United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
(4504F)
EPA /842-F-94-001
February 1995
> EPA Clean Water Act Section 403
A Framework For Ecological
Risk Assessment
Background
In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act
(CWA). Under the CWA, point source discharges (i.e.,
discharges from municipal and industrial facilities) to
waters of the United States must obtain a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit, which requires compliance with technology- and
water quality-based treatment standards. In addition,
because of the complexity and ecological significance of
marine ecosystems, discharges to the territorial seas and
beyond must also comply with section 403 of the CWA,
which specifically addresses impacts from such point
sources on marine resources. The section 403 program
was one of the first of EPA's programs to incorporate
ecological risk assessment as part of the evaluation of the
impacts of point source discharges on the marine
environment.
Section 403 Requirements
Section 403 of the CWA provides that point source
discharges to the territorial seas, contiguous zone, and
oceans are subject to regulatory requirements in addition
to the technology- or water quality-based requirements
applicable to typical discharges. The section 403
requirements are intended to ensure that no unreason-
able degradation of the marine environment will occur
as a result of the discharge and to ensure that sensitive
ecological communities are protected. These require-
ments can include ambient monitoring programs
designed to determine degradation of marine waters,
alternative assessments designed to further evaluate the
consequences of various disposal options, and pollution
prevention techniques designed to further reduce the
quantities of pollutants requiring disposal and thereby
reduce the potential for harm to the marine environ-
ment. If section 403 requirements for protection of the
ecological health of marine waters are not met, an
NPDES permit will not be issued.
In assessing the potential effects of a marine discharge
during permit application review, the permitting
authority evaluates the impact of a marine discharge on
the biological community based on ecological, social,
and economic factors. Under the provisions of section
403, the permitting authority can require the permit
applicant to provide the information necessary to
conduct such an evaluation.
Ocean Discharges
Contiguous
Open Ocean
Industrial
Fuci lily
"Baseline
LEGEND
Discharges :iyl subject to section
1, 2 (Inside the baseline)
[Discharges subject to section 4O3(c)-
4. 5 (Municipal and industrial
discharges to the territorial
MM)
3, 6 (Municipal and industrial
discharge* To the contiguous
zone)
7 (Oil and gas operations)
8 (Seafood processing)
-------
Ocean Discharge Guidelines
To implement section 403, EPA developed the Ocean
Discharge Guidelines (40 CFR Part 125, Subpart M
[45 FR 65942, October 3, 1980]), which specify the
ecological, social, and economic factors to be used by
permit writers when they evaluate the impact of a
discharge on the marine environment. The 10 ocean
discharge guidelines to be considered in determining
whether unreasonable degradation of the marine
environment will occur are as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Quantities, composition, and potential
bioaccumulation or persistence of the pollut-
ants to be discharged.
Potential transport of the pollutants by
biological, physical, or chemical processes.
Composition and vulnerability of potentially
exposed biological communities, including
unique species or communities,
endangered or threatened species, and
species critical to the structure or function
of the ecosystem.
Importance of the receiving water area to the
surrounding biological community, e.g.,
spawning sites,
- nursery/forage areas,
migratory pathways, and
- areas necessary for critical life stages/
functions of an organism.
The existence of special aquatic sites, includ-
ing (but not limited to)
marine sanctuaries/refuges,
- parks,
monuments,
national seashores,
wilderness areas, and
- coral reefs/seagrass beds.
Potential direct or indirect impacts on
human health.
(7) Existing or potential recreational and commer-
cial fishing.
(8) Any applicable requirements of an approved
Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP).
(9) Such other factors relating to the effects of the
discharge as may be appropriate.
(10) Marine water quality criteria.
Much of the information necessary to make these
evaluations is usually already available to the permitting
authority from previous scientific studies, permit
evaluations, or other data collection activities. Addi-
tional information may be requested from the applicant
when necessary to help the permit writer make decisions
regarding the permit.
In those cases where there is insufficient information to
support a finding of "no unreasonable degradation,"
applicants must demonstrate that the discharge will not
cause "irreparable harm." When the permitting author-
ity makes a determination of no irreparable harm, a
permit may be issued while confirmatory data on
ecosystem health are gathered to be evaluated prior to
reissuance of the permit. These data are collected as
part of a monitoring program to assess the impact of the
discharge on water, sediment, and biological quality, as
well as an assessment of alternative sites for the dis-
charge or disposal of the wastewater. Data are also
gathered through monitoring compliance with all other
conditions in the permit.
-------
Applicant submits request for
issuance/reissuance of permit
Evaluation to determine
unreasonable degradation
Issue/Reissue permit
May require:
—Limits
—Monitoring
—Special conditions
Section 403 decision process.
EPA has identified more than 300 facilities subject to
section 403 requirements under individual permits.
Approximately 2,500 oil and gas exploration and
production platforms must also meet section 403
requirements. These facilities are covered in five
general permits in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. One
general permit issued in Alaska covers approximately
300 seafood processing facilities, including both land-
based facilities and seagoing vessels.
403 Authority
Statutory Authority: Section 403 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. Section 1343).
Regulatory Authority: Ocean Discharge Criteria —
Title 40, Part 125, Subpart M, Code of Federal
Regulations (40 CFR 125.120-125.124).
Regulated Community: Point sources (i.e., industrial
and municipal facilities) discharging seaward of the
baseline of the territorial sea.
Key Section 403 Definitions
Unreasonable Degradation
• Significant adverse changes in ecosystem diversity,
productivity, and stability of the biological commu-
nity within the area of discharge and surrounding
biological communities;
• Threat to human health through direct exposure to
pollution or through consumption of exposed
aquatic organisms; or
• Unreasonable loss of aesthetic, recreational,
scientific, or economic value in relation to the
benefit derived from the discharge.
Irreparable Harm
• Significant undesirable effects that are irreversible
after cessation or modification of the discharge.
Baseline
• Defines the innermost boundary of the territorial
seas; generally, the mean low water mark.
The 403 Universe:
Types of Permitted Discharges (1994)
Category
Approximate Number
POTWs
Offshore Oil and Gas Facilities
Seafood Processors
Offshore Placer Mining
Log Transfer Facilities
Seawater Treatment Plants
Sugar Cane Mills
Petroleum Refineries
Pulp and Paper Mills
130
2,500
300
2
35
3
8
3
2
Ecological Risk Assessment and the
403 Process
As described by EPA in its Framework for Ecological
Risk Assessment (1992), ecological risk assessment is
the evaluation of the likelihood that adverse ecological
effects might occur as a result of exposure to one or
more environmental stressors. An environmental
stressor is any physical, chemical, or biological factor
that can cause an adverse environmental effect.
Common environmental stressors include pollutants
such as pesticides and organic chemicals, loss or
-------
alteration of habitat, and sudden or extreme changes
in temperature. Ecological effects commonly evalu-
ated include mortality and reproductive or develop-
mental abnormalities in fish, marine mammals, and
other marine organisms; the types and magnitude of
those effects; and the likelihood of recovery. Ecologi-
cal risk assessment also involves evaluating ecologi-
cal sustainability. Ecological sustainability entails
balancing ecological risks with socioeconomic factors
to determine an acceptable level of health and quality
of an ecological system.
Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program, dischargers must achieve
compliance with national minimum technology-based
treatment requirements and any additional require-
ments necessary to meet state water quality standards.
This approach helps to ensure that the designated
uses of the receiving waters (e.g., fishable, swim-
mable) are not impaired. Section 403 can be used to
require an evaluation of ocean discharges that looks
beyond potential for water quality degradation.
Specifically, section 403 provides for evaluation of the
ecological risks and impacts associated with the
discharge. The 10 guidelines listed earlier incorpo-
rate not only water quality impacts, but also impacts
on the biological community and human health.
To assess potential impacts posed by a discharge, site-
specific determinations of the magnitude of potential
ecological risks are made. For example, a discharge
might not cause long-term water quality degradation,
but it might contain levels of contaminants that are
harmful to marine organisms or entire marine
communities in the vicinity of the discharge, espe-
cially benthic (bottom) communities, such as coral
habitat, seagrass meadows, or shellfish beds. These
communities are important individually and also
make up part of the entire ecosystem, which directly
or indirectly affects human health, (e.g., fish con-
sumption, human contact, etc.). By measuring and
evaluating ecological health—in this case, marine
plant and animal life—we can better understand the
risks and impacts pollutants pose to human health
and welfare and make informed permitting decisions.
Our natural resources are not unlimited. The use of
natural resources carries with it an obligation to
protect those resources for the future. The purpose of
ecological risk assessment is to gain an improved
understanding of the magnitude and likelihood of
adverse environmental responses to human activities
so we can make informed decisions based on the best
scientific data and knowledge. Ecological risk
assessment, however, does not preclude human
activity in the environment. Rather, when
appropriately carried out, it should be used to identify
situations where ecological sustainability is threatened.
EPA is committed to improving its decision-making
capabilities by using ecological risk assessment technolo-
gies, such as section 403 Ocean Discharge Criteria
Evaluations to protect both human and ecological health
to the greatest extent possible.
Discussions between
Pemi-ee ana EPA
(Planning)
ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
PROBLEM FC
— Idsrt'y po
— kterfyaff
*
MUULATIOh
Jtants
Kled rabitats
I
)
•c —
ANALYSIS
— Cha-acterze exjxisure
— Evaljate impacts bssed on
10 ocean discharce yMe~.net
\
1
«
CHARACTERIZE RISK I
— Resu ts frcn the Ocean D scnarge 1
Criteria E'va jaticn
(
i
! Dele rmi nation cf no irreparable ram
( or no unreasonable degrad3ticn
I
<
-* :
Data acquisition; vitrification and monitoring
" t [__
ifpenrit
is grafted
i
r
Risk Management
— Moritorinj
— Pol uticn prc'^ntion
— Scientific stucies
Adap'.M Tom EPAs Fremewcrtr for Ecological Risk Assessner.t
EPV63C/R-9213C', Fssruary '392
EPA's framework for ecological risk assessment,
modified to incorporate the steps for evaluating an
ocean discharge.
Contact Information
U.S. Environmental Protection
Office of Wetlands, Oceans ar
Oceans and Coastal Protectio
401 M Street, SW (4504F)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-8448
I
------- |