Whole Effluent Toxicity NPDES Program

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY
Advertisements

Antideg and Municipal Stormwater Discussion Sept. 23, 2009.
Heather Ceron US EPA Region 4 May 21,  Two documents have been issued ◦ Actions that Regional Offices Are Taking to Promote Public Participation.
Whole Effluent Toxicity Sublethal Limitations Workgroup January 19, 2010 (please sign in and include an address)
What's New for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Bill Dimond MDEQ Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory.
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing Water Quality Standards Workgroup Meeting June 26, 2007.
Clean Water Act Section 402 Issues Facing Kentucky Kentucky Professional Engineers in Mining Seminar September 6, 2013 Lloyd Cress, Kentucky Coal Association.
Whole Effluent Toxicity
MERCURY REQUEST FOR EFFLUENT DATA. MERCURY - BACKGROUND STATEWIDE CAMPAIGN TO ELIMINATE THE USE AND RELEASE OF HUMAN- CAUSED MERCURY IN WASHINGTON STATE.
Water Quality Standards and MS4 Storm Water Permitting.
EPA’s Guidance on Nutrient Criteria Development
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA Region 10, Seattle,
Bureau of Water Overview Wastewater issues Drinking water issues Wrap up topics.
Legislative Changes Affecting Water Quality at a Local Level October 2011 Robert Kollinger, P.E. Water Resources Manager Polk County Parks and Natural.
Clean Water Act Integrated Planning Framework Sewer Smart Summit October 23, 2012.
Florida Pilot Initiative for the Performance Approach to Measurement Systems Stephen Arms Florida Department of Health.
Bureau of Water Program Overview Local Government Interest.
EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas.
Philip Markle Environmental Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Approaches to Addressing Bacteria Impairments Kevin Wagner Texas Water Resources Institute.
WQBELs Karen Holligan May 6, WQBELs – A Four-Piece Puzzle Numerical criteria (toxic pollutants) Water body quality Effluent fraction Bioavailable.
Implementation of Antidegradation Policies for Indiana Waters.
Washington’s Surface Water Quality Standards rule-makings: human health-based criteria and implementation tools Cheryl Niemi Washington Department of Ecology.
Status of the WET Program William Telliard Director, Analytical Methods USEPA Office of Science & Technology Office of Water.
Impaired and TMDL Waterbody Listings Impacts on DoD Facilities Bill Melville, Regional TMDL Coordinator
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) “The Canary in Your Coal Mine” 27 th Annual Region VI Pretreatment Workshop Irving, TX August 1-4, 2011 Paul Juarez, 6WQ-PP.
Lake Erie HABs Workshop Bill Fischbein Supervising Attorney Water Programs March 16, 2012 – Toledo March 30, Columbus.
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
Overview of WQ Standards Rule & WQ Assessment 303(d) LIst 1 Susan Braley Water Quality Program
Regulations that Protect Clean Water Jocelyn Mullen, P.E. PART 2 OF PRESENTATION Presented at The Water Course January 27, 2010 Mesa County Water Association.
1 ATTAINS: A Gateway to State-Reported Water Quality Information Webcast Sponsored by EPA’s Watershed Academy June 18, 2008, 11:30am-1:30pm EST Shera Bender,
Implementation Procedures (IPs) Brittany Lee Standards Implementation Team
MS4 Remand Rule Intergovernmental Associations Briefing September 15, 2015.
EPA REGION VI MINIMUM QUANTIFICATION LEVELS (MQLs) WHAT THE “L” IS GOING ON? 25 th EPA Annual Pretreatment Workshop Addison, TX 8/5/09 Allen Gilliam ADEQ.
Guide to Selecting Qualified WET Laboratories Robert N. Brent, Ph.D. DynCorp Science and Engineering Group.
Latest Developments - Effectiveness Assessment and Research Priorities Geoff Brosseau California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) December 4, 2007.
Deliberative, Pre-decisional – Do Not Quote, Cite or Distribute 1 Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Trading.
10/03/021 Stormwater Video-conference Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Videoconference October 3, 2002.
MWCOG Water Resource Workshop “Preparing for Regulatory Change” February 20, 2004 Track 2: Panel #4 - Storm Water MS4 Regulation Paula Estornell, USEPA,
1 Waste Discharge Authorization Application - British Columbia WG6 Application Process WG Document Review presented by Helga Harlander October x, 2008.
Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards
1 US EPA Straw Proposals for Modifying the 12/2005 draft Policy Statement Jim Hanlon, Director Office of Wastewater Management, OW Expanded Steering Committee.
EPA’s WET Interlaboratory Variability Study Findings Marion Kelly USEPA Office of Science & Technology Office of Water.
Overview of the Total Maximum Daily Load Program.
Date Planning for Compliance with the Final 316(b) Phase II Regulations For APPA – March 8, 2004 David E. Bailey EPRIsolutions.
1 Water Quality Antidegradation: Guidance to Implement Tier II Summary of Discussion: Review the Tier II Rule requirements. Clarify what feedback we are.
Elizabeth Miller Jennings Office of the Chief Counsel State Water Resources Control Board Peter Bowes 5/20/2009 Flickr REGULATION OF STORM WATER DISCHARGES.
ARE 309Ted Feitshans016-1 Unit 17 Point Source Control Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act of 1972)
1 EPA RIDE Review Expanded Steering Committee Meeting December 11-12, 2006 Betsy Smidinger USEPA/OECA R equired I CIS-NPDES D ata E lements.
The Clean Water Act (1977, 1981, 1987) By: Jonas Szajowitz.
 40 CFR § (d)(1)(v) “(W)hen the permitting authority determines, using the procedures in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, toxicity testing.
 40 CFR § (d)(1)(v) “(W)hen the permitting authority determines, using the procedures in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, toxicity testing.
TMDL for Diazinon in Chollas Creek Watershed TMDL for Diazinon in Chollas Creek Watershed Linda Pardy (858) Jimmy.
Connie Brower NC DENR Division of Water Resources.
WQBELs Karen Holligan September 23, WQBELs – A Four-Piece Puzzle Numerical criteria (toxic pollutants) Water body quality Effluent fraction Bioavailable.
 40 CFR § (d)(1)(v) “(W)hen the permitting authority determines, using the procedures in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, toxicity testing.
Framework for CSO Control Planning
VIRGINIA’S TMDL PROCESS Four Mile Run Bacteria TMDL March 25, 2002
Module 17: MIXING ZONES A limited area or volume of water where initial dilution of a discharge takes place and where numeric water quality criteria.
Cara Cowan Watts Graduate Student Biosystems Engineering
Mercury TMDL Review & Permitting Strategy Update
Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
TCEQ Environmental Trade Fair Water Quality Division
Update on Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
Implementation of Water Quality Standards and the WQ Based Approach
EPA’S ROLE IN APPROVING BASIN PLAN AMENDMENTS
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards
Understanding EPA’s FY National Compliance Initiative: Reducing Significant Noncompliance with CWA-NPDES Permits U.S. Environmental Protection.
Presentation transcript:

Whole Effluent Toxicity NPDES Program Laura Phillips USEPA - Office of Wastewater Management 202-564-0741, phillips.laura@epa.gov

What is Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing & Why Do it? What is it? - WQ-based toxics control method that directly measures the total or aggregate toxic effect (additive, synergistic and antagonistic) of an aqueous sample through the response(s) of exposed aquatic organisms. Why do it? - Protects Narrative Criterion (“no toxics in toxic amounts”) & was designed to predict the impact and toxicity of effluents to determine “safe effluent discharge concentrations” with respect to WQS (criteria).

EPA Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Program WET - Component of the WQ Integrated Approach WQ WET Criteria & Standards NPDES Regulations: 40 CFR Part 122 (i.e., 40 CFR Part 122.44(d)(1)(iv) & (v)) WET Methods (40 CFR Part 136) NPDES Permit & EPA Regions, Permitting Authorities (45 NPDES States) and Permittees Consultants (i.e., Labs)

Whole Effluent Toxicity Criteria Applying toxicity criteria with allowable dilution Narrative - “no toxics in toxic amounts” Numeric - TSD recommendations or numeric interpretation of Narrative Acute = 0.3 TUa (e.g., 100/LC50) Chronic = 1.0 TUc (e.g., 100/NOEC) Outfall 0.3 TUa 1.0 TUc

Major Components of a NPDES Permit Cover Page Effluent limitations Monitoring & Reporting Requirements Special Conditions Standard Conditions

With Regard to WET - - NPDES Permits Must Specify Test Species and Method (Fathead Minnow, Acute or Chronic) Testing Frequency (Representative of the Effluent) Statistical Endpoints (Acute: LC50 or IWC, Chronic: NOEC, ICp) Steps to Address Toxicity (Accelerated WET testing, TREs/TIEs)

WET Test Method Selection Approved acute and chronic methods (40 CFR Part 136) Must determine: Acute or chronic toxicity (based on calculated limits or available dilution) Freshwater or marine discharge Most appropriate species (e.g., 3 species quarterly for 1 year)

WET Monitoring WET Monitoring Representative of Effluent Discharge: Important for WET reasonable potential determinations & evaluating WET NPDES permit limit compliance USEPA NPDES Regulations:  40 CFR 122.21(g)(11)  40 CFR Part 122.21(j)(5)  40 CFR Part 122.44 (i)  40 CFR Part 122.48 (b) USEPA Guidance: Technical Support Document (TSD) (1991, OWM) Interim Guidance for Performance-Based Reductions of NPDES Monitoring Frequencies (4/19/96, OW/OECA)

WET Reasonable Potential (RP) Determinations No WET Data: Use EPA Technical Support Document’s (TSD) statistical approaches to determine if RP exists. Fewer than ten valid WET data points (per species): EPA’s TSD provides recommended coefficients of variation. Ten or more valid WET data points: With ten or more valid and representative effluent data points a robust WET RP determination can be done.

TSD Steps in Developing WET Permit Limitations WLA = Wasteload Allocation, LTA= Long Term Average Acute & Chronic Wasteload Allocations Step 1: Convert Acute WLA to Chronic WLA (WET only) Step 2: Calculate LTA for Both Step 3: Select Lowest LTA Step 4: Calculate Maximum Daily Load & Average Monthly Limits

NPDES Program Resources USEPA OWM Catalog of Publications (EPA 830/B-96-001) Basic Permit Writers’ Manual (EPA/833-B-96-003, 12/96) Technical Support Document (EPA/505-2-90-001, 3/91) USEPA Basic Permit Writer’s Course - Ca (1/03) OWM Web site: http://cfpub1.epa.gov/npdes or E-mail: pwcourse@cadmusgroup.com SETAC WET Training Courses Web site: setac.org

NPDES Program Resources Under Development NPDES Permit Development Tool (NPDES/PDT): Electronic tool that will allow permit writers to interactively calculate water quality-based effluent limitations for large number of pollutants. Future versions will include the ability to calculate technology-based limits. Permit Application Software System (PASS): Phase I: Electronic system which allows permittees to electronically prepare NPDES permit applications, print, & mail it to their NPDES permitting authorities. Phase II: System will be enhanced to allow electronic submission to the NPDES permitting authority. (http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/pass)

WET National Program Technical Resources Information/Assistance: EPA OW/OWM Web site: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes EPA OW/OST Web site: www.epa.gov/waterscience/WET EPA Regional Contacts SETAC Web site: www.setac.org/wetindex.html including “Frequently Asked Questions” Bulletin Board SETAC WET Expert Advisory Panel: www.setac.org USEPA WET Document Compendium

USEPA WET Document Compendium - Sample List WET Requirements in Municipal Permits (7/85) WET Sample Permitting & Enforcement Guidance (2/89) WET Control Policy (7/94) National Policy Regarding WET Enforcement (8/95) Clarifications Regarding Flexibility in WET Methods (4/96) Clarifications Regarding WET Test Methods & Guidance on Implementing WET Toxicity in Permits (7/97) TRE Municipal Guidance (8/99) WET Variability Guidance (6/00) WET Test Methods Guidance (7/00) TRE/TIE Clarifications Document (5/01) WET Test Methods Proposed Rule (9/01)

Where Do We Go From Here? Critical Crossroads - Require careful consideration of the issues, maintaining the NPDES base program, & identifying possibilities for appropriate flexibility within existing NPDES regs and the CWA. Review the Facts - Use facts to cull out non-productive issues so remaining issues are prioritized in a manner that produces results. Pursue Strategic Pathways or Decisions - To overcome ongoing barriers to effectively implementing the NPDES WET program.

Closing Remarks Move Program Forward Where possible, reduce controversies and implement the WET program in a manner that fulfills CWA objectives, complies with USEPA NPDES regulations, and is endorsed by stakeholders through their actions and support to the program.