## Iv sro k ts 

# WA z 

### rklprei

s<` 4Z PR

### 010 

## UNITED STATES 

# ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

# AGENCY Region 1 5 Post Office 

## Square Suite 

### 100 

## Boston 

# MA 021093912

December

# 2 2013
Michael Kuhns Director 

### Bureau ofLand and Water Quality 

### Department ofEnvironmental Protection 17 State 

### House Station 

### Augusta Maine 

## 043330917 Dear

# Mr Kuhns

I 

### would like to take this opportunity to highlight for

### you

# EPAs recent publication 

### offinal 

## ammonia and recreational water quality criteria 

### recommendations and urge 

### you to consider adoption 

### ofthese criteria into

### yourwater quality standards 

### These recently published criteria 

### documents reflect 

### once again the 

## Agencys commitment to 

### improving and updating the science bolstering protection 

### ofour 

### Nations water resources 

## Asyou 

## know EPAs water quality standards regulations at 

### 40 

## CFR 

# 13111a1 require states to adopt protective criteria that are 

### based on sound scientific rationale 

### The publication 

### of 

## EPA recommendations under 

### Clean Water Act section 

## 304a provides 

### an excellent opportunity for

### you and your stakeholders to 

### review existing water quality criteria 

### and determine 

### whether those existing criteria are still in fact protective 

### and based on sound scientific rationale I 

### encourage you to consider adoption 

### ofthese orequivalently protective criteria 

### and to use 

### your triennial public hearings 

### required by40 

## CFR 

# 13120a to provide a

### venue forpublic feedback 

### on the 

### need to adopt 

## new or 

### modify existing

# WQS to reflect the latest science 

## EPAs

# CWA section 

## 304a criteria

### recommendations provide scientific 

### recommendations to states 

### and authorized tribes in developing 

## new or revised water quality standards States 

### and authorized tribes 

### have the discretion to adopt

# EPAs criteria 

### recommendations 

# EPAs recommendations modified to reflect sitespecific conditions
or criteria based 

### on other scientifically defensible 

### methods 

## EPA last issued final 

### ambient water quality criteria 

### recommendations for recreational waters in 

### 1986 and for

## ammonia in 

## 1999 The 

## new water quality criteria reflect the significant research that has taken place 

### between then 

### and 

## now on these pollutants 

### and
the levels that are protective 

### ofdesignated 

### uses Recreational 

## Water Quality Criteria 

### The recreational water quality criteria 

### were developed based 

### on a 

### review of historic studies 

### and more recent scientific information including the National Epidemiological 

### and Environmental Assessment ofRecreational water studies at

# US beaches in

## 2003

## 2004 2005 2007 and 

## 2009 Those studies enrolled 

## 54250 participants 

### encompassed nine locations 

### and collected 

### and analyzed 

### numerous samples from a

### combination of fresh 

### marine tropical 

### and temperate 

### waters The resulting criteria 

### have numerous improvements over the 

### 1986 criteria 

### The criteria consist 

### ofboth a geometric 

## mean and statistical threshold 

### value The criteria 

## now comprise a 

### magnitude duration 

### and frequency States 

## maychoose from two different sets 

### ofrecommended criteria values to protect 

### primarycontact recreation 

### waters The criteria 

### recommendations forfresh 

### and marinewaters are 

### based on the 

### same illness rate 

### The criteria 

### no longer refer to different use intensities States 

## may take advantage 

### ofnewlydeveloped rapid test

# qPCR methods in adopting 

# WQS States 

## maynow use 

### Beach Action 

### Values in their

### beach notification 

### programs 

## As you 

## know as a

# BEACH Act state 

### Maine has specific requirements regarding recreational water criteria Section

# 303iIB ofthe 

### Clean Water Act 

## as amended 

## by the 

# BEACH Act of

## 2000 directs 

### each state 

### with coastal recreational waters to adopt 

### and submitto 

## EPAnew or revised water quality standards forthose waters for all pathogens 

### and pathogen indicators to 

### which the 

## new orrevised water quality criteria are applicable 

### The deadline for state adoption 

### and submittal to 

## EPA ofrevised 

# WQS is three years

### from 

## EPA publication 

### of

## new recommendations Since 

## EPA published final recreational water quality criteria 

### recommendations in 

### December 

## 2012 states should 

### complete this action 

### by December 

## 2015 

## EPAs 2012 recommendations apply to all waters designated for primary contact recreation 

## You can find 

### more information 

### on the 

### 2012 recreational water quality criteria

### on

# EPAs website at 

### httpwaterepagovscitechswguidancestandardscriteriahealthirecreation 

## Ammonia Criteria
In updating the 

### 1999 

## ammoniacriteria 

## EPA conducted an extensive literature 

### review that incorporates 

## new toxicity data 

### from 69 studies including 

## new data 

### on freshwater 

### mussels and gill 

### bearing snails 

### which are both sensitive to 

## ammoniatoxicity In particular the freshwater mussels are 

### more sensitive to

## ammoniathan the 

### organisms included in the 

### 1999 criteria dataset 

## You can find 

### more information 

### on the 

### 2013 

## ammoniawater quality criteria 

### on 

## EPAs website at 

### httpwaterepagoviscitechswguidancestandardscriteriaaqlifeaminonia Because both these 

### newly published criteria rely

### on the latest research 

### and science I encourage 

## youwhen reexamining yourwater quality standards during the next triennial 

### review to consider adoption 

### ofthese criteria into yourwater quality standards If after 

### you review your existing water quality standards 

### you conclude that updates to

### your 

## ammonia and recreational water quality standards are not necessary to protect the designated 

### uses I urge 

### you to 

### submit in 

### yourtriennial 

### review yourrationale for not 

### making a 

### change

I 

### hope these 

## new criteria provide 

### you with the information 

### you need to

## move forward as 

### you consider 

### changes to 

### yourwater quality standards in the near future I appreciate 

### your
2

### commitment to protecting water quality 

### and look forward to continuing to 

### work collaboratively towards our

### mutual goals 

### Ifyou should 

### have any additional questions please feel free to contact 

## me or Ellen Weitzler for

### more information Sincerely



## Ken Moraff Director Office 

### ofEcosystem Protection

3