\"t'll ll1 0 N4ff.t**~" ~**  STATE OF MAINE**~** ......

# ~J 

# Department of Environmental Protection

JOS£PH E. BRENNAN GOVE RNOR

April 1, 19 85

Michael 

### R. Deland R

egional Admin i s tra tor MAIN OFFICE: RAY BUilOIN<.>. HOS PIT A L STREET

. AUGUSTA MAI L ADDRESS : State Hous. Slatoon 17, Augu, ta. 04333

U.S. Environmen tal Pro t ec tion Agency Region I J.F. Kennedy**Feder~lLBuild ing**  Bost on ,**Massach~~~~22 03** 

# ear~:..**~** HENRY E. WARREN CO MMISSION ER

We appreciate your thorou gh r eview of our proposed Water Quality Standar ds. My staff has.**~repar.ed '**  a . response which I trust w -i.ll answer your**conce rn** **~** If you need further clarification, I would b e happy to provid e it

.

Stephen W. Groves, Director Bureau of Wat er Quality Control SWG /JS/pm f Enclosures

• Portland • REGIONAL OFFiq ES • B angor • • Presque Isle •l a) Response to Michael Del and' s C omments on Maine's Proposed Wat e r Quality Standards
It is o ur op1n1on that ex isting uses ar e defacto**pro~ected** by our propo sed language i n as m uch a s "wat er quality nece ssary to protect chara cteristics ..•. shall be ma intained." Since ex isting uses are dependent upon exi sting character i s t ics, ma int ainence of water qua lit y to protect char ac teristics translates to ma inta i n e nce of existing us es . b) To den y any degradation of water quality is in effect a "no discharge poli cy " w hic h the State of Main e is not yet prepared to embrace. Our Se c t io n 414-A , 1-c (see enclosure) discusses the m easure s n eces s ary bef ore any water quality d e g rad a t ion may oc c ur . T his a nti- degr a dat ion po licy s imp ly re inforces 414

- A and adds to it the necess ity of s howing "signific ant public benefits for the People of the State

. of M ai ne"

. c) Regulat io ns conce rni ng intergovernmental and pub lic partici pat ion proc e ss es will b e c ons idered fol l ow i ng passage of t h e statu te. We do not fee l language to th is effect is appropriate in t he s tat ute itself. d) Assu rance of cost effective and reason abl e be st m anag ement prac ti c es for no n-point s our ce control wi l l be a ddre ssed in our bienn ial 305 b report to E.P.A. 2. Section 3.d has been amended omitt ing the w o rk "new" pr ec eeding discharges. The prohibition now appl i es to any discharge. 3

. All water · quality regulat io ns will be revi e wed and revised where nec es s ary u pon pass age of the statutes. 4, A bl anket wai ver of bacteria cri t e ria is no t th e intent of this b i l l. The langu ag e s i m ply set s a ceiling for bacteria between May

. l an d October 1. It does not imp l y t hat bacteria levels may i n terfere with t he · c harac teri stics of a cl as s. In fact, 3.c., under General Provi si ons , assures tha t all discharg es mu st be assimilated s ufficie ntly to protect the characteristics and de signa t ed uses of any classified rec eiving wa ter or cause fish to be unsuitable for human consumption

. 5. This is prob abl y more a matter of s eman tics and can be ad dressed in regu la tions. Ne i ther our v e rsi o n or y our' s is perfe ct. Both have the "drawb ack" that falsificat ion of the null hypot h esi s is required before a source may b e attribut ed t o bacterial contaminat ion

. This is actu all y how it should be if we are to bas e the st andard on s cie nce. 6. Maine's "Toxic Strategy" should answ er these concerns. A first draft of which is due to be sent to you soon.-2-
7

. S ince dissolved oxyg en m1n1mums are set, there is nothing to prevent us from requiring higher leve ls in the eve nt that an indi genous species is present which requ i r es oxygen levels hi gher than the m1n1 mum of the class. Our low est class, Clas s 

### C, requires dis charges to be suff1ciently tr e ated so as t o " support all indigeno us specie s of fis h. " 

### 8

. Again a s stated in our response to comment 

### #4, bacterial li mit s are not wai ved.**~here** necess a ry to pro t ect the h arv est and pro pagation of shellfish, discha rg es w i ll be require d t o d isinfect. This is supported in two places in our statute 1 ) Ge n e ral provisions 3.c., last line and agai n in SB "There shall be no di scharge to Class SB wa t es which would cau se closure of open shellfi s h areas b y the Department o f Mar ine Resources." T

he D. M.R

. is re sponsible for m an agement of shell fis h in Maine and they must abide by the req u irement of t he Natural Shel lf ish Sanitation Program. 

### If total or fecal colifo rms are consid e red a threat t o an open area, then w

e have the power to deny a discharge l icense or put s ufficient conditions on a**lic~n se**  so as to remove the threat of closure. 

### 9. All water quality criteria are being reviewe d for changes when this statute



### · is passed. Chromium is among t hem. 10. Th ese are**egua tio** **,5'** w h ich will be reviewed and change d as necessary. 11. Our Sec ti on 4 5 1 addr es ses mixing zone s . considers the factor s in E.P .A

. • · s "W' eter Ch apter 2

. Decisions reg arding mixing z one s Quality St an d ards Randb ook,"