Association of State and Interstate

Water Pollution Control Administrators

1 221 CONNECTICUT AVEN U E N. W

, 2 ND FLOOR, • W A S H INGTON , DC 2 0 0 3 6 • TEL: 202 -756 -06 0 0 • FAX: 202 -7 56-0 605 • WWW .ASI W P CA.OR G

Decem ber 20, 2007

SUBJECT: Comments on the USEPA Preliminary 2008 Effluent Gu idelines Program Plan

TO: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW

- 2006-0771

Transm ittted by Em ail To: OW -Docket@epa.gov

The Association appreciates th is opportunity to comm ent on the Agency’s 2008 effluent guideline program plan. In ge neral we are supportive.

We are pleased to see that dental m e rcury is included. And, em erging contam inants has becom e an ASI W PC A priority for which we n eed workable national approaches.

In addition, for the reasons expressed in the att ached correspondence with the Office of Science and Technology, we recomm end that nutrients for cen tralized waste treatm e nt be included in the 2008 plan.

Sincerely,

Linda Eich m iller

Executive D i rector

Attachm e ntAssociation of State and Interstate

Water Pollution Control Administrators

1 221 CONNECTICUT AVEN U E, N. W

, 2 ND FLOOR • W A S H INGTON, DC 2 0 0 3 6 • TEL: 2 0 2 -756 -0600 • FAX: 20 2-756 -06 0 5 • W WW.ASI W P C A.ORG

Mr. Ephraim King, Director Nove m b er 26, 2007 Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology USEPA Headquarters

Ariel Rios B u ilding 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W

. Mail Code: 4301T Washington, DC 20460

Re: Technology Thresholds for Nutrients

Dear Mr. King:

Since the initial passage of the Federal W a ter Pollution Control Act of 1972, water quality

m a nage m e nt has evolved significan tly through technological adva nces in required treatm ent levels, the implem e ntation of water quality based effluent lim its and the widespread application of disinfection technology to point sources. By alm o st every m eas ure, surface waters are clos er than ever before to fully achiev i ng the fishable , swimmable goals espouse d by the Act. Much

work lies ah ead, howeve r , if sim ilar gains ar e to be m a de in the next 35 years as S t ates struggle

with the im pacts of po llutan ts like nutrients, b a ct eria and turbidity. It is b e com i ng clear that

States m u st now begin moving out of the traditi onal paradigm s to focus on these challenges.

The Association of State and Interstate W a te r Pollution Control Adm i nistrators (ASI W P CA) agrees with USEPA that the effects of nitroge n and phosphorus criteria on treatm e nt plant and

best m a nagem e nt practice perform a nces m u st be addressed as States m ove toward adopting water quality standards for nutrients. Therefor e, ASI W PCA would like to encourage the USEPA to research the concept of “best available technology” or “reasonable treatm e nt technologies” as a first step towards control ling these m o re universal pollu tants (i.e., nitrogen, phosphorus, bacteria, sedim e ntation or turbidity). Going the water quality standards route -- state-by-state,

perm it by perm it -- would be m o re dif f i cult, le ngthie r and will r e sult in less con s istent contro ls than setting federal technol ogy-based standards.

One of the foundational water quality m a nage ment t ools is the application of the more stringent

of either treatm e nt technology (e .g., BAT, BCT level) restrict ions; or water quality-based

effluent lim itations. It is vitally im portant that as the scientif ic knowledge about pollutants such as nitrogen and phosphorus evolves, the threshold of what is technologically achievable in term s of pollutant rem oval also evolves. Unfortunate ly, this has not always been the case. For

exam ple, many ASI W PCA m e mber States continue to hear that “1 m g /L is about as good as point sources can do to rem ove phosphorous.” However, a recent review of the currently available technology indicates th at levels as low as 0.25-0.50 m g /L of phosphorus are being

achieved in m a ny e ffluent stream s. Thresholds for treatment m u st be explored, not just forphosphorous, but for nitrogen, solids/sedim e nt, pathogens and other substances for which

trad ition a l approaches (e.g., dos e/res ponse) are inadequate.

We are aware of the potential cos t s th at im posi ng additional w a ste contro l technolog ies will h a ve on both industries and municipalities. More th an 20 years ago, the requirem e nt of secondary

treatm ent levels for all sanitary effluent genera ted considerable discussions about the necessity, practicality, and cost. However, at this point States would accept little argum ent against the application of secondary (or better) treatm e nt le vels to dischargers as a reasonable strategy to control wastewater pollution. The consistent application of technology-driven wastewater

m a nage m e nt has a proven track record in term s of i m proving the quality of effluent discharges.

USEPA and States should also be able to dem ons trate that the cos t s of further advan ced and / o r additional tr eatm e nt over tim e will be of f

s et by health ie r e c osystem s and citizens, decrea se d

trea tm ent c o sts to pub lic water su pplies, and cleaner water. Many of our m e mber States ’ regulation prom ulgation procedur es requ ire a cost ben e fit ana l ysis and im pact statem ent (conducted at the S t ate level) be conducted before a rule can be proposed for adopt ion into their regulations. Ideally, the econom ic s of effective pollution control also support achievability.

A treatm e nt technology-based approach transc ends “upstream

- downst r eam ” issues and can provide a broader fram e w ork for abatem ent of n itrogen and phosphorus pollution in waters such as the Gulf of Mexico or Chesapeake Bay. Usi ng this app r oach can also help States provid e consistency between program s for interstate waters.

The ASI W PCA m e mbership strongly believes that a State and Federal partne rship is vital to the success of this project. These issues have been discussed infor m ally with m e m b ers of your staff during th e recent m onths, and ASIWPCA welcom es the op portunity to discuss them with you in

more detail.

Thank you for your leadership in water quality m a nage ment. ASIWPCA looks forward to working with you and your staff over the next seve ral m ont hs to develop realistic technological control thresholds of nitrogen and phosphorus and sim ilar pollutants for both industries and municipalities.

Sincerely,

Derek Sm ithee

Co-Chair

ASI W PCA Standards, Assessm ents and Monitoring Task Force

Cc: Benjam in Grum bles Michael Shapiro

ASI W P C A Mem b ership