Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/131.38
Timestamp: 2016-02-11 07:03:23
Document Index: 128813651

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', 'art 423', '§ 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', '§ 131', 'art 423', '§ 131', '§ 131', 'art 131', 'art 131', 'art 131', 'art 131', 'art 131']

40 CFR 131.38 - Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
CFR › Title 40 › Chapter I › Subchapter D › Part 131 › Subpart D › Section 131.38 40 CFR 131.38 - Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California.
§ 131.38
Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California.
This section promulgates criteria for priority toxic pollutants in the State of California for inland surface waters and enclosed bays and estuaries. This section also contains a compliance schedule provision.
Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants in the State of California as described in the following table:
Footnotes to table in paragraph (b)(1):
a. Criteria revised to reflect the Agency q1* or RfD, as contained in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as of October 1, 1996. The fish tissue bioconcentration factor (BCF) from the 1980 documents was retained in each case.
b. Criteria apply to California waters except for those waters subject to objectives in Tables III-2A and III-2B of the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board's (SFRWQCB) 1986 Basin Plan that were adopted by the SFRWQCB and the State Water Resources Control Board, approved by EPA, and which continue to apply. For copper and nickel, criteria apply to California waters except for waters south of Dumbarton Bridge in San Francisco Bay that are subject to the objectives in the SFRWQCB's Basin Plan as amended by SFRWQCB Resolution R2-2002-0061, dated May 22, 2002, and approved by the State Water Resources Control Board. EPA approved the aquatic life site-specific objectives on January 21, 2003. The copper and nickel aquatic life site-specific objectives contained in the amended Basin Plan apply instead.
c. Criteria are based on carcinogenicity of 10 (-6) risk.
d. Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for a short period of time without deleterious effects. Criteria Continuous Concentration (CCC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for an extended period of time (4 days) without deleterious effects. ug/L equals micrograms per liter.
e. Freshwater aquatic life criteria for metals are expressed as a function of total hardness (mg/L) in the water body. The equations are provided in matrix at paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Values displayed above in the matrix correspond to a total hardness of 100 mg/l.
f. Freshwater aquatic life criteria for pentachlorophenol are expressed as a function of pH, and are calculated as follows: Values displayed above in the matrix correspond to a pH of 7.8. CMC = exp(1.005(pH)−4.869). CCC = exp(1.005(pH)−5.134).
g. This criterion is based on 304(a) aquatic life criterion issued in 1980, and was issued in one of the following documents: Aldrin/Dieldrin (EPA 440/5-80-019), Chlordane (EPA 440/5-80-027), DDT (EPA 440/5-80-038), Endosulfan (EPA 440/5-80-046), Endrin (EPA 440/5-80-047), Heptachlor (440/5-80-052), Hexachlorocyclohexane (EPA 440/5-80-054), Silver (EPA 440/5-80-071). The Minimum Data Requirements and derivation procedures were different in the 1980 Guidelines than in the 1985 Guidelines. For example, a “CMC” derived using the 1980 Guidelines was derived to be used as an instantaneous maximum. If assessment is to be done using an averaging period, the values given should be divided by 2 to obtain a value that is more comparable to a CMC derived using the 1985 Guidelines.
h. These totals simply sum the criteria in each column. For aquatic life, there are 23 priority toxic pollutants with some type of freshwater or saltwater, acute or chronic criteria. For human health, there are 92 priority toxic pollutants with either “water organism” or “organism only” criteria. Note that these totals count chromium as one pollutant even though EPA has developed criteria based on two valence states. In the matrix, EPA has assigned numbers 5a and 5b to the criteria for chromium to reflect the fact that the list of 126 priority pollutants includes only a single listing for chromium.
i. Criteria for these metals are expressed as a function of the water-effect ratio, WER, as defined in paragraph (c) of this section. CMC = column B1 or C1 value×WER; CCC = column B2 or C2 value×WER.
j. No criterion for protection of human health from consumption of aquatic organisms (excluding water) was presented in the 1980 criteria document or in the 1986 Quality Criteria for Water. Nevertheless, sufficient information was presented in the 1980 document to allow a calculation of a criterion, even though the results of such a calculation were not shown in the document.
k. The CWA 304(a) criterion for asbestos is the MCL.
l. [Reserved]
m. These freshwater and saltwater criteria for metals are expressed in terms of the dissolved fraction of the metal in the water column. Criterion values were calculated by using EPA's Clean Water Act 304(a) guidance values (described in the total recoverable fraction) and then applying the conversion factors in § 131.36(b)(1) and (2).
n. EPA is not promulgating human health criteria for these contaminants. However, permit authorities should address these contaminants in NPDES permit actions using the State's existing narrative criteria for toxics.
o. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the National Toxics Rule (“NTR”), at § 131.36. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays or estuaries and waters of the State defined as inland, i.e., all surface waters of the State not ocean waters. These waters specifically include the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for this criterion.
p. A criterion of 20 ug/l was promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR and was promulgated in the total recoverable form. The specific waters to which the NTR criterion applies include: Waters of the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of Salt Slough, Mud Slough (north) and the San Joaquin River, Sack Dam to the mouth of the Merced River. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for this criterion. The State of California adopted and EPA approved a site specific criterion for the San Joaquin River, mouth of Merced to Vernalis; therefore, this section does not apply to these waters.
q. This criterion is expressed in the total recoverable form. This criterion was promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR and was promulgated in the total recoverable form. The specific waters to which the NTR criterion applies include: Waters of the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of Salt Slough, Mud Slough (north) and the San Joaquin River, Sack Dam to Vernalis. This criterion does not apply instead of the NTR for these waters. This criterion applies to additional waters of the United States in the State of California pursuant to 40 CFR 131.38(c). The State of California adopted and EPA approved a site-specific criterion for the Grassland Water District, San Luis National Wildlife Refuge, and the Los Banos State Wildlife Refuge; therefore, this criterion does not apply to these waters.
r. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays or estuaries including the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria.
s. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and waters of the State defined as inland (i.e., all surface waters of the State not bays or estuaries or ocean) that include a MUN use designation. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria.
t. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays and estuaries including San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of the State defined as inland (i.e., all surface waters of the State not bays or estuaries or ocean) without a MUN use designation. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria.
u. PCBs are a class of chemicals which include aroclors 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016, CAS numbers 53469219, 11097691, 11104282, 11141165, 12672296, 11096825, and 12674112, respectively. The aquatic life criteria apply to the sum of this set of seven aroclors.
v. This criterion applies to total PCBs, e.g., the sum of all congener or isomer or homolog or aroclor analyses.
w. This criterion has been recalculated pursuant to the 1995 Updates: Water Quality Criteria Documents for the Protection of Aquatic Life in Ambient Water, Office of Water, EPA-820-B-96-001, September 1996. See also Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative Criteria Documents for the Protection of Aquatic Life in Ambient Water, Office of Water, EPA-80-B-95-004, March 1995.
x. The State of California has adopted and EPA has approved site specific criteria for the Sacramento River (and tributaries) above Hamilton City; therefore, these criteria do not apply to these waters.
General Notes to Table in Paragraph (b)(1)
1. The table in this paragraph (b)(1) lists all of EPA's priority toxic pollutants whether or not criteria guidance are available. Blank spaces indicate the absence of national section 304(a) criteria guidance. Because of variations in chemical nomenclature systems, this listing of toxic pollutants does not duplicate the listing in appendix A to 40 CFR Part 423-126 Priority Pollutants. EPA has added the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry numbers, which provide a unique identification for each chemical.
2. The following chemicals have organoleptic-based criteria recommendations that are not included on this chart: zinc, 3-methyl-4-chlorophenol.
3. Freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria apply as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
Factors for Calculating Metals Criteria. Final CMC and CCC values should be rounded to two significant figures.
(i) CMC = WER × (Acute Conversion Factor) × (exp{m
A[1n (hardness)] b
A})
(ii) CCC = WER × (Chronic Conversion Factor) × (exp{m
C[ln(hardness)] b
(iii) Table 1 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section:
Note to Table 1: The term “exp” represents the base e exponential function.
−3.6867
−4.705
Table 2 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section:
Conversion factor (CF) for freshwater acute criteria
CF for freshwater chronic criteria
CF for saltwater acute criteria
CF a for saltwater chronic criteria
Footnotes to Table 2 of Paragraph(
b)(2):
a Conversion Factors for chronic marine criteria are not currently available. Conversion Factors for acute marine criteria have been used for both acute and chronic marine criteria.
b Conversion Factors for these pollutants in freshwater are hardness dependent. CFs are based on a hardness of 100 mg/l as calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Other hardness can be used; CFs should be recalculated using the equations in table 3 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
c Bioaccumulative compound and inappropriate to adjust to percent dissolved.
d EPA has not published an aquatic life criterion value.
b 0.944
b 0.909
Note to Table 2 of paragraph (b)(2):
The term “Conversion Factor” represents the recommended conversion factor for converting a metal criterion expressed as the total recoverable fraction in the water column to a criterion expressed as the dissolved fraction in the water column. See “Office of Water Policy and Technical Guidance on Interpretation and Implementation of Aquatic Life Metals Criteria”, October 1, 1993, by Martha G. Prothro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Water available from Water Resource Center, USEPA, Mailcode RC4100, M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460 and the note to § 131.36(b)(1).
Table 3 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section:
CF=1.136672—[(ln {hardness}) (0.041838)]
CF = 1.101672—[(ln {hardness})(0.041838)]
CF=1.46203—[(ln {hardness})(0.145712)]
CF = 1.46203—[(ln {hardness})(0.145712)]
The criteria in paragraph (b) of this section apply to the State's designated uses cited in paragraph (d) of this section and apply concurrently with any criteria adopted by the State, except when State regulations contain criteria which are more stringent for a particular parameter and use, or except as provided in footnotes p, q, and x to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
The criteria established in this section are subject to the State's general rules of applicability in the same way and to the same extent as are other Federally-adopted and State-adopted numeric toxics criteria when applied to the same use classifications including mixing zones, and low flow values below which numeric standards can be exceeded in flowing fresh waters.
For all waters with mixing zone regulations or implementation procedures, the criteria apply at the appropriate locations within or at the boundary of the mixing zones; otherwise the criteria apply throughout the water body including at the point of discharge into the water body.
The State shall not use a low flow value below which numeric standards can be exceeded that is less stringent than the flows in Table 4 to paragraph (c)(2) of this section for streams and rivers.
Table 4 to paragraph (c)(2) of this section:
Aquatic Life Acute Criteria (CMC)
1 Q 10 or 1 B 3
Aquatic Life Chronic Criteria (CCC)
7 Q 10 or 4 B 3
Harmonic Mean Flow
Note to table 4 of paragraph (c)(2):
1. CMC (Criteria Maximum Concentration) is the water quality criteria to protect against acute effects in aquatic life and is the highest instream concentration of a priority toxic pollutant consisting of a short-term average not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.
2. CCC (Continuous Criteria Concentration) is the water quality criteria to protect against chronic effects in aquatic life and is the highest in stream concentration of a priority toxic pollutant consisting of a 4-day average not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.
3. 1 Q 10 is the lowest one day flow with an average recurrence frequency of once in 10 years determined hydrologically.
4. 1 B 3 is biologically based and indicates an allowable exceedence of once every 3 years. It is determined by EPA's computerized method (DFLOW model).
5. 7 Q 10 is the lowest average 7 consecutive day low flow with an average recurrence frequency of once in 10 years determined hydrologically.
6. 4 B 3 is biologically based and indicates an allowable exceedence for 4 consecutive days once every 3 years. It is determined by EPA's computerized method (DFLOW model).
If the State does not have such a low flow value below which numeric standards do not apply, then the criteria included in paragraph (d) of this section apply at all flows.
If the CMC short-term averaging period, the CCC four-day averaging period, or once in three-year frequency is inappropriate for a criterion or the site to which a criterion applies, the State may apply to EPA for approval of an alternative averaging period, frequency, and related design flow. The State must submit to EPA the bases for any alternative averaging period, frequency, and related design flow. Before approving any change, EPA will publish for public comment, a document proposing the change.
The freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria in the matrix in paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply as follows:
For waters in which the salinity is equal to or less than 1 part per thousand 95% or more of the time, the applicable criteria are the freshwater criteria in Column B;
For waters in which the salinity is equal to or greater than 10 parts per thousand 95% or more of the time, the applicable criteria are the saltwater criteria in Column C except for selenium in the San Francisco Bay estuary where the applicable criteria are the freshwater criteria in Column B (refer to footnotes p and q to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section); and
For waters in which the salinity is between 1 and 10 parts per thousand as defined in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section, the applicable criteria are the more stringent of the freshwater or saltwater criteria. However, the Regional Administrator may approve the use of the alternative freshwater or saltwater criteria if scientifically defensible information and data demonstrate that on a site-specific basis the biology of the water body is dominated by freshwater aquatic life and that freshwater criteria are more appropriate; or conversely, the biology of the water body is dominated by saltwater aquatic life and that saltwater criteria are more appropriate. Before approving any change, EPA will publish for public comment a document proposing the change.
Application of metals criteria.
For purposes of calculating freshwater aquatic life criteria for metals from the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, for waters with a hardness of 400 mg/l or less as calcium carbonate, the actual ambient hardness of the surface water shall be used in those equations. For waters with a hardness of over 400 mg/l as calcium carbonate, a hardness of 400 mg/l as calcium carbonate shall be used with a default Water-Effect Ratio (WER) of 1, or the actual hardness of the ambient surface water shall be used with a WER. The same provisions apply for calculating the metals criteria for the comparisons provided for in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section.
The hardness values used shall be consistent with the design discharge conditions established in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for design flows and mixing zones.
The criteria for metals (compounds #1—#13 in the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section) are expressed as dissolved except where otherwise noted. For purposes of calculating aquatic life criteria for metals from the equations in footnote i to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the water effect ratio is generally computed as a specific pollutant's acute or chronic toxicity value measured in water from the site covered by the standard, divided by the respective acute or chronic toxicity value in laboratory dilution water. To use a water effect ratio other than the default of 1, the WER must be determined as set forth in Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of Water Effect Ratios, U.S. EPA Office of Water, EPA-823-B-94-001, February 1994, or alternatively, other scientifically defensible methods adopted by the State as part of its water quality standards program and approved by EPA. For calculation of criteria using site-specific values for both the hardness and the water effect ratio, the hardness used in the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section must be determined as required in paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section. Water hardness must be calculated from the measured calcium and magnesium ions present, and the ratio of calcium to magnesium should be approximately the same in standard laboratory toxicity testing water as in the site water.
Except as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, all waters assigned any aquatic life or human health use classifications in the Water Quality Control Plans for the various Basins of the State (“Basin Plans”) adopted by the California State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”), except for ocean waters covered by the Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California (“Ocean Plan”) adopted by the SWRCB with resolution Number 90-27 on March 22, 1990, are subject to the criteria in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, without exception. These criteria apply to waters identified in the Basin Plans. More particularly, these criteria apply to waters identified in the Basin Plan chapters designating beneficial uses for waters within the region. Although the State has adopted several use designations for each of these waters, for purposes of this action, the specific standards to be applied in paragraph (d)(2) of this section are based on the presence in all waters of some aquatic life designation and the presence or absence of the MUN use designation (municipal and domestic supply). (See Basin Plans for more detailed use definitions.)
The criteria from the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply to the water and use classifications defined in paragraph (d)(1) of this section as follows:
Water and use classification
(i) All inland waters of the United States or enclosed bays and estuaries that are waters of the United States that include a MUN use designation
(A) Columns B1 and B2—all pollutants(B) Columns C1 and C2—all pollutants
(C) Column D1—all pollutants
(ii) All inland waters of the United States or enclosed bays and estuaries that are waters of the United States that do not include a MUN use designation
(C) Column D2—all pollutants
Nothing in this section is intended to apply instead of specific criteria, including specific criteria for the San Francisco Bay estuary, promulgated for California in the National Toxics Rule at § 131.36.
The human health criteria shall be applied at the State-adopted 10 (−6) risk level.
Nothing in this section applies to waters located in Indian Country.
It is presumed that new and existing point source dischargers will promptly comply with any new or more restrictive water quality-based effluent limitations (“WQBELs”) based on the water quality criteria set forth in this section.
When a permit issued on or after May 18, 2000 to a new discharger contains a WQBEL based on water quality criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this section, the permittee shall comply with such WQBEL upon the commencement of the discharge. A new discharger is defined as any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be a “discharge of pollutants” (as defined in 40 CFR 122.2) to the State of California's inland surface waters or enclosed bays and estuaries, the construction of which commences after May 18, 2000.
Where an existing discharger reasonably believes that it will be infeasible to promptly comply with a new or more restrictive WQBEL based on the water quality criteria set forth in this section, the discharger may request approval from the permit issuing authority for a schedule of compliance.
A compliance schedule shall require compliance with WQBELs based on water quality criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this section as soon as possible, taking into account the dischargers' technical ability to achieve compliance with such WQBEL.
If the schedule of compliance exceeds one year from the date of permit issuance, reissuance or modification, the schedule shall set forth interim requirements and dates for their achievement. The dates of completion between each requirement may not exceed one year. If the time necessary for completion of any requirement is more than one year and is not readily divisible into stages for completion, the permit shall require, at a minimum, specified dates for annual submission of progress reports on the status of interim requirements.
In no event shall the permit issuing authority approve a schedule of compliance for a point source discharge which exceeds five years from the date of permit issuance, reissuance, or modification, whichever is sooner. Where shorter schedules of compliance are prescribed or schedules of compliance are prohibited by law, those provisions shall govern.
If a schedule of compliance exceeds the term of a permit, interim permit limits effective during the permit shall be included in the permit and addressed in the permit's fact sheet or statement of basis. The administrative record for the permit shall reflect final permit limits and final compliance dates. Final compliance dates for final permit limits, which do not occur during the term of the permit, must occur within five years from the date of issuance, reissuance or modification of the permit which initiates the compliance schedule. Where shorter schedules of compliance are prescribed or schedules of compliance are prohibited by law, those provisions shall govern.
The provisions in this paragraph (e), Schedules of compliance, shall expire on May 18, 2005.
[65 FR 31711, May 18, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 9961, Feb. 13, 2001; 68 FR 62747, Nov. 6, 2003]
At 66 FR 9961, Feb. 13, 2001, § 131.38 was amended in the table to paragraph (b)(1) under the column heading for “B Freshwater” by revising the column headings for “Criterion Maximum Concentration” and “Criterion Continuous Concentration”; under the column heading for “C Saltwater” by revising the column headings for “Criterion Maximum Concentration” and “Criterion Continuous Concentration”; and by revising entries “23.” and “67.”, effective Feb. 13, 2001. However, this is a photographed table and the amendments could not be incorporated into the text. For the convenience of the user, the amended text is set forth as follows:
BFreshwater
CSaltwater
DHuman health (10−6) risk for carcinogens)
# Compound
Criterionmaximum
conc. (µg/L) d
Criterioncontinous
Criterioncontinious
Water &organisms
Organismsonly
a Criteria revised to reflect the Agency q1* or RfD, as contained in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as of October 1, 1996. The fish tissue bioconcentration factor (BCF) from the 1980 documents was retained in each case.
c Criteria are based on carcinogenicity of 10−6 risk.
d Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for a short period of time without deleterious effects. Criteria Continuous Concentration (CCC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for an extended period of time (4 days) without deleterious effects. µg/L equals micrograms per liter.
t These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays and estuaries including San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of the State defined as inland (i.e., all surface waters of the State not bays or estuaries or ocean) without a MUN use designation. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria.
23. Chlorodibromomethane
a,c 0.41
a,c 34
67. Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)Ether
a 1,400
a,t 170,000
§ 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California.
Scope. This section promulgates criteria for priority toxic pollutants in the State of California for inland surface waters and enclosed bays and estuaries. This section also contains a compliance schedule provision. (b)
(1) Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants in the State of California as described in the following table: View or download PDF
a. Criteria revised to reflect the Agency q1* or RfD, as contained in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as of October 1, 1996. The fish tissue bioconcentration factor (BCF) from the 1980 documents was retained in each case. b. Criteria apply to California waters except for those waters subject to objectives in Tables III-2A and III-2B of the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board's (SFRWQCB) 1986 Basin Plan that were adopted by the SFRWQCB and the State Water Resources Control Board, approved by EPA, and which continue to apply. For copper and nickel, criteria apply to California waters except for waters south of Dumbarton Bridge in San Francisco Bay that are subject to the objectives in the SFRWQCB's Basin Plan as amended by SFRWQCB Resolution R2-2002-0061, dated May 22, 2002, and approved by the State Water Resources Control Board. EPA approved the aquatic life site-specific objectives on January 21, 2003. The copper and nickel aquatic life site-specific objectives contained in the amended Basin Plan apply instead. c. Criteria are based on carcinogenicity of 10 (-6) risk. d. Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for a short period of time without deleterious effects. Criteria Continuous Concentration (CCC) equals the highest concentration of a pollutant to which aquatic life can be exposed for an extended period of time (4 days) without deleterious effects. ug/L equals micrograms per liter. e. Freshwater aquatic life criteria for metals are expressed as a function of total hardness (mg/L) in the water body. The equations are provided in matrix at paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Values displayed above in the matrix correspond to a total hardness of 100 mg/l. f. Freshwater aquatic life criteria for pentachlorophenol are expressed as a function of pH, and are calculated as follows: Values displayed above in the matrix correspond to a pH of 7.8. CMC = exp(1.005(pH)−4.869). CCC = exp(1.005(pH)−5.134). g. This criterion is based on 304(a) aquatic life criterion issued in 1980, and was issued in one of the following documents: Aldrin/Dieldrin (EPA 440/5-80-019), Chlordane (EPA 440/5-80-027), DDT (EPA 440/5-80-038), Endosulfan (EPA 440/5-80-046), Endrin (EPA 440/5-80-047), Heptachlor (440/5-80-052), Hexachlorocyclohexane (EPA 440/5-80-054), Silver (EPA 440/5-80-071). The Minimum Data Requirements and derivation procedures were different in the 1980 Guidelines than in the 1985 Guidelines. For example, a “CMC” derived using the 1980 Guidelines was derived to be used as an instantaneous maximum. If assessment is to be done using an averaging period, the values given should be divided by 2 to obtain a value that is more comparable to a CMC derived using the 1985 Guidelines. h. These totals simply sum the criteria in each column. For aquatic life, there are 23 priority toxic pollutants with some type of freshwater or saltwater, acute or chronic criteria. For human health, there are 92 priority toxic pollutants with either “water organism” or “organism only” criteria. Note that these totals count chromium as one pollutant even though EPA has developed criteria based on two valence states. In the matrix, EPA has assigned numbers 5a and 5b to the criteria for chromium to reflect the fact that the list of 126 priority pollutants includes only a single listing for chromium. i. Criteria for these metals are expressed as a function of the water-effect ratio, WER, as defined in paragraph (c) of this section. CMC = column B1 or C1 value × WER; CCC = column B2 or C2 value × WER. j. No criterion for protection of human health from consumption of aquatic organisms (excluding water) was presented in the 1980 criteria document or in the 1986 Quality Criteria for Water. Nevertheless, sufficient information was presented in the 1980 document to allow a calculation of a criterion, even though the results of such a calculation were not shown in the document. k. The CWA 304(a) criterion for asbestos is the MCL. l. [Reserved] m. These freshwater and saltwater criteria for metals are expressed in terms of the dissolved fraction of the metal in the water column. Criterion values were calculated by using EPA's Clean Water Act 304(a) guidance values (described in the total recoverable fraction) and then applying the conversion factors in § 131.36(b)(1) and (2). n. EPA is not promulgating human health criteria for these contaminants. However, permit authorities should address these contaminants in NPDES permit actions using the State's existing narrative criteria for toxics. o. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the National Toxics Rule (“NTR”), at § 131.36. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays or estuaries and waters of the State defined as inland, i.e., all surface waters of the State not ocean waters. These waters specifically include the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for this criterion. p. A criterion of 20 ug/l was promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR and was promulgated in the total recoverable form. The specific waters to which the NTR criterion applies include: Waters of the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of Salt Slough, Mud Slough (north) and the San Joaquin River, Sack Dam to the mouth of the Merced River. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for this criterion. The State of California adopted and EPA approved a site specific criterion for the San Joaquin River, mouth of Merced to Vernalis; therefore, this section does not apply to these waters. q. This criterion is expressed in the total recoverable form. This criterion was promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR and was promulgated in the total recoverable form. The specific waters to which the NTR criterion applies include: Waters of the San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of Salt Slough, Mud Slough (north) and the San Joaquin River, Sack Dam to Vernalis. This criterion does not apply instead of the NTR for these waters. This criterion applies to additional waters of the United States in the State of California pursuant to 40 CFR 131.38(c). The State of California adopted and EPA approved a site-specific criterion for the Grassland Water District, San Luis National Wildlife Refuge, and the Los Banos State Wildlife Refuge; therefore, this criterion does not apply to these waters. r. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays or estuaries including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta within California Regional Water Board 5, but excluding the San Francisco Bay. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria.
s. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and waters of the State defined as inland (i.e., all surface waters of the State not bays or estuaries or ocean) that include a MUN use designation. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria. t. These criteria were promulgated for specific waters in California in the NTR. The specific waters to which the NTR criteria apply include: Waters of the State defined as bays and estuaries including San Francisco Bay upstream to and including Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta; and waters of the State defined as inland (i.e., all surface waters of the State not bays or estuaries or ocean) without a MUN use designation. This section does not apply instead of the NTR for these criteria. u. PCBs are a class of chemicals which include aroclors 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016, CAS numbers 53469219, 11097691, 11104282, 11141165, 12672296, 11096825, and 12674112, respectively. The aquatic life criteria apply to the sum of this set of seven aroclors. v. This criterion applies to total PCBs, e.g., the sum of all congener or isomer or homolog or aroclor analyses. w. This criterion has been recalculated pursuant to the 1995 Updates: Water Quality Criteria Documents for the Protection of Aquatic Life in Ambient Water, Office of Water, EPA-820-B-96-001, September 1996. See also Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative Criteria Documents for the Protection of Aquatic Life in Ambient Water, Office of Water, EPA-80-B-95-004, March 1995. x. The State of California has adopted and EPA has approved site specific criteria for the Sacramento River (and tributaries) above Hamilton City; therefore, these criteria do not apply to these waters. General notes to table in paragraph (b)(1)
1. The table in this paragraph (b)(1) lists all of EPA's priority toxic pollutants whether or not criteria guidance are available. Blank spaces indicate the absence of national section 304(a) criteria guidance. Because of variations in chemical nomenclature systems, this listing of toxic pollutants does not duplicate the listing in appendix A to 40 CFR Part 423-126 Priority Pollutants. EPA has added the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry numbers, which provide a unique identification for each chemical. 2. The following chemicals have organoleptic-based criteria recommendations that are not included on this chart: zinc, 3-methyl-4-chlorophenol. 3. Freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria apply as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
(2) Factors for Calculating Metals Criteria. Final CMC and CCC values should be rounded to two significant figures. (i) CMC = WER × (Acute Conversion Factor) × (exp{m
(iii) Table 1 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section: Metal mA
−2.715 Copper
−1.702 Chromium (III)
1.561 Lead
−4.705 Nickel
0.0584 Silver
−6.52 Zinc
0.884 Note to Table 1: The term “exp” represents the base e exponential function.
(iv) Table 2 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section:
Metal Conversion factor (CF) for freshwater acute criteria CF for freshwater chronic criteria CF for saltwater acute criteria CF a for saltwater chronic criteria Antimony
1.000 Beryllium
0.994 Chromium (III)
d) Chromium (VI)
0.993 Copper
0.83 Lead
0.951 Mercury
0.990 Selenium
0.998 Silver
d) Thallium
0.946 Footnotes to table 2 of paragraph(
a Conversion Factors for chronic marine criteria are not currently available. Conversion Factors for acute marine criteria have been used for both acute and chronic marine criteria. b Conversion Factors for these pollutants in freshwater are hardness dependent. CFs are based on a hardness of 100 mg/l as calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Other hardness can be used; CFs should be recalculated using the equations in table 3 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section. c Bioaccumulative compound and inappropriate to adjust to percent dissolved. d EPA has not published an aquatic life criterion value.
(v) Table 3 to paragraph (b)(2) of this section: Acute Chronic Cadmium
CF = 1.136672 - [(ln {hardness}) (0.041838)]
CF = 1.101672 - [(ln {hardness})(0.041838)] Lead
CF = 1.46203 - [(ln {hardness})(0.145712)]
(1) The criteria in paragraph (b) of this section apply to the State's designated uses cited in paragraph (d) of this section and apply concurrently with any criteria adopted by the State, except when State regulations contain criteria which are more stringent for a particular parameter and use, or except as provided in footnotes p, q, and x to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. (2) The criteria established in this section are subject to the State's general rules of applicability in the same way and to the same extent as are other Federally-adopted and State-adopted numeric toxics criteria when applied to the same use classifications including mixing zones, and low flow values below which numeric standards can be exceeded in flowing fresh waters. (i) For all waters with mixing zone regulations or implementation procedures, the criteria apply at the appropriate locations within or at the boundary of the mixing zones; otherwise the criteria apply throughout the water body including at the point of discharge into the water body. (ii) The State shall not use a low flow value below which numeric standards can be exceeded that is less stringent than the flows in Table 4 to paragraph (c)(2) of this section for streams and rivers. (iii) Table 4 to paragraph (c)(2) of this section: Criteria Design flow Aquatic Life Acute Criteria (CMC)
1 Q 10 or 1 B 3 Aquatic Life Chronic Criteria (CCC)
7 Q 10 or 4 B 3 Human Health Criteria
2. CCC (Continuous Criteria Concentration) is the water quality criteria to protect against chronic effects in aquatic life and is the highest in stream concentration of a priority toxic pollutant consisting of a 4-day average not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average. 3. 1 Q 10 is the lowest one day flow with an average recurrence frequency of once in 10 years determined hydrologically. 4. 1 B 3 is biologically based and indicates an allowable exceedence of once every 3 years. It is determined by EPA's computerized method (DFLOW model). 5. 7 Q 10 is the lowest average 7 consecutive day low flow with an average recurrence frequency of once in 10 years determined hydrologically. 6. 4 B 3 is biologically based and indicates an allowable exceedence for 4 consecutive days once every 3 years. It is determined by EPA's computerized method (DFLOW model).
(iv) If the State does not have such a low flow value below which numeric standards do not apply, then the criteria included in paragraph (d) of this section apply at all flows. (v) If the CMC short-term averaging period, the CCC four-day averaging period, or once in three-year frequency is inappropriate for a criterion or the site to which a criterion applies, the State may apply to EPA for approval of an alternative averaging period, frequency, and related design flow. The State must submit to EPA the bases for any alternative averaging period, frequency, and related design flow. Before approving any change, EPA will publish for public comment, a document proposing the change. (3) The freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria in the matrix in paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply as follows: (i) For waters in which the salinity is equal to or less than 1 part per thousand 95% or more of the time, the applicable criteria are the freshwater criteria in Column B; (ii) For waters in which the salinity is equal to or greater than 10 parts per thousand 95% or more of the time, the applicable criteria are the saltwater criteria in Column C except for selenium in the San Francisco Bay estuary where the applicable criteria are the freshwater criteria in Column B (refer to footnotes p and q to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section); and
(iii) For waters in which the salinity is between 1 and 10 parts per thousand as defined in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section, the applicable criteria are the more stringent of the freshwater or saltwater criteria. However, the Regional Administrator may approve the use of the alternative freshwater or saltwater criteria if scientifically defensible information and data demonstrate that on a site-specific basis the biology of the water body is dominated by freshwater aquatic life and that freshwater criteria are more appropriate; or conversely, the biology of the water body is dominated by saltwater aquatic life and that saltwater criteria are more appropriate. Before approving any change, EPA will publish for public comment a document proposing the change. (4)
(i) For purposes of calculating freshwater aquatic life criteria for metals from the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, for waters with a hardness of 400 mg/l or less as calcium carbonate, the actual ambient hardness of the surface water shall be used in those equations. For waters with a hardness of over 400 mg/l as calcium carbonate, a hardness of 400 mg/l as calcium carbonate shall be used with a default Water-Effect Ratio (WER) of 1, or the actual hardness of the ambient surface water shall be used with a WER. The same provisions apply for calculating the metals criteria for the comparisons provided for in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. (ii) The hardness values used shall be consistent with the design discharge conditions established in paragraph (c)(2) of this section for design flows and mixing zones. (iii) The criteria for metals (compounds #1 - #13 in the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section) are expressed as dissolved except where otherwise noted. For purposes of calculating aquatic life criteria for metals from the equations in footnote i to the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the water effect ratio is generally computed as a specific pollutant's acute or chronic toxicity value measured in water from the site covered by the standard, divided by the respective acute or chronic toxicity value in laboratory dilution water. To use a water effect ratio other than the default of 1, the WER must be determined as set forth in Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of Water Effect Ratios, U.S. EPA Office of Water, EPA-823-B-94-001, February 1994, or alternatively, other scientifically defensible methods adopted by the State as part of its water quality standards program and approved by EPA. For calculation of criteria using site-specific values for both the hardness and the water effect ratio, the hardness used in the equations in paragraph (b)(2) of this section must be determined as required in paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section. Water hardness must be calculated from the measured calcium and magnesium ions present, and the ratio of calcium to magnesium should be approximately the same in standard laboratory toxicity testing water as in the site water. (d)
(1) Except as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, all waters assigned any aquatic life or human health use classifications in the Water Quality Control Plans for the various Basins of the State (“Basin Plans”) adopted by the California State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”), except for ocean waters covered by the Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California (“Ocean Plan”) adopted by the SWRCB with resolution Number 90-27 on March 22, 1990, are subject to the criteria in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, without exception. These criteria apply to waters identified in the Basin Plans. More particularly, these criteria apply to waters identified in the Basin Plan chapters designating beneficial uses for waters within the region. Although the State has adopted several use designations for each of these waters, for purposes of this action, the specific standards to be applied in paragraph (d)(2) of this section are based on the presence in all waters of some aquatic life designation and the presence or absence of the MUN use designation (municipal and domestic supply). (See Basin Plans for more detailed use definitions.) (2) The criteria from the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply to the water and use classifications defined in paragraph (d)(1) of this section as follows: Water and use classification Applicable criteria (i) All inland waters of the United States or enclosed bays and estuaries that are waters of the United States that include a MUN use designation
(A) Columns B1 and B2 - all pollutants
(B) Columns C1 and C2 - all pollutants
(C) Column D1 - all pollutants (ii) All inland waters of the United States or enclosed bays and estuaries that are waters of the United States that do not include a MUN use designation
(C) Column D2 - all pollutants
(3) Nothing in this section is intended to apply instead of specific criteria, including specific criteria for the San Francisco Bay estuary, promulgated for California in the National Toxics Rule at § 131.36.
(4) The human health criteria shall be applied at the State-adopted 10 (−6) risk level. (5) Nothing in this section applies to waters located in Indian Country. (e)
(1) It is presumed that new and existing point source dischargers will promptly comply with any new or more restrictive water quality-based effluent limitations (“WQBELs”) based on the water quality criteria set forth in this section. (2) When a permit issued on or after May 18, 2000 to a new discharger contains a WQBEL based on water quality criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this section, the permittee shall comply with such WQBEL upon the commencement of the discharge. A new discharger is defined as any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be a “discharge of pollutants” (as defined in 40 CFR 122.2) to the State of California's inland surface waters or enclosed bays and estuaries, the construction of which commences after May 18, 2000. (3) Where an existing discharger reasonably believes that it will be infeasible to promptly comply with a new or more restrictive WQBEL based on the water quality criteria set forth in this section, the discharger may request approval from the permit issuing authority for a schedule of compliance. (4) A compliance schedule shall require compliance with WQBELs based on water quality criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this section as soon as possible, taking into account the dischargers' technical ability to achieve compliance with such WQBEL. (5) If the schedule of compliance exceeds one year from the date of permit issuance, reissuance or modification, the schedule shall set forth interim requirements and dates for their achievement. The dates of completion between each requirement may not exceed one year. If the time necessary for completion of any requirement is more than one year and is not readily divisible into stages for completion, the permit shall require, at a minimum, specified dates for annual submission of progress reports on the status of interim requirements. (6) In no event shall the permit issuing authority approve a schedule of compliance for a point source discharge which exceeds five years from the date of permit issuance, reissuance, or modification, whichever is sooner. Where shorter schedules of compliance are prescribed or schedules of compliance are prohibited by law, those provisions shall govern. (7) If a schedule of compliance exceeds the term of a permit, interim permit limits effective during the permit shall be included in the permit and addressed in the permit's fact sheet or statement of basis. The administrative record for the permit shall reflect final permit limits and final compliance dates. Final compliance dates for final permit limits, which do not occur during the term of the permit, must occur within five years from the date of issuance, reissuance or modification of the permit which initiates the compliance schedule. Where shorter schedules of compliance are prescribed or schedules of compliance are prohibited by law, those provisions shall govern. (8) The provisions in this paragraph (e), Schedules of compliance, shall expire on May 18, 2005. [65 FR 31711, May 18, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 9961, Feb. 13, 2001; 68 FR 62747, Nov. 6, 2003; 78 FR 20255, Apr. 4, 2013]
At 66 FR 9961, Feb. 13, 2001, § 131.38 was amended in the table to paragraph (b)(1) under the column heading for “B Freshwater” by revising the column headings for “Criterion Maximum Concentration” and “Criterion Continuous Concentration”; under the column heading for “C Saltwater” by revising the column headings for “Criterion Maximum Concentration” and “Criterion Continuous Concentration”; and by revising entries “23.” and “67.” However, as this was a photographed table, the amendments could not be incorporated into the section.
Title 40 published on 2015-07-01The following are ALL rules, proposed rules, and notices (chronologically) published in the Federal Register relating to 40 CFR Part 131 after this date.2015-10-28; vol. 80 # 208 - Wednesday, October 28, 201580 FR 65980 - Extension of Public Comment Period for the Revision of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to Washington
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2015-27474 RIN EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0174 FRL-9936-29-OW ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Notice; extension of comment period. The comment period for the proposed rule published September 14, 2015 (80 FR 55063) is extended. Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2015. 40 CFR Part 131 SummaryThe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending the comment period for the proposed rule, “Revision of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to Washington.” In response to stakeholder requests, EPA is extending the comment period for an additional 45 days, from November 13, 2015, to December 28, 2015. EPA will offer virtual public hearings on the proposed rule via the Internet in December 2015.
2015-09-25; vol. 80 # 186 - Friday, September 25, 201580 FR 57734 - Water Quality Standards Regulatory Revisions; Correction
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2015-24314 RIN2040-AF16 EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0606 FRL-9934-33-OW ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Final rule; correction. This correction is effective as of August 21, 2015. 40 CFR Part 131 SummaryEPA is removing a sentence regarding the effective date for judicial review purposes in the preamble to a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register of August 21, 2015 (80 FR 51019). EPA included this sentence in the preamble to the final rule in error. Since the final rule does not fall within any of the actions listed in Clean Water Act section 509, it was not necessary to specify an effective date for judicial review purposes in the preamble. With this correction there is no delay in the effective date for purposes of judicial review, and parties choosing to do so may therefore seek judicial review at this time.
2015-09-14; vol. 80 # 177 - Monday, September 14, 201580 FR 55063 - Revision of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to Washington
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2015-22592 RIN2040-AF56 EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0174 FRL-9932-03-OW ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Proposed rule. Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2015. 40 CFR Part 131 SummaryThe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to revise the current federal Clean Water Act (CWA) human health criteria applicable to waters under the state of Washington&apos;s jurisdiction to ensure that the criteria are set at levels that will adequately protect Washington residents, including tribes with treaty-protected rights, from exposure to toxic pollutants. EPA promulgated Washington&apos;s existing criteria for the protection of human health in 1992 as part of the National Toxics Rule (NTR), (amended in 1999 for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)) using the Agency&apos;s recommended criteria values at the time. EPA derived those criteria using a fish consumption rate (FCR) of 6.5 grams per day (g/day) based on national surveys. However, the best available data now demonstrate that fish consumers in Washington, including tribes with treaty-protected rights, consume much more fish than 6.5 g/day. There are also new data and scientific information available to update the toxicity and exposure parameters used to calculate human health criteria. Therefore, EPA proposes to revise the federal human health criteria applicable to waters under Washington&apos;s jurisdiction to take into account the best available science, including local and regional information, as well as applicable EPA policies, guidance, and legal requirements, to protect human health.
2015-08-21; vol. 80 # 162 - Friday, August 21, 201580 FR 51020 - Water Quality Standards Regulatory Revisions
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2015-19821 RIN2040-AF16 EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0606 FRL-9921-21-OW ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Final rule. This final rule is effective on October 20, 2015. 40 CFR Part 131 SummaryEPA updates the federal water quality standards (WQS) regulation to provide a better-defined pathway for states and authorized tribes to improve water quality and protect high quality waters. The WQS regulation establishes a strong foundation for water quality management programs, including water quality assessments, impaired waters lists, and total maximum daily loads, as well as water quality-based effluent limits in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permits. In this rule, EPA is revising six program areas to improve the WQS regulation&apos;s effectiveness, increase transparency, and enhance opportunities for meaningful public engagement at the state, tribal and local levels. Specifically, in this rule EPA: Clarifies what constitutes an Administrator&apos;s determination that new or revised WQS are necessary; refines how states and authorized tribes assign and revise designated uses for individual water bodies; revises the triennial review requirements to clarify the role of new or updated Clean Water Act (CWA) section 304(a) criteria recommendations in the development of WQS by states and authorized tribes, and applicable WQS that must be reviewed triennially; establishes stronger antidegradation requirements to enhance protection of high quality waters and promotes public transparency; adds new regulatory provisions to promote the appropriate use of WQS variances; and clarifies that a state or authorized tribe must adopt, and EPA must approve, a permit compliance schedule authorizing provision prior to authorizing the use of schedules of compliance for water quality-based effluent limits (WQBELs) in NPDES permits. In total, these revisions to the WQS regulation enable states and authorized tribes to more effectively address complex water quality challenges, protect existing water quality, and facilitate environmental improvements. The final rule also leads to better understanding and proper use of available CWA tools by promoting transparent and engaged public participation. This action finalizes the WQS regulation revisions initially proposed by EPA on September 4, 2013.