Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0095-0019
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2012-04-19T04:00Z

August 16, 2002

Mr. Bradley M. Campbell

Commissioner

New Jersey Department of 

  Environmental Protection

CN 402

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0402

Dear Commissioner Campbell:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has completed its review
of the revisions to the New Jersey Surface Water Quality Standards
(NJSWQS) under New Jersey Administrative Code (N.J.A.C.) 7:9B, submitted
by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) on
March 1, 2002.  These revisions were approved by the New Jersey Attorney
General and were adopted by the State and became effective on January
22, 2002.  Submitted with the revised NJSWQS were the following:

the certification letter from the Deputy Attorney General Darren R.
Epply	(January 24, 2002); and,

 

the applicable notices from the New Jersey Register (dated December 18,
2000 and January 22, 2002).

Under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. ( 1313(c),
states are to submit revised or new water quality standards to EPA for
approval no less frequently than every three years.  Federal regulations
at 40 C.F.R. (( 131.21 and 131.22 implement these requirements. 

In a February 3, 1998 letter (enclosed) from Ms. Kathleen C. Callahan,
Director, Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, to Mr.
Robert Tudor, Administrator Office of Environmental Planning, EPA
acknowledged that New Jersey would use a two phase process for the
review and revision of the NJSWQS to meet the State(s statutory (sunset
date( of April 1998 for the expiration of its water quality standards. 
However, EPA stated that it would take action only when New Jersey
completed all applicable revisions to the NJSWQS resulting from both
phases of the State process.  During (Phase 1,( New Jersey completed and
adopted revisions to its water quality standards regulations on April
17, 1998.  The April 17, 1998 (Phase 1" rulemaking consisted of
re-adopting the existing NJSWQS with changes for consistency with the
New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) Rules, which
were adopted by the State on February 5, 1997.  These revisions were
relatively minor and non-controversial.  As part of the (Phase 2" review
process, NJDEP held two public hearings to receive public input and
comment on the proposed revisions to the NJSWQS on January 10 and
January 18, 2001.  The  January 22, 2002 (Phase 2" rulemaking resulted
in more substantial revisions to the policies and criteria included in
the NJSWQS.  

This letter constitutes EPA(s action on both phases of the revisions to
the NJSWQS.   EPA considers the adoption of revisions to N.J.A.C. 7:9B,
along with the public review and comment process, to constitute the
State(s triennial review of water quality standards.  Based on our
review, the procedures of both phases of New Jersey(s process are
consistent with, and satisfy the procedural requirements of 40 C.F.R. (
131.20.   

The revisions to the NJSWQS enhance and improve the NJSWQS program,
including:

the additions and/or revisions of several definitions, including some
new definitions to be consistent with the NJPDES regulations (N.J.A.C.
7:9B-1.4) which are approved as being consistent with the requirements
under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.3;

inclusion of applicable technical, administrative, and/or editorial
corrections or clarifications to existing definitions and provisions
which are approved as being consistent with the requirements under 40
C.F.R. ( 131.3;

deletion of certain NJPDES-based provisions or terms because they are
either out of date, or have been adopted into the NJPDES regulations,
and therefore, no longer need to remain in the NJSWQS, which is approved
as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.3; 

the addition of a provision stating that it is the State(s policy to
restore, maintain and preserve all freshwaters as potential sources of
potable water supplies.  This proposed policy provides that all fresh
surface waters should be protected as potential sources of public water
supplies to provide adequate, clean potable water for the present and
future (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.5(a)), which is approved as being consistent
with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.10(a); 

the revision of the harmonic mean flow for toxic pollutants with a
bioaccumulation/ bioconcentration factor greater than 200 L/kg and for
bromodichloromethane, to a design flow which is exceeded 75% of the time
for the appropriate (period of record( as determined by the United
States Geological Survey (USGS). (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.5(c)(2)), which is
approved as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. (
131.13;  

the adoption of the conversion factors published by EPA (60 Fed. Reg.
22229; May 4, 1995) as metal translators, unless a site-specific metal
translator is developed through a site-specific water quality study or
if a metal translator is developed as part of a study through the
watershed process or through a TMDL process which undergoes EPA review
and approval (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.5(c)(6)), which is approved as being
consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(b)(1)(ii);

revisions to the State(s nutrient policies to specify that nutrients
will not be permitted in concentrations that cause: (1) abnormal diurnal
fluctuations in dissolved oxygen or pH; or (2) changes to the
composition of aquatic ecosystems, in addition to the existing
conditions that are not allowed in freshwaters except due to natural
conditions (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.5(g)), which are approved as being
consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(b)(2);  

revisions to the State(s mixing zone policies and their implementation
procedures to clarify the scope of the policy and provide specificity to
ensure uniform implementation (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.5(h)), which are approved
as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.13; 

revisions to the State(s phosphorus criteria to acknowledge that
criteria may be developed through the watershed process (N.J.A.C.
7:9B-1.14(c)5), which are approved as being consistent with the
requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(b);

deletion of the portion of the State(s criteria for total dissolved
solids (TDS) specifying changes in TDS levels up to 133% shall be deemed
to be in compliance with the TDS criteria, and the addition of the use
of toxicity tests to confirm whether there are any adverse effects
(N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.14(c)8), which are approved as being consistent with
the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(b); 

adoption of ammonia criteria which are specifically developed to protect
the uses of the respective surface water classifications and are based
on toxicity data on New Jersey-specific species (N.J.A.C.
7:9B-1.14(c)13vi), which are approved as being consistent with the
requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. (
131.11(b)(1)(ii);

the revision of the State(s human health criteria for PCBs consistent
with EPA(s final rule entitled, Water Quality Standards; Establishment
of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States'
Compliance--Revision of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Criteria; Final
Rule, which was published in the Federal Register on November 9, 1999
(64 FR 61182) (N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.14(c)13xxxii), which is approved as being
consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40
C.F.R. ( 131.11(b)(1)(i); and, 

  

revisions to several water body classifications based on trout status
(N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.15), which are approved as being consistent with the
requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.10(a) - (e). 

EPA supports New Jersey(s use of a metal criterion(s conversion factor
as the metal translator to express the dissolved aquatic life criterion
in the equivalent total recoverable form. When developing an effluent
limit under the NJPDES program (expressed as a total recoverable
concentration) to meet the dissolved metal criterion, a translator is
required.  Use of the criterion(s conversion factor, as discussed in
guidance (EPA 823-B-96-007), provides an environmentally conservative
translator.  When monitoring for compliance with the criteria, however,
NJDEP should sample for and analyze the dissolved form of the metal in
the ambient environment and directly compare those sampling results with
the dissolved-based aquatic criteria.  It would not be appropriate to
determine compliance by using the metal translator to compare the total
recoverable concentration measured in the ambient environment with the
dissolved aquatic life criterion developed under laboratory conditions.

I am approving the State(s adoption of the marine acute and chronic
aquatic life criteria for lead, and also approving, for now, NJDEP(s
freshwater acute and chronic criteria for lead as non-hardness dependent
values.  At hardness levels below 200 mg/LCaCO3, NJDEP(s fresh water
criteria appear less protective than EPA(s.  However, direct comparisons
are not possible because EPA(s fresh water criteria are hardness
dependent. 

EPA is in the process of updating its aquatic life criteria for lead and
may revise the Agency(s national recommended water quality criteria. 
EPA conducted a literature review for lead in 1997 and generated a draft
document.  EPA previously provided NJDEP a copy of this draft document,
as well as and some unpublished data that was received in response to
the Agency(s 1999 solicitation of data from the public (64 FR 58409,
October 29,1999).  New acute data considered acceptable for use is
available for C. dubia (Bitton et al. 1993 and Diamond et al. 1997). 
New acceptable saltwater acute and chronic data along with a new acute
to chronic ratio (ACR) is available for the copepod, Eurytemora affinis,
(Hall et al 1997 Unpublished report).  Additional saltwater acute data
are also available in the draft document for amphipods, surf clams, bay
scallops and yellow crabs, but not all have been reviewed yet by EPA.  	

Once EPA publishes its updated national recommended aquatic life water
quality criteria for lead, New Jersey should review its water quality
criteria to determine if they are still protective of aquatic life based
on the most recent science.  EPA remains available to provide NJDEP with
any technical support necessary to assist the State in future revisions
to its lead criteria.

As you are aware, the National Toxic Rule (NTR) (57 FR 60848) criteria
still apply in  New Jersey for PCBs and lead criteria values for Clean
Water Act programs.  We will begin the process of withdrawing New Jersey
from the NTR for PCBs and for lead during the next round of withdrawals
from the NTR. 

By this letter, I am pleased to approve the revisions to the NJSWQS
pursuant to Section 303(c) of the CWA, subject to the results of
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act.

EPA initiated consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
the National Marine Fisheries Service (Services) on July 18, 2002, under
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act.  Section 7(a)(2) requires
that federal agencies, in consultation with the Services, insure that
their actions are not likely to jeopardize the existence of federally
listed species or result in the adverse modification of designated
critical habitat of such species.  Upon completion of consultation, EPA
will notify the State of the results.	

It is my understanding, consistent with the State(s commitment in the
SFY(02 - 04 New Jersey Performance Partnership Agreement, that NJDEP
will soon be proposing State adoption of revisions to the New Jersey(s
antidegradation policy, including a statement to provide that the
maintenance, migration, protection, and propagation of federally listed
threatened and endangered species are considered existing uses and will
be maintained and protected.  At the same time NJDEP will also propose
State adoption of the New Jersey-specific wildlife criteria for PCBs,
DDT and mercury that were jointly developed by NJDEP, FWS and EPA to
protect federally listed endangered and threatened species, including
the bald eagle and peregrine falcon.

EPA Region II looks forward to continuing to work with NJDEP to further
improve New Jersey's Surface Water Quality Standards.  If you have any
questions, please call me at (212) 637-5000 or have your staff contact
Mr. Walter Mugdan, Director, Division of Environmental Planning and
Protection at (212) 637-3725.

Sincerely,

William J. Muszynski

Deputy Regional Administrator

Enclosure

cc:  Brenda Jogan, NJDEP

       Steven Lubow, NJDEP

       Fred Leutner, OST-SHPD

       Marjorie Pitts, OST-SHPD

bcc: Mario Del Vicario, CEPB  

        Felix Locicero, CEPB-F&ET

        Wayne Jackson, CEPB-F&ET

        Dick Weisberg, ORC-WGGL

G:\user\share\swqb\tes\wqs\nj\approve.nj.wpd