Great Lakes Initiative: EPA and States Have Made Progress, but Much Remains to Be Done If Water Quality Goals Are to Be Achieved
Published: 2008-01-23T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Millions of people in the United States and Canada depend on the Great Lakes for drinking water, recreation, and economic livelihood. During the 1970s, it became apparent that pollutants discharged into the Great Lakes Basin from point sources, such as industrial and municipal facilities, or from nonpoint sources, such as air emissions from power plants, were harming the Great Lakes. Some of these pollutants, known as bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCC), pose risks to fish and other species as well as to the humans and wildlife that consume them. In 1995, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Great Lakes Initiative (GLI). The GLI established water quality criteria to be used by states to establish pollutant discharge limits for some BCCs and other pollutants that are discharged by point sources. The GLI also allows states to include flexible permit implementation procedures (flexibilities) that allow facilities' discharges to exceed GLI criteria. This testimony is based on GAO's July 2005 report, Great Lakes Initiative: EPA Needs to Better Ensure the Complete and Consistent Implementation of Water Quality Standards (GAO-05-829) and updated information from EPA and the Great Lakes states. This statement addresses (1) the status of EPA's efforts to develop and approve methods to measure pollutants at the GLI water quality criteria levels, (2) the use of permit flexibilities, and (3) EPA's actions to implement GAO's 2005 recommendations.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: As GAO reported in 2005, developing the sensitive analytical methods needed to measure pollutants at the GLI water quality criteria level is a significant challenge to achieving GLI's goals. Of the nine BCCs for which criteria have been established, only two--mercury and lindane--have EPA-approved methods that will measure below those criteria levels. Measurement methods for the other BCCs are either not yet approved or cannot reliably measure to GLI criteria. Without such measurement, it is difficult for states to determine whether a facility is exceeding the criteria and if discharge limits are required in the facility's permit. As methods become available, states are able to include enforceable discharge limits in facilities' permits. For example, since EPA approved a more sensitive method for mercury in 1999, the number of permits with mercury limits has increased from 185 in May 2005 to 292 in November 2007. EPA and state officials expect this trend to continue. Similar increases may occur as more sensitive analytical methods are developed and approved for other BCCs. Flexibilities included in permits allow facilities' discharges to exceed GLI water quality criteria. For example, one type of flexibility--variances--will allow facilities to exceed the GLI criteria for a pollutant specified in their permits. Moreover, the GLI allows the repeated use of some of these permit flexibilities, and does not set a time frame for facilities to meet the GLI water quality criteria. As a result, EPA and state officials do not know when the GLI criteria will be met. In the 2005 report, GAO made a number of recommendations to EPA to help ensure full and consistent implementation of the GLI and to improve measures for monitoring progress toward achieving GLI's goals. EPA has taken some actions to implement the recommendations. For example, EPA has begun to review the efforts and progress made by one category of facilities--municipal wastewater treatment plants--to reduce their mercury discharges into the basin. However, until EPA gathers more information on the implementation of GLI and the impact it has had on reducing pollutant discharges from point sources, as we recommended, it will not be able to fully assess progress toward GLI goals.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss our work on the Great Lakes  Initiative (GLI), and its impact on water quality in the Great Lakes Basin.  As you know, millions of people in the United States and Canada depend  on the Great Lakes—the largest system of freshwater in the world—as a  source of drinking water, recreation, and economic livelihood. During the  1970s, it became apparent that pollutants discharged into the basin from  point sources, such as industrial and municipal facilities, or from nonpoint  sources, such as air emissions from power plants and agricultural runoff,  were harming the Great Lakes. Because less than 1 percent of the Great  Lakes’ water recycles or turns over each year, on average, many of these  pollutants stay in place, settling in sediments or bio-accumulating in fish  and other aquatic species. As a result, some of these pollutants, such as  mercury and dioxin, known as bioaccumulative chemicals of concern  (BCC), pose risks to those species as well as to the humans and wildlife  that consume them.
In 1990, following a series of binational agreements aimed at improving  environmental conditions in the Great Lakes Basin, the Congress passed  the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act. This act, which amended the Clean  Water Act, required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to  publish water quality guidance on minimum water quality standards and  antidegradation policies for protecting existing water quality. In response,  in 1995, EPA published the Final Water Quality Guidance for the Great  Lakes System, otherwise known as the GLI, to control over 100 toxic  pollutants and protect aquatic life, wildlife, and human health. Through the  GLI, EPA established stringent water quality criteria—numeric values to  be used by states to set pollutant discharge limits for point sources—for 9  BCCs and 20 other pollutants found in the basin. In addition, the GLI  established methodologies that the states are to use in developing criteria  for the remaining pollutants. Meeting the criteria established by GLI  requires sensitive analytical methods that allow measurement of pollutant  concentrations at or below the level established by GLI water quality  criteria. These methods allow states to determine if a facility is exceeding  the criteria and if a discharge limit is required in the facility’s permit as  well as to assess the facility’s compliance. The Great Lakes Critical  Programs Act required that the eight Great Lakes states—Illinois, Indiana,  Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin— adopt provisions consistent with GLI into their environmental regulations  and point source permit programs within 2 years of issuance of GLI  guidance.
As you requested, my testimony today focuses on (1) the status of EPA’s  efforts to develop and approve methods needed to measure pollutants at  the GLI water quality criteria level, (2) the use of permit flexibilities, and  (3) the actions EPA has taken to implement the recommendations we  made in our 2005 report on the GLI to better ensure full and consistent  implementation of GLI and monitor progress in meeting GLI goals. My  testimony is based on the 2005 report and additional information we have  obtained from EPA and the Great Lakes states. Our testimony primarily  focuses on the nine BCCs for which EPA has developed GLI water quality  criteria. Most of these BCCs are responsible for fish consumption  advisories in the Great Lakes.
We conducted this performance audit from October 2007 through January  18, 2008 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.  We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.  We determined that the  data provided were sufficiently reliable for purposes of this testimony.
As we reported in 2005, developing the sensitive analytical methods  needed to determine whether GLI water quality criteria are being met is  a significant challenge to fully achieving GLI’s goals. At the time of our  report, a method that allowed measurement of the pollutant at or  below the GLI criteria had been developed and approved for only two  of the nine BCCs—mercury and lindane. Mercury and lindane remain  the only BCCs for which an approved method is available that  measures pollutant concentrations below the GLI criterion. Once EPA  approves an analytical method, Great Lakes states are able to issue  point source permits that require facilities to use that method unless an  alternative procedure has been approved by the EPA region. Methods  have been developed for the remaining seven BCCs, but these methods  either have not yet been approved or only allow for measurement  above the GLI criteria. For example, because chlordane has a water  quality criterion of 0.25 nanograms per liter but can only be measured  down to a level of 14 nanograms per liter, it cannot always be  determined if the pollutant is exceeding the criterion. When methods  are developed that can measure pollutant concentrations at or below  the level established by GLI water quality criteria, a more pervasive  problem of high pollutant levels in the Great Lakes Basin waterbodies  than previously recognized may be revealed and could result in  additional permits with discharge limits. For example, the number of  permits with mercury limits increased from 185 in May 2005 to 292 in  November 2007. EPA officials attribute this increase to the  development of a more sensitive method for mercury in 1999 and EPA  and state officials expect this trend to continue. Similar increases may  occur as more sensitive analytical methods are developed and  approved for other BCCs.
Although permits may include BCC discharge limits, the GLI authorizes  states to use flexibilities that allow facilities’ discharges to exceed GLI  water quality criteria. For example, one type of flexibility—variances— will allow facilities to exceed the GLI criteria for a particular pollutant  specified in their permits. Furthermore, the GLI allows the repeated  use of some of these flexibilities and does not set a time frame for  facilities to meet the GLI water quality criteria. As a result, EPA and  state officials could not tell us when the use of these flexibilities will be  discontinued or when the GLI criteria will be met.
EPA has taken some actions to implement the recommendations we  made in our 2005 report to help ensure the full and consistent  implementation of the GLI and to improve measures for monitoring  progress toward achieving GLI’s goals. First, EPA implemented our  recommendation to fully develop the GLI Clearinghouse and make it  available to the Great Lakes states. Second, as we recommended, EPA  is beginning to gather and track information to assess the progress of  GLI implementation although the information collected is limited to  municipal wastewater treatment plants. Third, to ensure the equitable  and timely implementation of GLI among all the Great Lakes states,  EPA has increased its efforts to resolve disagreements with the state of  Wisconsin on the adoption and implementation of GLI provisions.  Finally, although EPA disagreed with our recommendation to issue a  permitting strategy for mercury to ensure a more consistent approach  for controlling mercury by the states, it has continued to support state  implementation efforts by assessing which approaches are most  effective in reducing mercury discharges by point sources.
subsections: section_title: Progress Made in Developing Analytical Methods Will Ultimately Result in More Permits with BCC Discharge Limits
paragraphs: The ability to accurately and reliably measure pollutant concentrations is  vital to successfully implementing GLI water quality criteria. Without this  ability, it is difficult for states to determine if a facility’s discharge is  exceeding GLI water quality criteria and if a discharge limits are required.  For example, because chlordane has a water quality criterion of 0.25  nanograms per liter but can only be measured down to a level of 14  nanograms per liter, it cannot always be determined if the pollutant is  exceeding the criterion. As we reported in 2005, developing the analytical  methods needed to measure pollutants at the GLI water quality criteria  level is a significant challenge to fully achieving GLI goals. Although  methods have been developed for the nine BCCs for which GLI water  quality criteria have been established, EPA has only approved the methods  to measure mercury and lindane below GLI’s stringent criteria levels.  Analytical methods for the other BCCs either have not received EPA  approval or cannot be used to reliably measure to GLI criteria levels. Once  EPA approves an analytical method, Great Lakes states are able to issue  point source permits that require facilities to use that method unless the  EPA region has approved an alternative procedure. According to EPA  officials, specific time frames for developing and approving methods that  measure to GLI criteria have not yet been established. EPA officials  explained that developing EPA-approved methods can be a time- consuming and costly process. Table 1 shows the status of the methods for  the nine BCCs.
As we reported in 2005, if pollutant concentrations can be measured at or  below the level established by GLI water quality criteria, enforceable  permit limits can be established on the basis of these criteria. The Great  Lakes states’ experience with mercury illustrates the impact of sufficiently  sensitive measurement methods on identifying pollutant discharges from  point sources. Methods for measuring mercury at low levels were  generally not available until EPA issued a new analytical method in 1999 to  measure mercury concentrations below the GLI water quality criterion of  1.3 nanograms per liter of water. This more sensitive method disclosed a  more pervasive problem of high mercury levels in the Great Lakes Basin  than previously recognized and showed, for the first time, that many  facilities had mercury levels in their discharges that were exceeding water  quality criteria. Since this method was approved, the number of permits  with discharge limits for mercury rose from 185 in May 2005 to 292 in  November 2007. Moreover, EPA and state officials are expecting this trend  to continue. As EPA officials explained, it may take up to two permit  cycles—permits are generally issued for 5-year periods—-to collect the  monitoring data needed to support the inclusion of discharge limits in  permits. EPA officials are expecting a similar rise in permits with  discharge limits for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) when detection  methods are approved.
section_title: Permit Flexibilities Allowing Discharges in Excess of GLI Water Quality Standards Delay Achievement of GLI Goals
paragraphs: Permit flexibilities often allow facilities’ discharges to exceed GLI water  quality criteria. These flexibilities can take several forms, including the  following:    Variance. Allows dischargers to exceed the GLI discharge limit for a  particular pollutant specified in their permit.
Compliance schedule. Allows dischargers a grace period of up to 5  years in complying with a permitted discharge limit.
Pollutant Minimization Program (PMP). Sets forth a series of actions  by the discharger to improve water quality when the pollutant  concentration cannot be measured down to the water quality criterion.  A PMP is often used in conjunction with a variance.
Mixing Zone. Allows dischargers to use the areas around a facility’s  discharge pipe where pollutants are mixed with cleaner receiving  waters to dilute pollutant concentrations. Within the mixing zone,  concentrations of pollutants are generally allowed to exceed water  quality criteria as long as standards are met at the boundary of the  mixing zone. This flexibility expires in November 2010 with some  limited exceptions.
These flexibilities are generally only available to permit holders that  operated before March 23, 1997, and are in effect for 5 years or the length  of the permit. GLI allows states to grant such permit flexibilities under  certain circumstances, such as when the imposition of water quality  standards would result in substantial and widespread economic and social  impacts. Table 2 shows the number and type of BCC permit flexibilities  being used as of November 2007 in the Great Lakes Basin for mercury,  PCBs, and dioxin, as well as BCC discharge limits contained in permits.
According to EPA and state officials, in many cases, facilities cannot meet  GLI water quality criteria for a number of reasons, such as technology  limitations, and the flexibilities are intended to give the facility time to  make progress toward meeting the GLI criteria. With the exception of  compliance schedules, the GLI allows for the repeated use of these permit  flexibilities. As a result, EPA and state officials could not tell us when the  GLI criteria will be met.
section_title: EPA Has Taken Some Actions to Ensure Consistent Implementation of the GLI as Recommended in Our 2005 Report
paragraphs: In our 2005 report, we described several factors that were undermining  EPA’s ability to ensure progress toward achieving consistent  implementation of GLI water quality standards. To help ensure full and  consistent implementation of the GLI and to improve measures for  monitoring progress toward achieving GLI’s goals, we made a number of  recommendations to the EPA Administrator.  EPA has taken some actions  to implement the recommendations contained in our 2005 report, as the  following indicates:    Ensure the GLI Clearinghouse is fully developed. We noted that EPA’s  delayed development of the GLI Clearinghouse—a database intended  to assist the states in developing consistent water quality criteria for  toxic pollutants—was preventing the states from using this resource.  To assist Great Lakes states in developing water quality criteria for GLI  pollutants, we recommended that EPA ensure that the GLI  Clearinghouse was fully developed, maintained, and made available to  Great Lakes states. EPA launched the GLI Clearinghouse on its Web  site in May 2006 and in February 2007, EPA Region 5 provided  clearinghouse training to states. The clearinghouse currently contains  criteria or toxicity information for 395 chemicals. EPA officials told us  that the clearinghouse is now available to the states so they can  independently calculate water quality criteria for GLI pollutants. EPA  officials told us that some states, including Ohio, Wisconsin, and  Illinois, plan on updating their water quality standards in the near  future and believe that the clearinghouse will benefit them as well as  other states as they update their standards.
Gather and track information to assess the progress of GLI  implementation. In 2005, we reported that EPA’s efforts to assess  progress in implementing the GLI and its impact on reducing point  source discharges have been hampered by lack of information on these  discharges. To improve EPA’s ability to measure progress, we  recommended that EPA gather and track information on dischargers’  efforts to reduce pollutant loadings in the basin. EPA has begun to  review the efforts and progress made by one category of facilities— municipal wastewater treatment facilities—to reduce their mercury  discharges into the basin. However, until EPA develops additional  sources of information, it will not have the information needed to  adequately assess progress toward meeting GLI goals.
Increase efforts to resolve disagreements with Wisconsin. Although  we found that the states had largely completed adoption of GLI  standards, EPA had not resolved long-standing issues with Wisconsin  regarding adoption and implementation of GLI provisions. To ensure  the equitable and timely implementation of GLI by all the Great Lakes  states, we recommended that that the EPA Administrator direct EPA  Region 5, which is responsible for Wisconsin, to increase efforts to  resolve disagreements with the state over inconsistencies between the  state’s and the GLI’s provisions. Wisconsin officials believe the GLI  provisions are not explicitly supported by Wisconsin law.  Subsequently, EPA and Wisconsin officials have held discussions on  this matter, and neither Wisconsin nor EPA officials believe that these  disagreements are significantly affecting GLI implementation.  However, they have been unable to completely resolve these issues. We  found that similar issues have also surfaced with New York.
Issue a permitting strategy for mercury. Because we found that Great  Lakes’ states had developed inconsistent approaches for meeting the  GLI mercury criterion, including differences in the use of variances, we  recommended that EPA issue a permitting strategy to ensure a more  consistent approach. EPA disagreed with this recommendation,  asserting that a permitting strategy would not improve consistency.  Instead, the agency continued to support state implementation efforts  by developing guidance for PMPs, evaluating and determining  compliance, and assessing what approaches are most effective in  reducing mercury discharges by point sources. One such effort is EPA  Region 5’s review of mercury PMP language in state-issued permits for  wastewater treatment facilities. This review resulted in  recommendations to the states in May 2007 to improve the  enforceability and effectiveness of PMP provisions. However,  additional efforts will be needed to ensure consistency at other types of  facilities, such as industrial sites, across the Great Lakes states.
In closing, Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee,  although progress has been made with mercury detection and increased  knowledge of wastewater treatment facilities’ pollutant discharges to the  Great Lakes, information is still lacking on the full extent of the problem  that BCCs pose in the Great Lakes. As methods are developed to  determine whether facilities’ discharges for other BCCs meet GLI criteria  and EPA approves them, and as more permits include discharge limits,  more information will be available on pollutant discharges in the basin.  Even with these advances, however, extensive use of permit flexibilities  could continue to undercut reductions in pollution levels and the ultimate  achievement of GLI’s goals.
This concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to respond to  any questions that you or Members of the Subcommittee may have at this  time.
section_title: GAO Contacts
paragraphs: Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public  Affairs may be found on the last page of this statement. For further  information about this testimony, please contact David Maurer at (202)  512-3841 or maurerd@gao.gov. Key contributors to this testimony were  Greg Carroll, Katheryn Summers Hubbell, Sherry L. McDonald, and Carol  Herrnstadt Shulman. Other contributors included Jeanette Soares and  Michele Fejfar.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety  without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain  copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be  necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.