria, and
  antidegradation.
• Draft Regulations were published in the Maryland
  Register, Vol. 31, Issue 2, January 23, 2004,
  beginning on p. 128.
• Comment period has been extended to April 30.
• Hearings currently scheduled
• February 23, 2004 Hagerstown, MD
• February 25, 2004 Dorchester, MD
• February 26, 2004 Baltimore, MD

3
Designated Uses Review

• Reclassification of Aquatic Life Use
• Roaring Run (tributary to North Branch of the
  Patapsco River),
• Un-named tributary to the North Branch of the
  Patapsco River, and
• Rock Run in Cecil County
• from Use I to Use III.
• Basis for revisions DNR has requested these
  designated use changes based on an analysis of
  the current distributions of naturally
  reproducing trout populations in these segments.
  Monitored temperature is consistent with the
  proposed designated use for these streams.

4
Water Quality Criteria Updates

• National Recommended Water Quality Criteria
  2002 (EPA-822-R-02-047) November 2002
• Supercedes prior Clean Water Act (CWA) Section
  304(a) criteria.
• Compilation of 158 pollutants.
• EPA revised the methodology it uses to develop
  water quality criteria for protection of human
  health resulting in many changes.

5
Numeric WQ Criteria Bacteria

• New Standards based on Beaches Act (2000)
• Highlights
• Bacterial Indicator Transition from fecal
  coliform standard to Enterococci spp./E. coli
• Criteria two part, based on frequency of use
• Steady State Geometric Mean (minimum of 5
  samples)
• Single Sample Maximum Allowable Density
• Establishment of Frequency of Use local Health
  officials

6
Narrative Criteria

• Biocriteria
• Establish management and policy framework
• Set standards for implementation procedures

7
Antidegradation

• Antidegradation provides a tiered system for
  protecting the good quality of waters that have
  always met or exceeded their standards.
• Antidegradation provides a framework for
  protecting hard-won gains once water quality
  goals are reached.
• Three antidegradation tiers under EPA regulations
• Tier 1 Must not degrade below minimum water
  quality requirement (fishable/swimmable)
  applies to all waters
• Tier 2 Protects water better than the minimum
  water quality from degrading to the minimum.
• Tier 3 Protects the highest quality waters
  (i.e., Outstanding Natural Resource waters).

8
Antidegradation

• Maryland currently has an antidegradation policy
  that protects the quality of water that is better
  than the standards for that use (Tier II).
• We are proposing implementation procedures for
  determining and protecting water quality where it
  is better than the minimum required.

9
Tier 2 Implementation

• Two components
• How to determine when water quality is better
  than the minimum required, and
• What to do when there is an application for a new
  or increased discharge to that water body.

10
When is water quality better?

• If the MBSS IBI score is at least 4 out 5 (80 of
  possible score), for B- and F- IBIs the water is
  considered higher quality.
• If the one-sided 90 confidence interval around
  the mean of the available data for a specific
  water quality parameter is better than the
  numeric criterion, the water is considered higher
  quality for that parameter. See next slide for
  example.

11
Copper
Dissolved oxygen
90 CI around mean of available data
9 ppb chronic copper standard
5 mg/l standard
12
How do we know where theTier 2 waters are?

• A draft list has been prepared based on MBSS
  data.
• It has been published with the draft regulation
  and is subject to comment just like the
  regulation.

13
Tier II Assimilative Capacity

• The assimilative capacity is the difference
  between the water quality at the time the water
  body was designated as Tier 2 (baseline) and the
  water quality criterion.
• A maximum cumulative reduction of 25 (allows for
  natural variability) of the assimilative capacity
  from all sources is allowed. This is essentially
  a water quality cap.

14
Review Requirements

• Apply to both permit applications and amendments
  to water and sewer plans.
• Three key questions
• Is there a no-discharge possibility?
• If not, has everything been done to minimize the
  impact.
• If there is still a necessary impact, a Social
  and Economic Justification (SEJ) may be necessary.

15
Components of the SEJ

• Impacts from treatment beyond the costs to meet
  technology- or water quality-based controls.
• Cost and benefits of maintaining high quality.
• Determine whether the costs of pollution controls
  would limit development in the watershed that
  includes the Tier 2 water.

16
Other Criteria

• Water Color 75 Units Cobalt-Platinum Scale -
  in-stream numeric criteria

17
Triennial Review Contact Info

• Water Quality Standards
• Joseph Beaman (jbeaman_at_mde.state.md.us)
• George Harman (gharman_at_mde.state.md.us)
• Water Use Permit and Discharge issues
• Contact for WMA

18
Chesapeake Bay Standards

• Currently being developed.
• Will follow EPA Region III guidance fairly
  closely.
• Will have an informal, informational review this
  spring. Will essentially be a first draft of
  regulations.
• UAA will be abbreviated, but sufficient to enable
  review of the new standards

19
Chesapeake Bay Standards

• UAA will
• Contain Bay Program attainment tables,
• Explanation regarding natural conditions for deep
  channel,
• Some development of human caused conditions that
  cant be remedied
• Some cost estimates.
• UAA will be expanded for draft regulations

20
Impairments

• 2004 303(d) list has completed the review period
  and comments are being compiled, and responses
  developed.
• At this time we anticipate submitting the List to
  EPA by April.
• Most new impairments were for degradation of
  biological communities.

21
TMDLs

• Revising 1998 schedule to reflect resources, need
  for outreach, method development.
• Summary of changes published in MdR Feb. 6, 2004,
  p. 231.
• Comment period open for 30 days.
• Extends completion from 10 years to 13 years
  consistent with EPA guidance.

22
TMDLs

• Change due date for each year from Dec. to Sept.
• Clarify that TMDLs arent the only way to address
  impairments.
• Provides a two year schedule.
• Commits to also working on post-1998 lists.