Water Quality Standards Regulatory Clarifications Final Rule

Tribal Consultation and Coordination Webinars— Participant List & 

Summary

October 16, 2014 and October 22, 2014

Participant List

Katrina Acosta

Affiliation not provided

Toby Anungazuk, Jr.

Chinik Eskimo Community

Matt Baerwalde

Snoqualmie Indian Tribe

Thomas Balyles

Navajo Tribal Utility Authority

Lodonna Begay

Navajo Tribal Utility Authority

Sophi Beym

Pueblo of Acoma, New Mexico

Nick Bieser

Bad River Band

Seth Book

Skokomish Indian Tribe

Shane Bowe

Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians -

Department of Natural Resources

Scott Bulgrin

Pueblo of Sandia

Delice Calcote

Alaska Inter-Tribal Council

Souta Callinglast

Affiliation not provided

Nicole Casper

Swinomish Indian Tribal Community

Shawn Chato

Santa Clara Pueblo

Douglas Cox

Menominee

Peter Cruickshank

Yakama Nation

Deb Dirlam

Lower Sioux Indian Community

Arlene Dutschke

Ione Band of Miwok Indians

Steven Escobar

Chemehuevi Indian Tribe

Christopher Estes

Chalk Board Enterprises, LLC

Diane Evans

U.S. EPA Region 6

Ron Figlar-Barnes

Skokomish Tribe

Benjamin Foss

Pedro Bay Village Council

Tom Gibbons

Quinault Indian Naiton

Kevin Greenleaf

Kootenai Tribe of Idaho

AvaMarie Greybear

Copper River Native Association

Jessie Harrison

Poarch Band of Creek Indians

1
Mark Hicks

Mescalero Apache Tribe

Ira Hight

U.S. EPA Region 6

Linda Hood

Campo Band of Mission Indians EPA

Shawn Howard

Citizen Potawatomi Nation

Joseph Huhn

Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa 

Indians

Ambrie Johnson

Chickasaw Nation

Ashley Jones

Campo EPA

Anna Kanseah

Affiliation not provided

Summer King

United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in 

Oklahoma

Sissy Kotongan

Native Village of Unalakleet

Daniel Kusnierz

Penobscot Indian Nation

Roger LaBine

Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior 

Chippewa

Matthew Laughlin

Santee Sioux Nation

Catherine Laux

Keweenaw Bay Indian Community

Heather Lawrence

Shoshone-Paiute Tribes

Clarita Lefthand-Begay

University of Washington and Hozho Research 

and Consulting

Levi Lementino

Tribal Environmental Program-Picuris Pueblo

Kaml Lindoff

EPA Planner

Wanda Jean Lord 

Tejon Indian Tribe

Teri Macias

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians

Billy Maines

Curyung Tribal Council

Kathleen Mayo

U.S. EPA Region 5

Lisa Meday

Seminole Tribe of FL

Ken Merrill

Kalispel Tribe

Kimberly Miller

Morongo Band of Mission Indians

Ramona Montoya

Pueblo of Isleta

Linda Nguyen

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewas

Autumn Nicholas

Copper River Native Association

Danielle Pangilinan

U.S. EPA

Nikos Pastos

Alaska Inter-Tribal Council 

Randy Poelma

Ho-Chunk Nation

2
Grant Poole

Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians

Jim Rasanen

Keweenaw Bay Indian Community

Bernardo Roman

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida

Jamie Sheahan Alonso

Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs

Brent Shields

Chickasaw Nation

Shavonne Smith

Shinnecock Environmental Department

Chris Spencer

Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa

Matt Steinbach

Forest County Potawatomi Community

Mardell Sundown

Haudenosaunee Environmental Task Force

Teresa Swoyer

Otoe-Missouria Tribe

Steve Terry

United South and Easterin Tribes, Inc.

Todd Thorn

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation

Brenda Tomaras

Lytton Rancheria

Maja Tritt

U.S. EPA Region 10

Scottie Wallace

Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians

David Warfel

Miccosukee Tribe

Carl Wissilie

Alaska Native

Raquel Whitehorse

Navajo Tribal Utility Authority

Jessica Winnestaffer

Chickaloon Native Village

Felicia Wright

U.S. EPA Headquarters

Joy Yoshioka

Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma

3
Questions and Answers

October 16 Webinar

Question: How does fracking water fit into the antidegradation?

U.S. EPA Response: In general, water quality standards (WQS) relate to surface waters. If there are 

activities that could lower water quality in surface waters, then antidegradation applies generally. The 

specific circumstances will depend on what is happening at the particular site.

Question: Economic condition for the long-term or the short-term?

U.S. EPA Response: In the context of deciding whether to allow a lowering of high quality water, it is 

necessary to show that an activity is necessary to accomodate important economic or social 

development in the area in which the waters are located. EPA’s 1995 Interim Economic Guidance for 

Water Quality Standards outlines factors to consider when a state or tribe is making this decision, but 

the analysis is case specific. The analysis should consider long-term impacts among other factors.

Question: Will EPA require water quality testing to ensure antidegradation of water quality?

U.S. EPA Response: Water quality monitoring is conducted under a different part of the Clean Water Act 

than water quality standards. Water quality monitoring is a useful way to see if water quality is being 

protected and maintained. Establishing conditions for water quality monitoring will be the prevue of the 

entity issuing the permit. Often NPDES permits contain specific conditions for water quality monitoring.

Question: If you wouldn't mind, could you give a definition of highest attainable use versus highest 

water quality?

U.S. EPA Response: “Highest attainable use (HAU)” refers to identifying the best use that can be 

achieved when a state or tribe has demonstrated that 101(a)(2) uses are not attainable. In that case, 

something less is attainable. HAU refers to the function of the water body, not the water quality. In the 

antidegradation context, “high water quality,” is used for waters that have certain water quality (i.e., 

measured parameters), and whether that level of water quality is better than CWA goal uses. The 

fundamental difference is the function of the water body vs. water quality levels.

October 22 Webinar

Question: Has the State of Alaska finished a Triennial Review during the last two review periods? There 

are a lot of Tribal waters in Alaska.

U.S. EPA Response: This question is state-specific, and presenters today are unable to answer statespecific questions. The EPA presenters will put the questioner in touch with the EPA Region 10 

coordinator who can answer this question. 

Question: When prior use of waters has been hunting, fishing and drinking the waters for thousands of 

years and regulatory control was done through oral policy, how can this information be included in the 

rulemaking? Is there a component of Traditional Knowledge that can be used in the rulemaking?

U.S. EPA Response: This question is specific to a given state or tribal action. During the WQS rulemaking 

process, that type of information can be factored in. Such information should be submitted via the 

methods specified in a state or tribe’s public participation process. In addition, that information can be 

sent to EPA Headquarters, so that EPA can bring it up during the state or tribal participation process. 

4
Question: What are examples of non-101(a)(2) uses?

U.S. EPA Response: Examples of non-101(a)(2) uses are public water supply (water used for drinking 

water intakes), as well as use of water for industrial purposes, agriculture purposes, ceremonial uses, or 

irrigation.

Question: The Alaska Inter-Tribal Council continues to question whether the State of Alaska is actually 

complying with the NPDES Clean Water Act NPDES permitting in Alaska. EPA delegated permitting 

authority to Alaska, against the expressed opposition of dozens of Alaskan Tribes. Will any further 

technical assistance be offered to federally recognized Tribal governments or disproportionately 

impacted communities throughout Alaska in the area of WQS and NPDES permitting?

U.S. EPA Response: This question is beyond the scope of the rulemaking that we are discussing today, 

and presenters today are unable to answer state-specific questions. The EPA presenters will we will put 

you in touch with the EPA Region 10 coordinator that can discuss this matter with you.

Comments and Questions Received Following Conclusion of the Webinar

Comment: Consultation between governments needs to be initiated and accepted by each duly elected 

Tribal Government in compliance with Executive Orders on government to government consultation.

Question: What other avenues exist in the CWA regs for temporary WQS exceedances or are variances 

the only way to handle that? For short-term restoration projects, for example.

Question: Are there public notice/approval requirements for variances?

5