News

ACWA Submits Comments on Revised Definition of WOTUS

ACWA submitted a set of comments on the EPA and Army’s proposal revising the definition of “waters of the United States.” The EPA and Army announced plans to revise the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) and return to the pre-1986 regulations aligned with recent Supreme Court decisions. The comment letter presents the varying positions of ACWA’s members on the components of the rule. ACWA’s comments were developed with input from members of the association’s WOTUS workgroup and from members of the Board of Directors.

EPA Rescinds 2019 Memorandum, “Policy for EPA’s Review and Action on Clean Water Act Program Submittals,” Issues New WQS Decision-making Principles Memorandum

On February 4, 2022, EPA Assistant Administrator for Water Radhika Fox sent a memorandum to the EPA Regions rescinding a June 3, 2019, memorandum, “Policy for EPA’s Review and Action on Clean Water Act Program Submittals” that was signed June 3, 2019, by then-Assistant Administrator for Water Dave Ross (“2019 Ross Memo”). The 2019 Ross Memo covered actions by states and authorized Tribes, including new or revised Water Quality Standards (WQS), biennial lists of waters determined to be impaired, and TMDLs.

EPA’s rescission memo notes that:

EPA reconsidered its interpretation of the CWA and determined that “requiring the proposal of federal [WQS] within 90 days after a state or authorized tribe fails to remedy an EPA disapproval decision,” as noted in the 2019 Ross Memo, is “not supported by the Act.”
Assistant Administrator Fox requested the Directors of both Office of Science and Technology (OST) and Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds (OWOW) issue memos concerning processes under CWA Sections 303(c) and 303(d).

EPA Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations’ outreach about the rescission notes, “The 2019 memorandum weakened the agency’s ability to substantively review these submissions while engaging with state co-regulators and authorized Tribes. Assistant Administrator Fox’s February 2022 memorandum replaces the processes for EPA review with memoranda issued by EPA career senior leaders in the Office of Water. Moving forward, EPA is committed to timely and robust evaluation of Clean Water Act submittals—with leadership from EPA’s regional offices that have local knowledge and expertise—while upholding the principles of cooperative federalism and fulfilling the agency’s obligations under the Act.”

ACWA is not aware of a new memo regarding 303(d); however, a memo regarding 303(c) was sent to EPA Regions on February 4, 2022, titled, “Decision-Making Principles for EPA Headquarters’ Concurrence on Water Quality Standards Decisions” signed by OST Director Deborah Nagle. The memo focuses on WQS disapprovals, building on the “2000 Grubbs Memo.” The 2000 WQS memorandum issued by then-Director of OST Geoffrey Grubbs describes cooperation between EPA Regions and Headquarters in response to WQS submittals, including many processes still implemented today (i.e., a single WQS Liaison within OST for each Region; Regions as primary reviewers of submittals in coordination with OST, etc.). The February 4, 2022, memo notes that Regions sought Office of Water concurrence on almost all WQS disapprovals in the last two decades, resulting in wait time (contributing to a WQS backlog) for both states and authorized tribes as well as EPA Regions.

The 2022 “Decision-making Principles…” memo outlines five disapproval principles. If a WQS submittal meets all five, the OST Director will provide concurrence; if less than all five, the OST Director will seek Regional and OW concurrence “as appropriate.”

The best available data and evidence indicate that the WQS is not consistent with the requirements of the CWA and EPA’s implementing regulations.
The EPA Region and Headquarters agree that the WQS is not consistent with the requirements of the CWA and EPA’s implementing regulations.
The state or authorized tribe recognizes that the WQS is not consistent with the requirements of the CWA and EPA’s implementing regulations.
Disapproval of the WQS is generally not expected to be controversial or lead to litigation.
A corresponding, previously approved WQS provision remains in effect for CWA purposes and/or the state or authorized tribe is actively working on the changes necessary to meet the requirements of the CWA and EPA’s implementing regulations such that a protective WQS will be in place absent a federal promulgation.

You can review the new memoranda here. Copies of WQS decision memoranda including the 2019 Ross Memo, 2022 rescission memo, and 2022 “Decision-Making Principles…” memo are available on ACWA’s website here.

ASDWA Releases State Implementation Framework for Inventory of Lead Service Line Requirements

ASDWA released a State Implementation Framework for Lead Service Line Requirements to help states as they begin to prepare for inventory requirements. On June 10, 2021, EPA published a Federal Register notice extending the effective date until December 16, 2021, and extended the compliance date to October 16, 2024. The results of EPA’s review and its decision were published in the December 17, 2021, Federal Register. EPA determined that there are areas within the LCRR that can be improved with a focus on removing lead service lines and more equitably protecting public health. Therefore, while the EPA is allowing the rule to go into effect to support near-term actions, EPA will immediately begin developing a new proposed rulemaking to strengthen the elements identified within the notice. EPA intends this new rule, named the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI), to be proposed and finalized ahead of the LCRR’s October 16, 2024, compliance date. Although EPA will be working on another iteration of the LCRR, EPA has made it clear that inventory requirements will remain, and that states and water systems should begin to develop their inventories. The intent of this framework is to serve as a prequel for EPA’s Inventory Guidance and to ensure that everyone is working off the same information when starting inventories.

Green Infrastructure Definition

On January 5, 2022, a research paper was published (What is green infrastructure? A study of definitions in US city planning) that observed the many ways city plans address and define green infrastructure (GI). This study reviewed 122 plans from 20 US cities, including several city wide plans that did not define GI at all. The following general observations were noted.

Excerpted from study:

City planning often fails to explicitly define “green infrastructure” (GI), but when it does, stormwater concepts of GI are much more prevalent than landscape or integrative concepts
Types of GI vary widely and significantly, and often exclude parks and larger urban green spaces in favor of smaller engineered facilities
Functions of GI are primarily hydrological, although more functional diversity is provided by landscape and integrative definitions of GI
Stormwater concepts of GI appear to engage in greenwashing by purportedly offering the greatest number of benefits despite circumscribing types and functions of GI
Future research and planning should be informed by a new broad definition of GI, one that focuses on the relations between ecological and built infrastructure systems to facilitate the production of social benefits

More details on this study can be found here: What is green infrastructure? A study of definitions in US city planning – Grabowski – – Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment – Wiley Online Library

USGS Publication Suggests Prediction of PFAS Detection in Groundwater Possible Using Existing Data

Study Title: McMahon et al., 2022, “PFAS in Groundwater Used as a Source of Drinking Water in the Eastern United States”

Abstract: In 2019, 254 samples were collected from five aquifer systems to evaluate perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) occurrence in groundwater used as a source of drinking water in the eastern United States. The samples were analyzed for 24 PFAS, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, dissolved organic carbon (DOC), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pharmaceuticals, and tritium. Fourteen of the 24 PFAS were detected in groundwater, with 60 and 20% of public-supply and domestic wells, respectively, containing at least one PFAS detection. Concentrations of tritium, chloride, sulfate, DOC, and manganese + iron; percent urban land use within 500 m of the wells; and VOC and pharmaceutical detection frequencies were significantly higher in samples containing PFAS detections than in samples with no detections. Boosted regression tree models that consider 57 chemical and land-use variables show that tritium concentration, distance to the nearest fire-training area, percentage of urban land use, and DOC and VOC concentrations are the top five predictors of PFAS detections, consistent with the hydrologic position, geochemistry, and land use being important controls on PFAS occurrence in groundwater. Model results indicate that it may be possible to predict PFAS detections in groundwater using existing data sources.

Source and Supporting Information

USGS PFAS Strategic Plan (2021): “Integrated Science for the Study of PFAS in the Environment”

EPA Extends Public Comment Period for Draft Screening Level Approach for Fenceline Communities Under TSCA

This week, EPA announced the extension of the public comment period for the proposed Screening Level Approach for Assessing Ambient Air and Water Exposures to Fenceline Communities Version 1.0 under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The proposed screening level methodology uses reasonably available data, information, and models to quantify environmental releases, evaluate exposures to fenceline communities and characterize risks associated with such releases and exposures for certain air and water pathways previously not evaluated in published TSCA risk evaluations. The comment period is currently scheduled to end on February 22, 2022 and will be extended until March 22, 2022 to give stakeholders additional time to provide input.

The agency encourages written comments for consideration by the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) during the upcoming peer review be submitted by the original deadline of February 22, 2022. Comments submitted after this date will be provided to the SACC members, however members may not have adequate time to consider those comments prior to the meeting’s discussions. The SACC is unable to consider comments submitted after the March 15-17, 2022 meeting. However, EPA will consider all comments submitted by March 22, 2022. To ensure proper receipt of comments, please identify docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2021–0415 in the subject line on the first page of your comments and follow the instructions in the Federal Register Notice.

Additionally, registration is now open for the March 15-17, 2022 virtual meeting of the SACC to peer review the proposed methodology. The SACC’s virtual meeting is open to the public and registration is required. Register here. If you would like to provide oral comments during this peer review virtual meeting, you must register by 12:00 p.m. EST on February 25, 2022. You may register as a listen-only attendee at any time until the end of the meeting on March 17, 2022.

Meetings and Webinars

Introduction to ECHO: EJSCREEN

Date: February 15, 2022
Time: 1:30-2:30 PM EST
Register here

Join U.S. EPA for its next Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) webinar.

This webinar focuses on how to use the ECHO facility searches to learn about environmental and demographic data from EPA’s EJSCREEN. We will demonstrate examples of using ECHO searches and reports to view EJSCREEN data and how to interpret the information. The webinar will cover the following topics:

How to search for environmental and demographic data in your community.
How to view and interpret EJSCREEN index values at the location of a facility.
How to visualize EJSCREEN data on an interactive map.

If you can’t make it, don’t worry, ECHO tutorials and recorded webinars are available at any time.

Modeling Workgroup Webinar

Date: February 22, 2022
Time: 2:00-3:30 PM EST
Register here

This webinar will be a lightning round of eight speakers with about eight minutes each of the various chapters of the recently developed TMDL Modeling Manual of Practice (MOP) as presented for last spring’s ASCE, EWRI, TMDL Modeling Task Committee 2021 Congress. Following the presentations, the Committee will be doing a live panel discussion with audience Q & A.

Reminder: Assessing the Toxicity of PFAS Chemicals to Aquatic Organisms on Wednesday, February 23

Date: February 23, 2022
Time: 2:00-3:30 PM EST
Register here

Among the many questions surrounding PFAS are their potential effects on aquatic communities. While much of the initial research effort has focused on ecological effects of PFOS and PFOA, there is a much wider range of PFAS that can occur in the environment―both as a result of more recently developed compounds and the breakdown products of other PFAS. Effective management of PFAS in aquatic systems requires understanding of the potential effects of a more complete range of PFAS chemicals.

EPA is working to explore the relationships between PFAS toxicity and chemical structure for several aquatic species to help identify and predict the toxicity of PFAS and PFAS mixtures of greatest ecological concern in support of the development of water quality guidelines. This involves measuring the toxicity of PFAS with varying structural features, determining variation in sensitivity across species, and grouping PFAS chemicals by their inferred toxic modes of action (MoA). This webinar will discuss initial findings that sublethal toxicity is strongly related to fluorinated chain length as well as the structure of the non-fluorinated “head” group, and that differences in toxicity of certain PFAS across structures suggest that multiple PFAS MoAs likely exist.

For future viewing, a closed-captioned recording of this webinar will be made available on EPA’s YouTube site.

Developing the Digital Water Workforce of the Future

Date: March 8, 2022
Time: 2-3 PM EST
Register here

The water system operating environment is evolving to incorporate various technology advancements. There is a growing need to attract, train, and retain water protection specialists with a high degree of technological competence – and the ability to make data driven decisions based on up-to-date and accurate information using technology. Meeting this need will require creative and inclusive workforce approaches to ensure the utility’s workforce is an integral part of the utility’s technology development and deployment strategy. This will help staff be comfortable and fully able to understand and implement new technologies– i.e., “bought in”.

This webinar is part of an ongoing webinar series hosted by EPA, in partnership with leading water sector organizations around the country. More information on this webinar series can be found here.

Mixtures Modeling Methods: Applications for Assessing Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Date: March 16, 2022
Time: 1-4 PM EST
Registration: Register for the EPA PCBs Mixture Webinar (Links to EventBrite) | The registration deadline is March 14, 2022

Agenda: Click here and see downloads tab

EPA is currently updating its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). This assessment addresses selected noncancer human health effects that might result from exposure to these chemicals. PCBs are a class of synthetic compounds characterized by a biphenyl structure with chlorine substitutions at up to 10 positions. There are 209 well-defined PCBs known as “congeners” based on the various combinations of the numbers and positions of the chlorine substitutions on the biphenyl molecule. PCB congeners vary both structurally and in their toxicity in humans and animals. PCBs were synthesized as mixtures of congeners, and the composition of commercially produced PCB mixtures can vary substantially from mixtures humans are currently exposed to in the environment. Most health effect studies of PCBs in animals have been conducted using commercial mixtures, and there are no data to represent many environmental mixtures of concern for human health risk assessment. Therefore, methods for translating experimental data from tested to untested mixtures would be useful, including methods for addressing PCB mixtures with varying proportions of congeners that act via different biological pathways. For these reasons, EPA is evaluating approaches for assessing chemical mixtures for use in the assessment.

To that end, EPA is developing the Mixtures Similarity Tool (MiST). MiST is a Microsoft Excel® based tool, which automates the process of evaluating the degree to which chemical mixtures are similar in their ability to cause health effects and whether they are “sufficiently similar” for risk assessment applications. MiST identifies PCB mixtures with well-characterized dose-response information (i.e., reference mixtures) that are “sufficiently similar” to a specific candidate mixture that may not have dose-response information. Dose-response data for a sufficiently similar reference mixture could be used to assess toxicity for the candidate mixture.

2022 Nutrients Permitting Workshop: April 12 – April 14

This workshop is part of a series of meetings focused on nutrients permitting through a grant between EPA, ACWA, and WEF. The workshop series is intended to help support states and EPA to further identify challenges & barriers to nutrient permitting program implementation, highlight opportunities for program improvement & enhancement, showcase innovations, assist with analysis of training, guidance, tools, and other support material needs, improve administrative efficiencies, clarify roles and responsibilities, promote program streamlining, build stronger linkages to WQS & TMDLs, modernize permit terms and data management, revise program performance measures, identify program areas where targeted technical assistance would be most beneficial, and attempt to solve some of the most intractable nutrients issues.

This is the seventh workshop in a series of eight. This workshop will focus on drafting policy recommendations based on a variety of topics covered throughout the previous six workshops in this series. We are anticipating that this will be a discussion-heavy workshop. Attendees will be expected to participate and share their ideas throughout the workshop.

This workshop will be held at the Hotel Phillips in Kansas City, MO. There is a room block available for attendees.

You can view the agenda here.

EPA Webcast: Optimizing Nutrient Removal in Sequencing Batch Reactors

Date: February 17, 2022
Time: 1 – 2:30 PM EST
Register here

In this 90-minute webinar, the speaker will share case studies: sequencing batch reactor (SBR) wastewater treatment plants that are operated differently than designed to achieve notable reductions in effluent nitrogen and phosphorus. And explain how listeners might modify day-to-day operations at their SBR WWTPs to realize similar improvements. Among the case studies will be SBR facilities in East Haddam, Connecticut; Pratt, Kansas; and Osawatomie, Kansas. Participants will be encouraged to comment and ask questions throughout the webinar. The case studies will be preceded by a brief overview of biological nitrogen removal and biological phosphorus removal science and technology.

Job Opportunities

IPDES Compliance Officer | Idaho Department of Environmental Quality

Location: Boise, ID

Closing Date: February 22, 2022

Idaho DEQ is seeking a compliance officer to work in its State Office located in Boise, Idaho. This position is responsible for conducting inspections and audits for pretreatment and municipal biosolids programs throughout the state. Works closely with DEQ and EPA staff in assessing compliance of the approved pretreatment programs and significant industrial users under DEQ’s control authority. Experience working with industrial users and evaluating compliance with Clean Water Act permits is preferred.