# C!Congrttiti of tbt Wnittb**~tattti** 

## J;Joust of l\tprtstntatibts**Rla~btngton,** 

### tD<! 20515

The Honorable Gina McCarthy Administrator Jul y 26 , 20 1 3

United States E n v ironmental Prote c tion Age nc y Ariel Rio s Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue , N .W. Washington , DC 20460

Dear Administrator McCarthy , We appreciate the importance of ensuring the safety of the fi s h consumed in Wa s hington , Ore go n and Idaho , and are aware of effo rt s und erw ay b y the s tate agencie s in Washington and Idaho to develop prote c ti ve C lean Water Act (CWA) human health wat er quali ty c riteria (HHWQC). Ho weve r , we are concerned that E PA 's inte rf eren c e in tho se processe s w ill pre vent th e agencies from de ve loping criteria that properl y balanc e protection s of public health and achievable CWA permit limit s b y facilities that mu s t abide by the m in these states. This balanc e i s critical to e n s ure clean water and to protect peopl e as we ll as job s an d th e eco nom y. U nder the C WA , s tat es h ave the primar y re s pon s ibili ty to de ve lop wat er qualit y s tandard s to protect human h ealth

. Spec ific ally , CWA Sect i on 303(c)(4)(B) dire cts that , "

... State [ s ] s h a ll adopt criteria for all to x ic pollutants li s t ed pursuant to sect i o n 3 0 7(a) (l) of thi s Act for w hi ch criteria have been published und e r Section 304(a), the di sc h ar ge or presence of wh ich in t h e affect ed wate r s could reasonabl y b e expec t ed to interfere w ith tho se des i gnate d u ses adopte d b y the State , as nece ss ary to s upport s uch de s ignat ed u ses." E PA 's ro l e in rev i ew in g and appro v in g HHWQ C (a component of th e s t at e standard) i s to e n s ure that the final s tandard i s adequatel y prote ct ive of fi s h co n sumers. We b e li eve th a t EPA i s oversta ting its authority b y di c tatin g that s tate s u se o ve rl y co ns ervati ve input value s an d ri s k l eve l s i n the a lre ad y extremel y conservat ive and protecti v e formula for deri v in g criteri a , f or examp l e, b y re quirin g a ve ry hi g h F i s h Cons umpti o n Rat e (FCR). In a June 2 1 ,2 013 l etter from the EPA to the Washington Department ofEcolog y , EPA R eg ion 1 0 Admini s trator McLerran threate n s to i ss ue a fede ra l rule if Wash ington ' s proc ess i s
" unnecessarily dela ye d. " T h e letter states that E PA ex pe cts Wa s hin gton to ad opt the s am e hi g h FCR and ri s k le ve l s as w ere adopte d in Oregon. T he Oregon s tand ar d s , a dopte d in 20 11 , ar e exp ected to re s ult in num erou s n ew impaired wat er s li s tin gs , TMDLs , and CWA p ermit limit s th at cannot be m et w ith ex i s tin g tec hn o l ogy. Ind eed, s ome limit s wo uld requ ire faci liti es ' di sc h arges to b e clean e r than th e background wat er they take in. Ad mini st r ator McLerran' s l etter al so ref e re nce s E PA ' s acti o n s i n Idaho ,where E PA reje c t ed Idaho ' s human hea lth water quality s tandard s , again citing concerns about the F C R u se d b y the s tate
. Wa s hin gton i s unde rtaking a hi g h-level s takeholder process to brin g parties to th e t able in an attempt to s trike a reas onable balan ce w ith the updated HH WQC. Idaho i s mo v in g forward with p rocesses to accomplish the same goa l, includin g a state wi de genera l population FCR s urvey. Thi s inform ation w ill serve as the ba s i s fo r deve lopin g more sc i ent ifi ca ll y d efe n s ibl e and d at a -ba se d HHWQ C and a l so a ll ow the s tate s t o u se a probabili s ti c approac h in their criteria deve lopment. This app roac h , u s in g peer rev iewe d sc ience , b e tter characterizes risk and provide s a n opportu ni ty to deve lop balanced , defen s ibl e s tandard s that are both f eas ibl e for CWA p e rmittees to ac hieve, a nd be protective of human h ea lth for a ll fi sh consumers, in c ludin g those consuming hi g h leve l s. State s need to b e allowed to comp lete th e ir wo rk of de ve loping prote cti ve and ac hi evabl e HHWQC , wi th ou t dictating particular i nput va lu es. E PA s hould l et the s tate s make the a ppropri a te, individual p o licy cho i ces, not attempt to dictate them in a l ess th a n tran s p arent manner. We wo uld request a respon se o n how E PA will remedy thi s proce ss as soo n as po ss ible to allow states to proceed w ithout interference. If yo u have any que s tion s, plea se contact Todd U ngerec ht of R e p. Ha s tin gs' s t a ff at (202) 225- 276 1 or Mis sy Small of Rep. Simpson ' s s taff at (202) 2 25-5531.

Mike Simpson Membe r o f Co n g ress

R au l Labrador M e mb e r of Co n g r ess Sincere ly,

J a ime He rre ra Beut le r Member of Co ng re ss