vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-600/9-81-005
February 1981
Research and Development
Research Strategy
for the 1980's
Water Quality Research
Committee
-------
EPA-600/9-81-005
February 1981
RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR THE 1980's
WATER QUALITY RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Prepared jointly by the:
Office of Research and Development
and
Office of Water and Waste Management
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
PREFACE
Beginning In 1977, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) undertook a
comprehensive review of its research planning and management and reported its
findings to the Congress, submitting The Planning and Management of Research
and Development in June, 1978. To address some of the problems identified, a
pilot project was initiated to examine the feasibility of planning research
and development programs by committees representing t'he Agency's primary
organizational elements. The success of this pilot project resulted in the
formation of research committees to plan programs in all research areas. Each
committee is co-chaired by the Office of Research and Development (ORD) and
the appropriate, corresponding regulatory, organization - the Office of Water
and Waste Management; the Office of Air, Noise and Radiation; or the Office of
Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
This document describes the research and development strategy prepared by
the Water Quality Research Committee. The strategy reflects current perspec-
tives of EPA's program thrusts in the 1980s and associated research require-
ments. The document will serve as the basis for detailed planning in those
ORD laboratories implementing research on water quality management. To be
properly responsive to evolving regulatory priorities and emerging scientific
findings, however, the strategy will be subject to at least one annual
revision, in concert with EPA's planning and budgeting cycle.
Richard M. Dowd
Acting Assistant Administrator
for Research and Development
Eckardt C. Beck
Assistant Administrator
for Water and Waste Management
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface ii
I. Purpose and Scope i
I. Executive Summary 3
III. Projected Agency Policies and Priorities in the 1980's 7
General 7
1981-1983 Period 8
Beyond 1983 14
IV. Research Needs 17
General 17
Summary of Highest Priority Needs 18
V. Research Plan 27
Role of Office of Research and Development 27
Research Program Areas Designated to Respond to Needs 28
Proposed Research Goals 33
Anticipated Problems in Satisfying Needs 33
VI. Research Program Options 51
Major Concerns 51
Discussion of Options 52
Potential Sources of Funds For Real location 54
Priority Array For Seeking New Resources 55
Priority Array For Real location of Base Resources 55
iii
-------
I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of the strategy is to express the Water Quality Research
Committee's view of the non-energy research program priorities over a five to
ten year period to support the Headquarters and Regional regulatory programs
served by the Committee. The strategy also is to serve as a compendium of all
relevant areas of research and associated resource requirements so that it can
be used as the primary working document in evaluating alternative research
thrusts, making tradeoffs among research projects, and preparing and revising
annual research program plans when faced with resource increases, decreases,
or shifts in emphasis. To properly serve these purposes, the strategy will be
updated at least annually to maintain it on a current basis.
The strategy also is intended to serve, along with the other research
committee strategies, as a building block of the annual Office of Research and
Development (ORD) Research Outlook. This publication describes EPA's plans
for research over a four "or five year period.
The strategy is intended to reflect the short and long term research needs
of the Office of Water Regulations and Standards (exclusive of the Effluent
Guidelines Division), marine protection, and water quality management planning
programs of the Office of Water Program Operations, and associated programs of
the Office of Water Enforcement and the Regions in the implementation of the
Clean Water Act. Basically, these programs deal with the identification of
ambient water quality problems warranting Agency concern, development and
implementation of nationwide or regional strategies for abating and controlling
the ambient problems identified, and assessment of the effectiveness of the
strategies and the progress of the programs implementing them. From the per-
spective of a water pollutant's movement, impact, and fate in the environment,
this strategy addresses those concerns from the point where a pollutant
(exclusive of those derived from energy development activities) would enter a
surface water or wetland (by any means other than a spill) and up to the point
where it would enter a drinking water treatment plant intake. The strategy
also addresses the generation and control of nonpoint pollutant from rural
(viz., agriculture and silviculture) sources and from dredge and fill
operations.
Research needs of the Agency associated with the characterization and
control of municipal sewage, urban storm runoff, and spilled materials are
addressed in the Municipal Wastewater and Spill Prevention Research Strategy.
Needs of the Agency associated with the characterization and control of
industrial wastewaters, including storm runoff from industrial sites, are
addressed in the Industrial Wastewater Research Strategy. Needs associated
with the treatment, protection, and characterization of drinking water and
ground water (and associated problems) are addressed in the Drinking Water
Research Strategy. Needs dealing with leachates and surface runoff from solid
and hazardous waste disposal sites are addressed in the Solid Waste Research
Strategy. Needs associated with environmental impacts of energy development
activities will be covered in the Energy Research Strategy.
Research needs of Agency Programs covered by this strategy are sub-divided
into the following program areas: 1) Scientific Assessments, 2) Technical
Information & Liaison, 3) Monitoring Systems and Quality Assurance, 4) Health
1
-------
Effects, 5) Environmental Processes and Effects, 6) Chesapeake Bay, and 7)
Great Lakes.
Some needs of the Agency programs served by the Committee also fall into
research areas under the purview of the Drinking Water Committee (i.e., those
related to ground water), Municipal Wastewater and Spill Prevention Committee
(i.e., those related to urban nonpoint source control and use of wetlands as a
municipal effluent polishing system), Solid Waste Committee (i.e., those
related to surface and ground water impacts from leachates and runoff from
hazardous waste disposal sites), and Energy Committee (i.e., those concerning
the transport, fate, and effects of pollution generated through the develop-
ment and operation of energy sources). In addition, strategic assessments,
socioeconomic research, and environmental processes research carried out under
ORD's Anticipatory Research Program also are relevant to the needs of Agency
programs served by the Water Quality Research Committee.
-------
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The strategy projects the operational program's policies and priorities
over the next five to ten years, the resultant program thrusts, and associated
research needs. Thus, the validity of the strategy for carrying out the
research hinges primarily on the precision of the projections of future Agency
policies and priorities. The near term projections enjoy a much higher level
of confidence than the longer term ones.
The general consensus is that as the technology based point source control
requirements of the Clean Water Act are achieved over the next four years
emphasis increasingly will be placed on water quality based controls where
necessary to achieve the water quality goals of the Act. Nonpoint sources of
pollution and dredge and fill operations are expected to receive increased
attention as point sources are brought under appropriate levels of control.
Increased emphasis also is expected to be given to demonstration of nonpoint
source control and lake restoration techniques useful in achieving water
quality goals.
Of all of the pollutants of interest, toxic chemicals are expected to
receive the single greatest emphasis in the 1980's. Other constituents to
receive significant attention will be sediment and nutrients.
In pursuing the above activities, there will be a full awareness of and
sensitivity to the nation's protracted energy and economic problems. Greater
attention will be given to translating the goals of the act into quantitative
water quality objectives reflecting local conditions and to identifying the
most cost-effective and energy-efficient water quality management strategy-for
achieving these objectives for each pollutant and within each watershed.
After due consideration of the above policies and directions the
following categories of reseach needs have emerged as of greatest importance
and are listed in priority order:
1. Toxic Pollutant Management
2. Nonpoint Source Control
3. Clean Lakes and Dredge « Fill Program
4. Ground Water Protection (addressed primarily in the Drinking Water
Research Strategy)
Areas of research considered to be of single greatest relevance in each of
tne nrst three need categories are as follows:
Toxic Pollutant Management - numerical criteria for specific toxic chemi-
cals to be addressed in State water quality standards. Completion of the
chrome toxicity data base for the Consent Decree chemicals is of immediate
concern. Procedures for translating the criteria to local conditions are
also a high priority. Associated measurement and modeling capabilities are
-------
also needed for implement at ion of the ambient water quality standards
produced.
0 Nonpoint Source Control - techniques for documenting (and information on)
the ecoTogical impacts of nonpoint sources and translating that information
into useable (i.e., time variant) criteria and standards. A capability to
translate the criteria and standards into NPS control requirements also
must be provided, along with a capability to project the cost and
effectiveness of candidate NPS management practices for specific
applications.
° Clean^Lakes Program - information on the applications, limitations,
duration ofeffecti veness, and costs of various in-lake pollution control/
restoration techniques and an approach for using this information in
evaluating the merits of clean lake grant proposals.
0 Dredge & Fill Program - information and techniques for assessing potentially
harmful impacts associated with the extraction, transport, and disposal of
dredged material containing toxic pollutants.
The current allocation of base resources among the various research areas is
summarized in Figure II-l. This allocation will allow modest to near-adequate
progress in many of the above priority areas. Needs that cannot be met in any
where near a timely fashion without a substantial resource increase over a
three to five year or more period are the following (listed in order of
decreasing priority):
1. Formation of a Technical Assistance Team to support toxic pollutant
management activities in Agency water pollution control programs.
2. Development and field validation of procedures for applying laboratory
derived water quality criteria to field situations, as necessary to
develop realistic State/Federal water quality standards.
3. Development of exposure analysis and load allocation predictive
techniques, with the latter applicable to both specific toxic
pollutants and general effluent toxicity measures.
4. Acceleration of work on: a) minimum data sets for water quality
criteria for priority pollutants; b) measurement methods for toxic
volatile organic pollutants; and c) toxic pollutant exposure analysis
predictive techniques.
5. Development of "wet weather" time variant water quality criteria.
6. Development of economic benefit analysis techniques and associated data
bases for use in demonstrating where the cost of implementing further
point and/or nonpoint source controls is in line with the benefits to
be derived.
7. Acceleration of Great Lakes research on health risks from PCBs and
other toxic organics and necessary remedial measures.
-------
Figure 11-1
WATER QUALITY NON-ENERGY DECISION UNIT
CURRENT BASE FUNDING DISTRIBUTION
(November 1980)
i
3-
s
£
Ml
|
"• 1-
g
70-
60-
60-
IU
h>
y.
i *°"
§ *°~
£
20-
10-
0
i
I
I
[
i
i
s
E
|
1
I
S
1
^
yMy////////////mm
1
S
I
— ]
^
^j
\
I
f
i
i
.
1
i
I
•r
UOtND:
i
at
w
__
1
I
i
^™t
TW
HOI
Ml
«
»L
In
LtOtNO:
1
^
r
L
j
s
!
1
i
i
f
1
\
i
^
*ia
|
i
e
>n
t
—
i
m
1
v/y////////\
_
^
1
—
Y//////////A
^
W////////A
i
i
§
f
£
i
ENVIRON. PROCESSES & EFFECTS
i
i
s
1
I
1
i
i
s
I
£
1
i
\ .
n
i !
! i
II-3
-------
8. Compilation of rural BMP effectiveness data base, as needed to select
the most cost-effective combination of management practices capable of
achieving specified load reductions in specific situations, or to
predict water quality improvements that would result from the imple-
mentation of BMPs.
Needs that also cannot be met in a sufficiently timely fashion at the
current base level of resources, but which could be with modest resource
increases over a one-five year period are (in order of decreasing priority):
9. Toxic hot spot screening techniques.
10. Interior gross wasteload allocation predictive techniques applicable
to general toxicity type assessments.
11. Reference measurement methods for priority toxic pollutants in water,
sediment, and biota with detection limits at least as low as the
maximum concentrations considered as safe.
12. Techniques for assessing impacts of proposed dredge and fill projects
involving spoils containing toxic pollutants.
13. Technical assistance in the preparation, revision, and implementation
of regulations and associated guidelines covering marine discharge and
dumpi ng activities.
Every attempt will be made to accelerate work on Needs 9-13 through
resource shifts within the overall Agency base resources and/or making full
use of relevant work performed under other research committees or by other
agencies. In later years, as work on currently pursued outputs is completed,
resource shifts will be made to the fullest extent possible to more adequately
pursue Needs 1-8, except as noted below.
Although fulfillment of the fourth priority need for minimum data sets for
priority pollutants had been viewed by the Water Quality Research Committee to
be the single highest priority and to represent the basic underpinning of any
defensible water quality based pollution control strategy, no further shift in
base resources to this area will be considered. The majority of the Agency
Ranking Committee deemed that the current level of effort in this area
could be reduced in FY 1982 to a level that will not allow its completion
until beyond the Year 2000. Thus, the water quality based approach, if
launched in the mid-19801s, may have to concentrate initially on non-toxic
pollutants until valid and defensible water quality criteria for a significant
percentage of the ubiquitous toxic pollutants become availabe. One possible
way of temporarily getting around this long term gap in the technical base
that is being pursued will be to deal primarily in terms of "toxicity units"
of effluents and receiving waters in aggregate and avoiding consideration to
the extent possible of individual waste constituents and their individual
effects.
-------
III. PROJECTED AGENCY POLICIES AND PRIORITIES IN THE 1980's
GENERAL
The goals of the Clean Water Act are being pursued essentially in two
phases. In Phase I, emphasis is being given to putting in place a minimum or
base level of point source pollution control across the country. This
fundamental level of control is based on the control technology available or
economically achievable, without regard to site-by-site considerations of
water quality impacts. Most first generation regulations covering technology
o^ *P?Jn?ofi°Ur emphasis will shift to implementation of Phase II.
n^nf? !' !mphaf s wlj. be 9iven to development and implementation of a
national strategy for meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act where the base
level of controls, alone, is insufficient to do this. Building from existing
programs employing water quality standards and the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) of permits, the Agency already has begun
to identify and further control point sources discharging toxic wastewaters.
Biological toxi city screening will be used to identify those industries where
the technology based control requirements are insufficient to control acutely
toxic discharges. Control procedures employing wasteload allocations of total
maximum daily loads (WLA/TMDL) and considering both general toxi city and
chemical-by-chemical composition (as appropriate), will be implemented during
this phase.
Attention will continue to be given, however, to development of second and
subsequent generation technology based control requirements as additional
S?rf? o? thWarI?ntin9 s"ch cwerage are identified and as advancements in the
state-of-the-art of control technology are made. In planning and implementing
Phase II, which represents a water quality based approach, there will be a
full awareness of and sensitivity to the nation's protracted energy and
economic problems. Attention will be given to translating the goals of the
Act into site-specific quantitative water quality objectives and to
identifying the most cost-effective and energy-efficient water quality
Ser'shed! 9y achiev1n9 these objectives for each pollutant in each
of the greater costs associated with higher levels of point source
e.g., advanced waste treatment for municipal wastes), technically
PTTPrnx/P JiMi-J^nc r01? increasingly critical to provide the most cost
will pntaii fht10ns;. Cost-effectiveness and energy efficiency considerations
win entail the application of various combinations of point and nonpoint
ODtirmalC?ol,rr?innln •?? mana?ement of the full range of pollutants of concern.
uptimai solutions will require consideration to be given to the use of water
course or watershed modification or non-source control techniques (e.g.,
IdlSrpnf tnXl?^ ™°™'1 > flow augmentation, creation of artificial wet'lands
adjacent to streams to intercept and treat runoff, etc.), in addition to
source control techniques. This approach has been and will continue to be
hKon nt0A9rea!i exten* 1n the Clean Lakes Program. The relationship
between quality and quantity and the role of conservation will be recognized
in future water quality management planning.
7
-------
Pollutants and associated impacts to receive the single greatest emphasis
over the next several years will be the toxic and hazardous chemicals. Other
constituents to receive significant attention will be sediment and nutrients.
The importance of toxic and hazardous chemicals in a highly industrialized
society will be recognized in their control. Thus, primary consideration in
associated environmental decisions wi 11 be directed at specifying and
regulating use and disposal practices to maintain environmental risks posed by
these chemicals at acceptable levels, as opposed to simply approving or
banning their use or disposal. Risks posed by existing environmental levels
of toxic and hazardous chemicals also will be evaluated and taken into account
in such risk assessments. This approach will require more sophisticated
assessments of actual and potential environmental exposures and associated
risks than were required in managing conventional pollutants. In addition, it
will require much more comprehensive water quality standards fully relevant to
each geographical region of the U.S. and its territories. Greater considera-
tion also will have to be given to the multimedia aspects of toxic and
hazardous chemicals, from the standpoints of both environmental exposure
assessments and disposal practices. This will require an integration of water
quality, drinking water, and solid waste management programs to provide the
most cost-effective environmental protection.
Pollutant sources other than POTWs and industrial point sources to be
given serious attention in the 1980's include abandoned hazardous waste sites,
urban storm runoff and runoff from farming, logging, mining, and construction
activities. Increased attention also will be given to the protection of
wetlands from dredge and fill operations and of ground waters from contami-
nation by such sources as landfills, saltwater intrusion, underground
injection, and the storing or disposal of hazardous waste. In addition,
greater attention is expected to be given to the problems created by the
disposal of pollutants in marine waters.
1981 - 1983 PERIOD
OVERVIEW
In the 1981 - 1983 period, five program areas will fall within Office of
Water and Waste Management's (OWWM's) first level of priorities (relative to
this research strategy.) These are: (1) toxic pollutant management; (2)
nonpoint source control; (3) clean lakes program; (4) dredge and fill program;
and (5) ground water quality protection program. The latter area, of course,
is covered by the Drinking Water Research Strategy. Other important activi-
ties in this period will include the wasteload allocation/total maximum daily
load program, ocean disposal program, and special studies.
During this same period, the Office of Water Enforcement's primary
emphasis will be on implementation of Phase II of the program. This will
entail stepped-up efforts to identify point source discharges subject to the
NPDES that must be controlled further in order to achieve water quality
standards, especially with respect to toxic pollutants. Such efforts will
include: 1) expansion of effluent and ambient monitoring for toxicants, other
priority pollutants, and adherence to technology based control requirements;
2) full implementation of the Discharge Monitoring Report quality assurance
program to improve NPDES compliance data; and 3) increased inspections in
8
-------
a
support of enforcement cases and emergency situations. The Office of Water
Enforcement also wi 11 be working toward improving the effectiveness of
enforcement programs dealing with toxic substances and hazardous materials.
Consideration will be given to the various ways such materials enter the
environment and are regulated by each statute and enforcement program, with
view toward coordinating all relevant programs in a way that will deal most
effectively with national concerns.
TOXIC POLLUTANT MANAGEMENT
In FY 1981, activities initiated previously to control toxic pollutants
will be continued. Promulgation of best available technology (BAT) regula-
tions and pretreatment standards covering toxic pollutants from primary
industries will occur, as will completion of the publicly owned treatment
works (POTW) study that is assessing the effectiveness of secondary treatment
on toxic pollutants. Increased attention will be given to determining whether
there are additional toxic compounds that should be addressed in effluent
guidelines, and to conducting special "hot spot" and follow-up exposure/risk
studies (pollutant-by-pollutant in selected areas) to determine whether
controls in addition to and beyond BAT are necessary. Highest priority also
will be given in this period to development of specific water quality criteria-
for priority toxic pollutants and promotion of inclusion of specific
pollutants in State water quality standards. There also will be increased
emphasis on monitoring of effluents and receiving waters for early detection
of toxic hot spots.
Among the highest of Regional priorities will be the conduct of priority
pollutant analyses to determine exposure/fate of these pollutants and the
development of geographic control strategies for them. The Regions also will
be giving high priority to ensuring that States develop adequate toxic
analytic capabilities and that the procedures will be consistent with the
Agency's Quality Assurance Policy.
NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROL
In FY 1980, Section 208 grants were shifted, as a matter of OMB
Congressional and EPA policy, to development of N>S controls. Thus, the
Water Quality Management (WQM) program must provide enough supportive
information to continue a restructured NPS program, under non-regulatory
Section 208 authority or otherwise, by 1983. Accordingly, the 1980-1983
period will be directed toward the development of an adequate technological
data base to ensure that the States will be able to develop under Sec. 208
(and implement under both Sec. 208 and 314) a fully operational NPS control
program (employing best management practices) that will meet water quality
management goals.
Attention will be directed as necessary to assure that funds being spent
for management of nonpoint sources of pollution are being spent effectively
and that these efforts do, in fact, impact water quality. Priorities for the
nonpoint source program include urban and agricultural runoff and ground water
management.
-------
The WQM program wi 11 be utilizing demonstration and implementation
projects to illustrate, by example, the effectiveness of selected NPS
management practices. These "prototype" projects, the National Urban Runoff
Program (N'JRP), and various USDA programs foster implementation of WQM plans
developed under the 208 program. The WQM program will provide the expertise
to determine which inputs are creating the NPS problem and what BMPs can solve
them, including institutional, structural, or non-structural controls. The
"transfer" aspect of the prototype projects is an important one. The Rural
Clean Water Program (funded at $50 million in FY 1980) is now getting underway
and will be emphasizing the development of loading estimates and the
evaluation of BMPs.
CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
The thrust of the Clean Lakes program is shifting from demonstration to
implementation of restorative measures applicable to lakes. The Clean Lakes
program has recently issued the Sec. 314 cooperative agreement regulations,
which describe the procedures used in securing a grant to restore and/or
protect a publicly owned, freshwater lake. Every effort will be made to fund
only the most cost-effective projects. Accordingly, high priority will be
given by OWRS to evaluation of lake restoration techniques on an economic/
technical basis. The Clean Lakes Program also is being factored into State
strategies as a means to control sources of pollution on a priority basis.
Clean lakes projects will continue to be implemented in a diversity of urban
and rural watersheds involving pollution sources from agriculture, irrigation,
silviculture, mining, wetland leachates, stormwater discharge, hazardous and
solid waste disposal facilities, sanitary wastes, and atmospheric washout.
DREDGE AND FILL PROGRAM
The Section 404 program (on dredge and fill materials) will be focusing on
completing the test and evaluation section of the 404(b)(l) guidelines, which
outline procedures for reviewing dredge and fill permit applications,
including the specifying of disposal sites. High priority will be given by
the Regions to assurance of adequate environmental review of projects.
Attention wi 11 be directed at the most environmentally sensitive projects,
with emphasis on pre-permit application planning and analysis. The assess-
ments will focus on projecting detrimental impacts from the discharge of
dredged or fill material at the discharge site, the likely mechanisms of
transport, and the ultimate fate of the pollutants. Consideration also will
be given in these assessments to the relative environmental and economic
impacts of alternative dredging techniques.
The Regions will also be working actively to transfer 404 program
responsibility to qualified States for certain waters of the U.S. This
transferal will involve the preparation and dissemination of guidance
materials.
GROUND WATER QUALITY PROTECTION
The ground water program in OWWM for the near term is directed at the
development of cost-effective solutions to ground water quality problems
through a national "prototype" technology transfer program, which includes the
10
-------
development of State/areawide comprehensive ground and surface water programs
aimed at continuing planning and implementation activities. The results of the
prototype" projects will include the development of BMPs that will be trans-
ferable to other areas of the nation experiencing similar problems.
The water quality management ground water program will encourage the States
to develop and coordinate, as part of a State comprehensive ground water
management program: (1) management programs to control nonpoint sources of
pollution (septic systems, agricultural and urban runoff, salt water intrusion
landfills, etc.) under the CWA, (2) management plans for sole source aquifers '
(3) management of hazardous and non-hazardous waste disposal under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and (4) underground injection
controls under Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). 'njettion
As stated previously, research needs associated with ground water pollution
are addressed in the Drinking Water Research Strategy. Needs associated with
waste disposal under RCRA are covered in the Solid Waste Research Strategy.
WASTELOAD ALLOCATION/TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS
The WLA/TMDL program will focus on two priorities in the 1980 - 1983 period-
1) management of construction grants program and 2) control of toxic hot spots.
Effective and efficient management of the construction grants program will
continue to be a high priority over the 1980 - 1983 period. Meeting the
treatment needs of the largest SMSAs will be a major programmatic thrust.
Particular emphasis will be given to the construction of cost-effective
energy-efficient facilities, utilizing land treatment wherever feasible.'
Scrutiny of proposed AWT/AST facilities will continue in order to ensure that
they will result in significant water quality improvement and that associated
capital and operating costs are justified. High priority will be given to
review of the technical adequacy of wasteload allocations in AWT/AST project
?n2P?DA o -In add!t!on' hl'9h Pr1or1ty will be given to establishment of State
and EPA Region wasteload allocation programs and providing the associated
guidance needed.
Toxic hotspots that would remain after the application of required
technology based controls and where further national controls are not
appropriate will be managed through either chemical-by-chemical or general
toxicity waste load allocations. The hotspots will be identified through
several approaches, including the application of biological screening techniques
to effluents and ambient waters. In addition, as part of its ongoing effort to
identify water quality problem areas, EPA will be preparing estimates of
expected pollutant concentrations in a number of receiving waters after the
installation of the required base level of control.
OCEAN DISPOSAL PROGRAM
^ + J^ 0!iSJ? D1sP°sal Program, as described here, covers responsibilities of
both the Office of Water Regulations and Standards and the Office of Water
Program Operations under Sec. 301(h) and 403(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and
11
-------
ocean dumping provisions of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act, as amended (MPRSA), and the International Convention for Prevention of
Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Materials (London Dumping
Convention (LDC) ). Other marine-related activities (viz., water quality
criteria development for toxic pollutants and the dredged and fill materials
program) are addressed elsewhere.
In the 1981 - 1983 period, emphasis will be on administering the regulations
implementing Sec. 301(h) and 403(c) of CWA and the ocean dumping provisions of
MPRSA and LDC. All of these regulations impose rather significant monitoring
requi rements.
Sec. 301(h) allows modification of the secondary treatment requirement for
those POTWs discharging to marine waters, where certain conditions are met. Tn
those situations where a modification is granted (generally for a set number of
years), the discharger must monitor the impact on aquatic .biota of the
discharge over that period and report monitoring results to EPA. Accordingly,
with respect to Sec. 301(h), the major thrust over the 1981 - 1983 period will
be to first provide guidance on the decision-making process for handling the
applications and then to proceed with guidance on establishment of necessary
monitoring systems, evaluation of the adequacy of proposed systems, and
implementation of a program for systematically evaluating and interpreting the
monitoring data submitted by the dischargers to verify that no adverse impacts
are resulting from their discharge.
Sec. 403(c) requires EPA to prepare and periodically update guidelines for
determining the degradation of marine waters resulting from the disposal of
pollutants. These guidelines are to be used in evaluating applications for Sec.
402 permits to discharge to marine waters. As currently proposed, these
guidelines are in the form of ocean discharge criteria and apply to off-shore
(e.g., oil and gas exploratory and production platforms) as well as land based
sources. As with Sec. 301 (h), there is a requirement for the discharger to
establish a monitoring system to measure the impact of the discharge. The
monitoring program is considered the key to compliance with Sec. 403(c). Thus,
the major thrust over the 1981 - 1983 period with respect to Sec. 403(c) will be
the development of monitoring-related guidance similar to that described for
administering the 301(h) program, and determining the impact of these
di scharges.
The overall objective of the eight year old Ocean Dumping Program is to
prevent or strictly limit the ocean dumping of any material that would
adversely affect human health, welfare, marine ecologic systems, or economic
potentialities. One of the goals of the program is to stop all "harmful
dumping" (viz., sewage sludge) by the end of 1931. A permit system is
administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (for dredge spoils) and EPA
(for all other materials). Dumping sites are designated by EPA.
Although the intent of the law is clear, the difficulties of complying will
be great. During the next two years, EPA's implementation and enforcement of
various provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean
Water Act, and the Clean Air Act may create strong pressures to increase ocean
disposal of certain wastes. In addition, many major coastal metropolitan
12
-------
areas, now dumping sewage sludge in the oceans, may have extreme difficulty in
eliminating these practices because of their poor fiscal positions.
The major thrust of the Ocean Dumping Program over the 1981 - 1983 period
will be to continue administering the permit program and to obtain a clearer
understanding of the actual impacts of ocean dumped pollutants on the marine
environment, as necessary for effective ocean resource use and management. A
survey of ocean dump sites is already underway and should be completed within
the 1981 - 1983 period. Administration of the permit program involves
evaluation of each permit application regarding:
The need for the proposed dumping (versus alternative disposal
approaches).
The effect on human health and welfare, including economic, esthetic,
and recreational values.
The effect on fisheries resources, plankton, fish, shellfish, wildlife,
shorelines, beaches and marine ecosystems.
The effect of dumping particular volumes and concentrations of materials
and the persistence of the effects.
The effect on other ocean uses such as scientific study, fishing and
other resource exploitation.
Appropriate locations and methods of disposal or recycling, including
land-based alternatives and the probable impact of requiring the use of
such alternate locations or methods.
SPECIAL STUDIES
As directed by Congress, EPA is conducting an in-depth study of the
Chesapeake Bay. The objective of the study, to be completed by the end of
1982, is to develop a basis for a sound, permanent management system that will
ensure effective protection of Chesapeake Bay water quality and continuous
prudent management of the Bay as a natural resource. Steps toward this end
involve identification of factors adversely impacting the bay, conduct of
research to address these factors, and development of alternative management
strategies. The three priority areas identified to date are toxic pollutants,
eutrophication, and dieoff of submerged aquatic vegetation.
In the Great Lakes Basin, significant progress has been made in the control
of nutrients and eutrophi cat ion. Emphasis is now shifting to the study of PCBs
and other toxic organic chemicals present in the lakes and reaching humans in
what may be significant amounts. Emphasis over the 1981 - 1983 period will be
on identification and characterization of the relative contributions by all
media routes of toxic organic chemicals to the Great Lakes; their pathways of
movement, persistence, and fate; the resultant exposures to the human
population; and the resultant health effects. The overall purpose of the study
will be to identify necessary levels of control of toxic organic chemicals
reaching the Lakes and the types of sources warranting greatest attention.
13
-------
Work on nutrient-related problems in the Great Lakes study will continue at
a minimal level through FY 1983. Emphasis in this area will be on verification
of the mathematical models used in developing nutrient control requirements for
Great Lakes dischargers and development of a strategy for the control of
nearshore nuisance algal growths.
No other major special studies are currently underway or planned. A
significant number of small-scale studies, however, wi 11 be conducted over the
1981 - 1983 period. They will be directed at identifying and controlling
problems in those geographic areas with the worst pollution problems after
implementation of technology based controls and secondary treatment. Over this
period there also will be an increasing interest in field evaluation of the
applicability or validity of water quality criteria for selected pollutants and
in identification of contributions to surface water pollution from other
environmental media (e.g., atmospheric deposition, landfill leachates, and
ground water outflow). There also is expected to be a greater interest in
assessing the fate of toxic pollutants, particularly metals, as they move from
rivers into the estuarine zone. In addition, there is expected to be increased
interest in studies of pollutant fate and effects in lakes and the coastal zone.
BEYOND 1983
Program emphases beyond 1983 are less certain because of the many unforeseen
problems that will undoubtedly arise. However, some reasonable judgments about
the major areas of emphasis over the remainder of this century can be made. It
is reasonable to assume that the technology based controls will be largely in
place by July 1984 and Phase II of the strategy for meeting the Clean Water Act
goals will be well into the implementation phase at that time. First generation
control strategies for specific areas requiring controls beyond the technology
based requirements largely will be completed in the early part of this period.
Their implementation will be well underway by the latter part of the 1980s.
Control of toxic chemicals still will be of single greatest concern, although
problems resulting from excessive amounts of nutrients, sediments, and salinity
still will be prevalent in many areas of the country and will be receiving
significant attention by the Agency. The control of nonpoint source pollution
still will be receiving considerable emphasis, as will be restoration of
publicly-owned lakes and the protection of wetlands and ground waters.
Abatement programs in all of these areas will be well into the implementation
phase. There will be greater emphasis on close coordination of these abatement
programs on a watershed-by-watershed basis to achieve goals most effectively.
In addition, there will be wider and more sophisticated use of the "bubble .
concept" in determining site specific trade-offs related to overall
environmental improvement.
Other trends (cited by the National Academy of Sciences) over the next 20
years or more that will influence water quality management programs at all
levels of government include the following:
0 The public's post-Watergate, post-Vietnam sag in confidence about
national institutions will change, and decisions will be more widely
accepted only if the decision-making process is strengthened by using
scientifically sound information.
14
-------
o
o
Growing public concern in the United States about such things as the
nation's defense capability, its trade deficit, and global economic
recession will continue to influence Congress, the courts, and the
general public, making it more difficult to pursue environmental
improvements without very strong data validating serious effects from
environmental hazards.
Growing public concern about improving U.S. productivity to allow this
country to compete more effectively in world trade will tend to bring
important environmental and occupational safety issues into sharper
focus.
0 Priorities in the expenditure of public and private funds will begin to
reflect the rate of real risk abatement per unit of investment.
0 Growing public sophistication will ameliorate demands for zero risk
technologies.
0 Experience will build better articulation among federal, state, local
and industry risk abatement and environmental protection efforts, thus
making for more cost-effective use of scarce resources.
Thus, over the next 20 years and beyond, a much greater emphasis can be
expected to be given to considerations of cost-effectiveness in all pollution
control measures advocated by the Agency. After having experienced several
years of high inflation and energy shortages, the populace will be much more
cost conscious and public support for further environmental expenditures will
be given only where they can be shown to yield commensurate benefits. As a
result, greater attention will be given to integrated environmental planning.
Not only will there be a greater effort to make tradeoffs between point and
nonpoint source controls, but greater consideration wi 11 be given to the
intermedia transfers of pollutants and associated implications on the
effectiveness of goal attainment through control of indirect as well as direct
discharges to surface waters. In addition, there will be greater scrutiny at
the local level of the national goals suggested by the Clean Water Act at those
locations where additional point source control over and above the technology
based level (in concert with nonpoint source and non-source control measures)
is needed to meet them. The Agency will be acutely aware of this and must be
prepared to defend its position in those instances where it determines the
additional level of point and/or nonpoint source control necessary to meet the
national goals is feasible and attainable.
This increased concern for cost-effectiveness in pollution control
decisions wi 11 be accompanied by an increased emphasis on gathering of the
information about current and future pollution sources and their impacts as
necessary to make these kinds of decisions. Consistent with these concerns
over costs, there also will be greater emphasis on more accurately defining
water quality requirements for intended uses and on the systematic acquisition
of data needed to identify incipient problems and take timely preventive or
corrective measures. New problems may be the result of new pollutants
entering the environment for the first time, old and familiar ones reentering
at excessive rates, or modifications being made in the physical features of
water bodies or their watersheds. New pollution problems likely will result
from a wider range of materials that will be required for emerging
technologies. Such metals as titanium, gallium, vanadium, niobium, and
15
-------
chromium, as well as coal and oil shale liquids and biologically generated
chemical feedstocks, are likely to become much more common.
The problems of ultimate disposal of waste residuals likely will intensify,
as ever-increasing pollutant loads from an expanding population and economy and
greater and greater levels of pollution control generate larger and larger
amounts of residuals. As a result, available alternatives will be scrutinized
more closely, including greater use of the oceans for this purpose. This will
result in the undertaking of rather comprehensive assessments of the costs and
environmental impacts of alternative disposal policies and will likely include
considerations of dredge spoils as well as waste residuals.
There will be still other pressures brought to bear on environmental
protection programs. Various predictions of 21st century problems suggest
that, on a global scale, there wi 11 be markedly increased environmental
degradation. This is expected to result from:
0 More serious water shortages because of a relatively fixed supply and an
increasing demand. In certain parts of the world shortages also will be
attributable to increasing costs of developing new water supplies and
maintaining existing ones.
0 Serious degradation of agricultural soil because of erosion, loss of
organic matter, desertification, salinization, alkalinization, and
waterlogging. These problems elsewhere in the world still will impact
on the U.S. by increasing pressure on the U.S. to meet a larger share of
the world's food supply needs.
0 Continued deforestation, eliminating 40 percent of the remaining
standing forest cover by 2000.
0 Increasing NPS pollution volume in every category.
0 Increased levels of metals and pesticides being introduced to the
envi ronment.
0 Increased development of energy sources to meet world demand.
Thus, the Agency increasingly will feel pressure from two directions; one,
for the increased utilization of natural resources to meet human needs; and
second, for environmental protection requirements to be realistic, justifiable,
and implementable with minimal impact on society.
16
-------
IV. RESEARCH NEEDS
GENERAL
The research needs are shaped primarily by the planned broadening of
program emphasis, going beyond the technology based point source control
approach to include a water quality based approach. This will substantially
increase emphasis on the control of pollution caused by activities other than
point source discharges and on the use of natural systems for waste
assimilation and will require the demonstration of cause and effect relation-
ships. The needs also are strongly influenced by the high priority being
given to the control of toxic chemicals, the increased concern over estuarine
and marine waters, and added concerns over the nation's protracted economic
and energy problems.
In essence, the Offices of Water Regulations and Standards, Water Enforce-
ment, and Water Program Operations (in concert with Regional Office, State,
and local programs) are striving to provide a water quality management program
capable of more efficiently, effectively, and systematically identifying: 1)
existing and potential future water quality problems and their origins; 2)
attainable site specific water quality goals relevant to all of the pollutants
of consequence; 3) current and future levels of pollution control necessary to
achieve the goals and the most equitable allocation of allowable loadings- 4)
the most cost- and energy-effective control strategy for achieving assigned
loadings; and 5) the most appropriate institutional mechanisms for
implementing the control strategy. Such a capability requires the
availability and use of the following scientific and technical base:
A range of cost-effective monitoring and measurement methods for
identifying and quantifying pollution problems and evaluating
compliance with source control and ambient quality requirements.
Field validated surface water quality criteria known to closely reflect
conditions actually required for various water uses, including the
protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife and for
recreation in and on surface waters, and that are applicable to
identification of impacts of NPS pollution and deposits of sediment-
bound pollutants on aquatic life, recreational, and other uses. The
criteria also should be structured to permit identification of
incremental benefits that would result from additional increments of
pollution reduction. In addition, they should take into account the
physical features of water bodies that influence water uses.
Methods for translating water quality goals into point and nonpoint
source load allocations in water quality limited segments. This could
include chemical-by-chemical and general toxicity based controls.
Methods and associated data bases for evaluating environmental, dollar
and energy costs and associated benefits of alternative water resource
management strategies, including various combinations of point and
nonpoint source controls and water body restoration and modification
17
-------
measures. The methods should also be applicable in evaluating the
costs and benefits of dredging and alternative dredge spoil and other
waste residual disposal schemes.
0 Nonpoint (and point) source control techniques, non-source control
techniques, and water body restoration techniques that are highly
cost- and energy-effective and whose costs and effectiveness are known
for the range of operating conditions that would be encountered in
their potential use.
0 Alternative strategies for the effective implementation of water
quality management/control systems, alone, and in conjunction with
related public or private activities (e.g., flood control or soil
conservation) and that take into consideration the various legal,
institutional, social, economic, and energy constraints.
SUMMARY OF HIGHER PRIORITY NEEDS
As a result of the program direction and concerns identified above, the
following five categories of research needs have been determined to be of
greatest importance and are listed in priority order:
1. Toxic pollutant management
2. Nonpoint source control
3. Clean lakes and dredge & fill programs
4. Ground water protection (addressed in the Drinking Water and Solid
Waste Research Strategies)
Within the category of toxic pollutant management, the single greatest
need is for numerical water quality criteria covering specific toxic
pollutants that should be addressed in State water quality standards.
Completion of the chronic toxicity data base for 40 of the 65 consent decree
chemicals should receive first consideration. Other high priority needs in
this area include procedures for adapting criteria to field situations and
screening methods for rapidly and inexpensively detecting toxic hotspots.
In the area of nonpoint source control, the single greatest need is for
information on the ecological impacts of nonpoint sources and the translation
of that information into criteria and standards more relevant to the control
of NPS pollution. The criteria are needed to determine the real impacts on
water uses by NPS pollution and to identify the benefits that could be
expected from given expenditures on NPS control.
The highest priority research need of the Clean Lakes Program is for a
characterization of the applications, limitations, effectiveness, and costs of
various lake pollution control techniques.
In the Dredge and Fill Program area, the highest priority need is for a
general evaluation of the potential harmful impacts associated with the
extraction, transport, and disposal of dredged material containing toxic
18
-------
pollutants. The evaluation should include an assessment of the relative
advantages, limitations, benefits, and problems associated with alternative
measures available.
The above needs, as well as the other needs submitted to the Water Quality
Research Committee, were compiled and evaluated. The higher priority needs
among them were then consolidated, arrayed in three priority categories and
summarized in Tables IV-1 through IV-3. They are subdivided in the summary
tables by technical areas most relevant to the operational programs of the
Agency. The needs excluded from the summary tables are not to be considered
unimportant. They were excluded for one of three reasons: 1) the low
probability of ever having enough resources to reach that far down on the
priority list; 2) they represent routine technical assistance (as opposed to
research) needs; or 3) they fall under the purview of another research
strategy.
19
-------
TABLE IV - 1
SUMMARY OF FIRST PRIORITY RESEARCH NEEDS
A. WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
1. Minimum data set for consent decree pollutants.
2. Procedures for developing criteria and translating w. q. criteria to field
situations.
3. Field validation of health & ecological effects criteria for consent decree
pollutants.
B. SOURCE CONTROL STRATEGIES
1. Procedures for predicting receiving water impacts and making wasteload
allocations from effluent bioassay results; and for ranking relative
importance of sources.
2. Simple, but effective wasteload allocation techniques for controlling toxic hot
spots, including gross mass balance method and an EXAMS -type fate predictive
model for toxic metals.
3. Environmental process rate coefficient data base for consent decree pollutants
& full range of canonical environments.
C. NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT
1. Field techniques for documenting ecological (X other) effects of nonpoint
sources.
2. Documentation of the ecological impacts of nonpoint sources.
3. "Wet weather" time variant criteria applicable to NFS contributors.
4. Cost & effectiveness information on existing relevant NPS management practices.
D. CLEAN LAKES
1. Cost & effectiveness information on innovative in-lake restoration/control
techniques.
2. Guides for selection & evaluation of clean lake projects, based on technical &
soci oeconomic factors.
E. DREDGE & FILL
1. Methodology for predicting impacts of dredged material extraction, transport, &
disposal, from a toxic pollutant mass balance perspective.
2. Sediment testing methods (for toxicants).
3. Technical assistance in the preparation of regulations & associated guidance
materials. 20
-------
CONTINUATION OF TABLE IV - 1
F. WETLANDS
1. Working definition of "wetland."
G. OCEAN DISPOSAL
1. Technical assistance in the preparation of regulations & associated guidance
materials.
2. Techniques for assessing ecological impacts of marine discharges.
3. Method for predicting nonbuoyant plume movement & dispersion.
H. SOCIOECONQMIC ANALYSIS
1. Method (including data base) for predicting economic benefits of improving water
quality to alternative levels.
2. Method (including data base) for predicting costs of alternative point, nonpoint,
and nonsource (e.g., flow augmentation) control measures for achieving
alternative water quality goals.
I. MONITORING, MEASUREMENT. & QUALITY ASSURANCE
1. Bioassay techniques for toxic hot spot screening.
2. More cost-effective & sensitive chemical measurement methods for toxic organics
in water, sediment, & biota.
3. Definition of "biological integrity" & an approach for measuring it.
4. Assistance to Regions & others in setting up assessments of toxic pollutant
problems.
J. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
(None)
K. SPECIAL STUDIES
1. Recommend management strategies for Chesapeake Bay.
2. Through an integrated assessment approach, establish relationship between source
contributions of toxic organics to the Great Lakes & resultant human exposure
levels, as necessary to determine necessary control levels.
3. Pilot study of validation of wasteload allocation procedures.
4. Strategy for control of near-shore nuisance algal growths in Great Lakes.
L. INFORMATION TRANSFER
1. Transfer research results to user community in an effective & timely manner.
21
-------
TABLE IV - 2
SUMMARY OF SECOND PRIORITY RESEARCH NEEDS
A. WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
1. Basis for criteria for updating present list of priority toxic pollutants &
ranking their relative importance.
2. Feasibility of alternative criteria decision rules.
3. Health effects data set generation procedures that include all relevant health
endpoints.
B. SOURCE CONTROL STRATEGIES
1. Full set of techniques & associated data bases for evaluating water quality
benefits from proposed AST/AWT projects.
2. Rapid screening tests for mutagens, teratogens, etc. for hot spot
identification.
C. NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT
1. Fate & effects of heavy metals contributed by NPS.
2. Protocol for estimating relative impacts of nonpoint vs. point sources &
allocating wasteloads.
3. Techniques for predicting pollutant loadings from various categories of
nonpoint sources.
D. CLEAN LAKES
1. Determination of magnitude of problem from accumulations of toxicants in lake
sediments and most appropriate remedial measures.
2. Cost & effectiveness information on out-of-lake pollution control techniques
(viz., BMPs).
E. DREDGE & FILL
1. Sediment criteria for toxicants (similar to water quality criteria).
2. Procedure for defining "permissible" mixing zones for dredge spoil disposal.
3. Proper approach for managing spoil discharge in contained or upland sites.
F. WETLANDS
1. Techniques for predicting impact of human activities on wetlands.
G. OCEAN DISPOSAL
1. Guides for designing and operating a disposal site monitoring program.
22
-------
CONTINUATION OF TABLE IV - 2
H. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS
1. Assessment of distribution of benefits of water quality, as necessary to
identify equitable solutions to pollution problems.
I. MONITORING, MEASUREMENT. & QUALITY ASSURANCE
1. Monitoring network and intensive survey design guides.
2. Measurement methods for metal species in water & wastewater.
3. Updated QA procedures, consistent with new QA directive.
4. Evaluation of limitations of existing mutagenicity/carcinogenicity test
methods.
5. Official methods manual for analysis of bottom sediments.
6. Procedures for screening and for quantitation of viruses in surface waters
wastewaters, sediments, & sludges. '
J. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
1. Practical, cost-effective methods for consistently preparing and reviewing
u lo S •
2. Rapid, cost-effective field methods for assessing the "value" of particular
areas for specified natural resource benefits (e.g., flood control, wildlife
habitat, recreation, aquifer recharge) or in aggregate.
K. SPECIAL STUDIES
1. Validation of projected phosphorus loading allocations among Great Lakes'
dischargers.
2. Techniques for predicting water quality J ecological impacts of dredge spoil
disposal in open waters of the Great Lakes.
L. INFORMATION TRANSFER
(None)
23
-------
TABLE IV - 3
SUMMARY OF THIRD PRIORITY RESEARCH NEEDS
A. WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
1. Effects of combinations of priority pollutants.
B. SOURCE CONTROL STRATEGIES
1. Ecology of intermittent streams (to evaluate, proposed AST/AWT project
benefits).
2. Practical means for determining reaeration rates in estuaries.
3. Valid predictive model for estimating impacts on eutrophi cation of estuaries,
impounds, & slow-moving streams from various combinations of nitrogen and phos-
phorus control.
C. NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT
\
1. Protocols for conducting monitoring of NPS contributions and impacts.
2. Identify secondary envi ronmental impacts of urban and rural best management
practices.
3. Field validation of health risks from urban runoff as suggested by bacterial
indicators.
D. CLEAN LAKES
1. Techniques for predicting pollutant loadings from various sources of lake
pollution, before & after the application of controls.
2. Linkage of pollutant loading models to lake response predictive models.
DREDGE & FILL
E.
1. Transport & fate characterization of toxic chemicals common to dredge spoils.
F. WETLANDS
1. Characterization of wetland structure & function.
2. Impact on wetlands of their use for wastewater treatment (this need viewed to
be under the purview of the Municipal Wastewater & Spill Prevention Research
Committee).
3. Impacts of agricultural & si Ivi cultural practices on wetlands.
4. Impacts of hydro logic modifications on wetlands.
24
-------
CONTINUATION OF TABLE IV - 3
G. OCEAN DISPOSAL
1. Transport & fate characterization of toxic pollutants contributed by ocean
discharges & dumping.
2. Evaluation of total environmental impacts of land disposal vs. ocean disposal
of wastes.
H. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS
1. Assessment of value of wetlands.
2. Assessment of economic value of watersheds for: 1) the "natural" state and
2) "altered" state.
3. Socioeconomic benefits of various rural NPS control strategies.
I. MONITORING. MEASUREMENT, & QUALITY ASSURANCE
1. Automated field sampling & measurement methods.
J. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
1. Descriptive information on the effects on various types of ecosystems of
various types of human activities.
2. Methods for assessing secondary impacts and cumulative impacts of human
activities commonly addressed by EISs.
K. SPECIAL STUDIES
1. Refinement of present knowledge of nutrient additions to Great Lakes.
2. Techniques for predicting impacts of hydrologic modifications (including
construction in wetlands) in Great Lakes Basin.
3. Data base on atmospheric contributions of metals & other consent decree
pollutants & their impacts on large lakes & other standing water bodies.
L. INFORMATION TRANSFER
(None)
25
-------
V. RESEARCH PLAN
ROLE OF OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The Office of Research and Development's primary role with regard to its
activities covered by the Water Quality Research Committee (WQRC) is to
provide the technical base determined to be needed by the Office of Water
Regulations and Standards (exclusive of the Effluent Guidelines Division),
Water Planning Division and Marine pollution programs of the Office of Water
Program Operations, and associated Office of Water Enforcement, Regional,
State, and local programs in the development, and implementation of water
pollution control programs, consistent with their responsibilities under the
Clean Water Act. ORD's secondary role under the WQRC is to provide technical
assistance to the Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Office of Water
Program Operations, Office of Water Enforcement, and Regional Offices in
situations where expert testimony or consultation is needed or where
emergencies arise requiring a response by EPA that exceeds the resources of
these Offices.
The technical base intended to be provided by ORD shall consist of
scientific information and technical tools, such as analytical measurement
methods, that are broadly applicable in the development, and implementation of
programs mandated by the Clean Water Act. This technical base generally is
not intended to include information that would be generated by the application
of routine methods or that have very limited geographic application. Data
generation of this nature is viewed as a responsibility of the operational
programs.
More specifically, the technical base addressed in this strategy to be
provided by ORD shall consist of the following:
0 Procedures for generation of the health, ecological, and physical effects
data sets needed in the preparation of water quality criteria to support
all legitimate water uses and in the assessment of impacts of various human
activities on aquatic and related terrestial ecosystems.
0 Assistance in generating data sets needed in the preparation of water
quality criteria.
0 Predictive methods for translating water quality goals or allowable
exposure levels into levels of point and nonpoint source pollution
control required.
0 Predictive methods for assessing the environmental impacts of proposed
hydro!ogic modifications (e.g., dredge and fill operations, stream
channelization, etc.).
0 Predictive methods for assessing environmental exposures and risks
associated with the release or disposal of toxic chemicals and resultant
entry into fresh and marine surface waters.
o
Predictive methods for estimating pollutant loadings from rural nonpoint
sources before and after the application of alternative management
27
-------
practices and associated information on the effectiveness of various rural
NFS management practices under the expected range of operating conditions
(development of a simi lar technical base for urban nonpoint sources will be
coordinated with the Municipal Wastewater and Spill Prevention Research
Committee).
Methods and data for estimating the costs of various point and nonpoint
source control measures and non-source control measures and the values of
various surface and ground waters, wetlands, restored lakes, other
habitats, and associated ecosystems, and of various water uses.
0 Monitoring, measurement, and quality assurance methods for the physical,
chemical, and biological characterization of pollutants, or their effects
in water, wastewater, sludge, sediment, soil, and biota and of aquatic and
related terrestial ecosystem integrity.
0 Special needs of the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes.
In providing the necessary technical base, ORD must recognize and take
advantage of the established capabilities of other agencies. This capability
must be used to the maximum possible extent in providing the scientific
information and technical tools required.
In addition, it must be recognized that much of the initial efforts of the
208 program constitute a massive technology demonstration activity. Thus ORD
bears a responsibility to develop and carry out its R&D activities in a manner
that complements and uses to the maximum extent those activities being con-
ducted under the 208 program. Similarly, the Agency bears a responsibility to
work with ORD to assure that 208 activities are not duplicative of ORD
programs and that pilot efforts under 208 are designed, carried out, and
reported in such manner that their results are not merely limited to local
conditions, but that they are as applicable as possible for use across the
country.
RESEARCH PROGRAM AREAS DESIGNATED TO RESPOND TO NEEDS
Research and related activities proposed to be carried out in response to
the needs identified in Section IV are subdivided into the following
categories:
0 Scientific Assessments
- Health Hazard & Risk Assessment Guidelines
- Health Hazard & Risk Assessments
- Scientific Criteria on Health & Ecological Effects
0 Health Effects
- Criteria for Priority Pollutants
- MetKodology Development
28
-------
- Field Assessment/Case Studies
0 Environmental Processes & Effects
- (Ecological) Criteria for Priority Pollutants
- Exposure Analysis Techniques
- Watershed Management/Wasteload Allocation
- Clean Lakes
- Dredge & Fill
- Wetlands
- Ocean Di sposal
- Field Assessment/Case Studies
0 Monitoring Systems & Quality Assurance
- Monitoring Systems
- Exposure Analysis Techniques
- Watershed Analysis
- Clean Lakes
- Measurement Methods
- Quality Assurance
- Field Assessment/Case Studies
0 Chesapeake Bay
0 Great Lakes
0 Technical Information & Liaison
- Information Dissemination Management
- R«D Project Tracking
- Regional Coordination & Technical Assistance
TW iT!*u res?arch areas to which the higher priority needs identified in Tables
IV-1 through IV-3 of Section IV have been assigned are summarized in Tables
V-l through V-3. It should be noted that needs dealing with ground water
urban NPS control techniques, energy related activities, municipal or
industrial control technology or effluents, and use of wetlands as a treatment
system are viewed to be under the purview of other research committees and,
-------
TABU V - 1
RESEARCH PROGRAM AREAS OTSIGHATED TO RESPOND TO FIRST PRIOR ITT NEEDS
00
O
RESEARCH HEED
(Froai Table IV -1 )
A. «.l). criteria: |
2
3
B. Source Control Strat.l 1
2
C. UK Hanagnent: 1
2
3
0. Clean Lakes: 1
E. Dredge and Fill: 1
2
F. Wetlands: 1
2
3
4
G. Ocean Disposal: 1
2
3
H. Socloeconoailc Anal.: 1
2
3
!. Hon.. Msnt., I QA: 1
2
3
4
S
J. En*. Impact Statraents: 1
2
K. Special Studies: 1
2
3
4
I. Info. Transfer: |
DESIGNATED RESEARCH PROGRAM AREA
US
Cf
l!
X
k
k
25
iS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Environmental Processes ft Effects
S
Id
£15
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hanne Qua lit)
Criteria
x
X
If
X
X
Exposure
Analysis
Techniques
x
X
X
X
Utrshd Hgt/dA
Effects
X
X
w
It
X
Utrsnd .Igt/'JA
Predictive
Hetnods
x
x
X
X
p
1
X
X
X
_J
1
X
x
3
s-^
X
*
X
•a
X
x
X
i
X
o 5
v
X
X1
Monitoring
Systan 1 QA
v
x
x
X
X
i.
X
1
W
(9
X"
X
X
Is
«J
sp
X
-------
TABU V - 2
RESEARCH PROGRAM AREAS DESIGNATED TO RESPOND TO SECOND PRIORITY NEEDS
RESEARCH NEEO
(from Table I» -2 )
*• "'I- W"wli: T
i
fl. Source Control Strat.:
C. NPS Miiutomt:
0. Clean Lakes:
E. Dredge and Fill:
F. Uetlinds:
6. Ocean Disposal:
H. SocloKOWMlc Anal.:
1. MM.. Hst*.. iQAt
J. £•!. lupact SUteaents:
K. Special Studies:
L. Info. Transfer: i
II i 1 |j IJSetwtlflc
l| ! 1 |1"n AstesMaiiu
|j
X
X
.DESIGNATED RESEARCH PROGRAM, AJfff.
EnviroiMental Processes 1 Effects
| m
III
X
X
X
I
X
X
^ Exposure
Analysli
Techniques
X
L
3
X
H| 1 Utrsnd Mgt/WA
x U Predictive
Hetnods
X
X
X
p
I!
cj
]
N
I
JL
c
[
3-
lf§
— • x —
X
~x —
X
X
*
X
X
3
JL
x
I
i
X
X
|| J Monitoring
M System i QA
X
X
Hr-
X
L
1
1
1
Is
E^t
"k^
rt?
X
X
X
-------
TABLE V - 3
RESEARCH PROGRAM AREAS DESIGNATED TO RESPttlO TO THIRD PRIORITY MEEDS
U>
ro
RESEARCH NEED
(from Table IK -J)
A. u.q. criteria: i
2
1
B. Source Control Strat.: 1
2
)
C. UPS Naoageueiit: I
2
1
4
D. Clean Latas: 1
2
E. Dredge and fill: 1
2
3
F. Wetlands: 1
2
1
6. Ocean Disposal: I
2
3
H. SocloecoiuMlc Anal.: 1
2
3
1. Hon.. Msat.. i QA: 1
2
3
4
S
6
J. En*, layact Statements: 1
2
K. Special Studies: 1
2
3
4
L. Info. Transfer: 1
DESIGNATED RESEARCH PROGRAM AREA
op
C E
II
s2
«— •*
3£
X
X
Envlrnwental Processes 1 Effects
s
5i>z
srs
2sr
u.4So
X
X
Harfnc Quality
Criteria
X
X
Exposure
Analysis
Teciinlaues
ittnhd Hgt/M
Effects
*
X
X
X
X
Utrsnd .tgt/WA
Predictive
Hetnods
X
X
X
X
X
§*
^
s^
ii
X
X
X
X
1
1
u
»
X
s
5t~
IF
X
X
^
23~
X
X
Wetland!
X
X
X
X
X
Ocean
Disposal
X
Y
Monitoring
System a QA
X
X
Chesapeake
Bay
|
I
-------
accordingly, are not addressed in this section. With few exceptions, needs
viewed as "technical assistance" instead of "research and development" also
are not specifically addressed.
PROPOSED RESEARCH GOALS
The major thrusts required in each research area to be most responsive to
the needs summarized in Tables IV-1 through IV-3 are listed in Table V-4.
Research outputs proposed, consistent with these thrusts, are given in Tables
V-5 and V-7. Table V-5 reflects the outputs proposed if resource levels
remain at the current level for each research area. Table V-6 identifies the
current base resource allocation among the research areas. Table V-7
identifies outputs that would be pursued with additional resources, or in lieu
of other activities listed in Table V-5. In general, the order of listing of
research thrusts under each research subject area in Tables V-4, 5, and 7 are
intended to roughly suggest relative prorities, with highest priority work
listed first. There are exceptions where, for continuity of subject area,
closely related work is grouped together, even though some work immediately
below such a cluster is of higher priority than some of the work identified in
the cluster. The order of research subject areas in these tables is not
intended to reflect their relative priorities, however.
ANTICIPATED PROBLEMS IN SATISFYING NEEDS
Perhaps the most pervasive problem is the lack of resources in any one
research area to meet all of the higher priority needs of that area in a
timely manner. The ongoing and proposed work within each and every area at
this time is of sufficient importance, however, that none should be sub-
stantially sacrificed for the others. The planned resource cuts in FY 1981
and FY 1982 further exacerbate this problem.
The single greatest concern, from the Water Quality Research Committee's
perspective, is the slow progress in providing minimum data sets on health and
ecological effects necessary for preparation of valid and defensible water
quality criteria for the 129 consent decree toxic chemicals. At the current
pace, valid and defensible criteria cannot be completed until beyond the Year
2000. The planned cut in this research area for FY 1982 has magnified an
already serious problem. There is great hesitancy to propose a further shift
of resources from other research areas to this area for fear that they, too,
will be cut from the Water Quality research budget.
Other significant problems of output timeliness resulting from the FY 1982
cuts are elimination or near elimination of resources in the following areas:
0 Broad spectrum measurement methods for volatile organic and inorganic
pollutants in water, sediments, and soils.
0 Exposure analysis predictive methods for assessment of environmental
risks posed by the consent decree toxic pollutants.
0 Wetland impact assessment methods.
33
-------
The major impacts on output timeliness from cuts in FY 1981 are:
0 Elimination of work on development of the data base needed to predict
water quality improvements that would result from implementation of
agricultural BMPs.
0 Substantial decrease in work on identification of reductions in source
loadings of PCBs and other toxic orgam'cs to the Great Lakes needed to
reduce human exposure levels to acceptable levels.
Other areas where important outputs likely will lag far behind the dates
by which they are needed are:
0 "Wet weather" time variant water quality criteria development.
0 Economic benefit analysis techniques and associated data base
development.
With regard to technical assistance, there is one area where the demands
over the next one to three years will significantly exceed the personnel
resources available to respond. This is associated with the preparation,
revision, and implementation of regulations and related guidelines covering
marine discharge and dumping activities.
34
-------
TABLE V - 4
MAJOR RESEARCH THRUSTS REQUIRED
I. SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS
A. Water Quality criteria documents for priority pollutants.
B. Guides for interpretation and application of above criteria documents
to local situations.
C. Technical assistance in conducting risks assessments.
D. Standard water quality criteria data set generation procedures that address
a broader range of effects and at a lower cost than do current procedures.
E. Evaluation of feasibility of alternative criteria decision rules.
F. Guide for judging relative environmental risks associated with various
pollutants.
II. HEALTH EFFECTS
A. Health effects data sets for priority pollutants.
B. Field validation of health effects criteria.
C. Input to I. B, above.
D. Improved health effect assay procedures for:
1. Addressing a broader range of health endpoints in generating water
quality criteria data sets (& doing so at a lower cost).
2. Toxic hot spot screening.
E. Guide for judging relative health risks associated with various pollutants
(singly and in various combinations) and with various effluents.
F. Characterization of health risk associated with urban NPS pollution for input
to "wet weather" criteria.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES & EFFECTS
A. Water Quality (Ecological) Criteria
1. Ecological effects data sets for priority pollutants.
2. Guides for translating laboratory-derived criteria to field situations
(and input to I. B, above).
3. Field validation of ecological effects criteria and associated
interpretive guides.
35
-------
TABLE V-4 (Continued)
4. Improved ecological effects assay procedures for:
a. Addressing a broader range of effects (i.e., in addition to mortality)
in generating criteria data sets (& doing so at a lower cost).
b. Toxic hot spot screening.
c. Characterizing wastewater effluents in terms of expected receiving
water impacts and as a basis for making wasteload allocations.
5. Guide for judging relative ecological risks associated with various
pollutants as a basis for ranking the relative importance of point sources.
6. Definition of biological integrity and an approach for measuring it.
7. Guides for addressing effects of various pollutant combinations.
B. Exposure Analysis Predictive Techniques
1. Exposure analysis modeling system (& associated data base) for toxic
metals.
2. Data base (i.e. model coefficient values) for existing toxic organic
pollutant Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS).
3. Gross multimedia materials balance technique for estimating primary
exposure pathways of specific toxic pollutants on a national or
regional scale.
C. Watershed Management/Wasteload Allocation
1. Effects
a. Field techniques for documenting ecological effects of urban and rural
NPS pollution and associated human activities.
b. Documentation of "typical" ecological effects of urban and rural NPS
pollution.
c. "Wet weather" time variant water quality criteria applicable to
determining NPS pollution impacts.
d. Guides for determining economic value of mitigating ecological
effects of NPS pollution.
2. Predictive Methods
a. Simplest possible, but valid and defensible wasteload allocation
procedures (including associated coefficients) applicable to streams,
estuaries, and impoundments for non-toxic, as well as toxic pollutants
and that take account of NPS contributions & existing deposits in *
36
-------
TABLE V-4 (Continued)
bottom sediments (consistent with item III. B. 1, above). One set of
procedures should possess the capability to make load allocations based
on effluent bioassay results from procedures addressed in III. A. 4. c,
above.
b. Techniques (and associated data bases) for predicting economic costs
and benefits of proposed water quality improvements and for identifying
the beneficiaries.
c. Set of procedures described in a and b, above tailored specifically to
assessments of proposed AST/AWT facilities.
3. Rural NPS Management
a. Cost & effectiveness data bases on existing rural NPS management
practices, as needed in identifying the most effective set of best
management practices (BMPs) for achieving proposed loading reductions
and estimating their cost.
b. Procedures (and associated data bases) for calculating economic
benefits of rural NPS control.
c. Valid and defensible rural NPS loading predictive techniques for the
range of pollutants requiring control.
d. Identification of secondary impacts (e.g., ground water contamination)
of rural BMPs.
D. Clean Lakes
1. Cost & effectiveness characterization of in-lake restoration/control
techniques and out-of-lake control techniques.
2. Guide for selection/evaluation of proposed/completed clean lake
projects.
3. Characterization of seriousness of problem of toxicants in lake
sediment deposits.
E. Dredge & Fill
1. Predictive and testing methods for estimating ecological impacts of
dredge and fill operations, including spoil disposal.
2. Sediment quality criteria.
F. Wetlands
1. Working Definition of "wetland".
2. Characterization of wetland structure and function.
3. Techniques for estimating ecological impacts of human activities on
wetlands. 37
-------
TABLE V-4 (Continued)
G. Ocean Disposal
1. Technical assistance in preparation of regulations and associated
guidance materials.
2. Techniques for assessing impacts of marine discharges.
3. Nonbuoyant plume dispersion predictive model.
4. Transport and fate characterization of toxic pollutants contributed by
ocean discharges and dumping.
5. Re-evaluation of environmental impacts of ocean disposal vs. other
alternatives.
IV. MONITORING SYSTEMS & QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Reference bioassay methods for use in toxic hot spot screening and assessing
impacts of marine discharges (overlaps with H, below).
B. More cost-effective and sensitive chemical reference measurement methods for
toxic organics and inorganics in water, sediments, and biota.
C. Reference methods for measuring "biological integrity".
D. Reference methods needed in the documentation of ecological effects of NPS
pollution and the human activities.
E. Techniques for monitoring impacts in vicinity of ocean dumping sites.
F. Monitoring network and intensive survey design guides.
G. Metal speciation measurement methods.
H. Evaluation and standardization of existing mutagenicity/carcinogenicity
methods.
I. Updated QA procedures, consistent with new QA directive.
J. Automated field sampling & measurement methods.
K. Reference methods for rapid screening and for quantisation of viruses in
water, sediments, and sludges.
V. CHESAPEAKE BAY
A. Propose alternative management strategies for Chesapeake Bay.
38
-------
TABLE V-4 (Continued)
VI. GREAT LAKES
A. Identification of major types of sources of PCBs and other toxicants
(including metals) to Great Lakes.
B. Predictive models for translating allowable human exposure levels of these
toxicants into maximum permissible loadings to the Great Lakes (compatible
with an integrated assessment approach).
D. Pilot study to validate wasteload allocation procedures.
C. Strategy for control of near-shore nuisance algal growths.
E. Validation of projected phosphorus loading allocations among Great Lakes'
dischargers.
F. Techniques for predicting impacts of dredge spoil disposal in open waters of
the Great Lakes.
G. Refinement and update of information on nutrient additions to Great Lakes.
H. Techniques for predicting impacts of hydrologic modifications (including
within wetlands) in Great Lakes Basin.
VII. TECHNICAL INFORMATION & LIAISON
A. Provide assistance in transferring research results to user community in an
effective and timely manner.
B. Support of Regional liaison activities.
39
-------
TABLE V - 5
SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED MAJOR RESEARCH OUTPUTS
ASSUMING CONSTANT RESOURCES AT TENTATIVE FY 1982 LEVEL1/
PROPOSED RESEARCH OUTPUTS
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION
I. SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS
A. Water quality criteria documents for consent
decree and other toxic pollutants
B. Health analyses for CWA Sec. 301(g) waivers, as
requested
C. Technical assistance to Regions in interpreting
criteria documents.
II. HEALTH EFFECTS
A. Health effects data sets for 129 consent decree
pollutants.
B. Bacterial freshwater quality criteria for
swimming use.
C. Characterization of NPS bacterial impacts on
swimming use.
D. Characterization of health risks from use of
AST/AWT effluent for swimming.
E. Comparison of aquatic & mammalian tests for
predicting human health endpoints.
F. Validation of selected short-term in vivo tests
for carcinogenicity.
G. Development & validation of short-term tests for
other health endpoints.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES & EFFECTS
A. Fresh & Marine Eco. Quality Criteria
1. Ecological effects data sets for 129 consent
decree pollutants.
2. Improved ecological effects assay
procedures.
15 documents by 9/82; 5+
documents/yr, thereafter;
completion by Year 2005.
continuing basis over
FY 81/83
continuing
Data base/for 15 pollu-
tants by 9/82; 5+/yr.,
thereafter; compTetion by
Year 2005
9/82
9/84
9/84
10/82
9/82
9/84
Data base for 37 pollut.
by 9/82; 5+/yr., there-
after; completion by year
2001.
4/83
I/ In 1982 Dollars
40
-------
TABLE V - 5 (Continued)
PROPOSED RESEARCH OUTPUTS
3. Interim preliminary procedures for adapting
criteria to specific field situations.
4. Definition of "biological integrity" &
recommended evaluation approach.
B. Exposure Analysis Predictive Techniques
1. (No effort planned after FY 1981, because of
resource cut.)
C. Watershed Management/Wasteload Allocation
1. Effects
a. Field techniques for documenting NFS
effects.
b. Characterization of ecosystem effects of
selected NPS pollutants.
c. Determination of ecological improvements
from NPS controls.
d. Selected guides for determining economic
value of water quality improvement.
2. Predictive Methods
a. Watershed management models (& selected
coefficient values) for assessing impacts
& benefits of alternative NPS & PS
control of conventional & selected toxic
pollutants and for wasteload allocations.
b. Maintain EPA Model Center.
3. Rural NPS Management
a. Technical assistance
D. Clean Lakes
1. Cost & effectiveness characterization of
selected in-lake control techniques.
2. Guide for selection/evaluation of clean lake
projects. 41
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION
9/83
5/82
6/82
9/83
12/81
8/81
11/83
continuing
continuing
12/81
12/83
-------
TABLE V - 5 (Continued)
PROPOSED RESEARCH OUTPUTS
3. Assessment of seriousness of problem from
lake deposits of toxicants.
E. Dredge « F111
1. Improved marine bent hie bioassay method to
assess acute & chronic effects and bioaccu-
mulation potential of contaminants in the
settleable component of dredge material.
2. Sediment quality criteria for selected
toxicants in dredged materials disposed
of in marine waters.
F. Wetlands
1. Manual for defining wetland boundaries.
G. Ocean Disposal
1. portion of technical assistance requested.
2. Bioassay technique for assessing impact of
marine discharges.
3. Methods manual for evaluating sediment
toxicity.
4. Infaunal Index (a measure of biological
response to sediment pollution).
5. Nonbuoyant plume dispersion model.
6. Limited transport & fate characterization of
toxic pollutants contributed by ocean
discharges.
IV. MONITORING SYSTEMS & QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Selected standardized toxic hot spot screening
methods.
8. Standardized measurement methods for selected
toxic organics.
C. Methods for assessing NFS pollution.
D. Methods for assessing ocean dumping sites &
marine pollution. 42
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION
12/83
12/83
1983 - 1985
9/82
continuing
12/81 - 12/85
12/82
9/83
6/82
9/85
7/82
3/81 - 9/83
9/81
9/82
-------
TABLE V - 5 (Continued)
PROPOSED RESEARCH OUTPUTS
E. Selected monitoring network design guides.
F. Metal speciation measurement methods.
G. Standardized Ames-like mutagencity/carcinogeni-
city methods
H. Updated QA procedures & standard reference
materials.
I. Evaluation of selected commerically available
samplers.
J. Selected remote sensing techniques for assessing
lake water quality.
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION
9/81
8/81 - 7/83
6/83
9/81 - 9/83
9/81
9/82
K. Standardized methods for measurement of viruses
on suspended material & in water.
L. Overhead imagery support to Agency.
V. CHESAPEAKE BAY
A. Alternative management strategies for the Bay.
VI. GREAT LAKES
A. Identification of atmospheric inputs, pathways,
£ reservoirs of selected toxic organic
pollutants in Great Lakes.
B. Strategy for control of near-shore nuisance
algal growths.
C. Validation of projected phosphorus loading
allocations among G.L. dischargers.
D. Techniques for assessing impacts of proposed
dredge spoil disposal in open waters of Great
Lakes.
VII. TECHNICAL INFORMATION & LIAISON
A. Research summary reports, guides, seminars, &
symposia on emerging technologies for the user
community.
9/81
continuing
9/82
12/81
8/83
12/81
10/82
continuing
-------
TABLL V - 5 ( ontinued)
PROPOSED RESEARCH OUTPUTS SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION
B. Provide distribution of & quality control over continuing
research output reports.
C. Congressionally required Research Outlook Annually
report, Research Highlights, & Research
Program Guide.
D. Support of Regional liaison activities. continuing
44
-------
TABLE V - 6
CURRENT BASE RESOURCE ALLOCATION
WATER QUALITY RESEARCH AREA
RESEARCH AREA "
I. Scientific Assessments
II. Health Effects
III. Environ. Processes & Effects
A. Eco. Quality Criteria
1. Freshwater
2. Marine
B. Exposure Analysis Predictive
Techniques
C. Watershed Management/
Wasteload Allocation
1. Effects
2. Predictive Methods
3. Rural NPS Management
D. Clean Lakes
E. Dredge X Fill
1. Freshwater
2. Marine
F. Wetlands (Freshwater)
G. Ocean Di sposal
H. Anticipatory Research Centers
IV. Monitoring Systems & Quality
Assurance
V. Chesapeake Bay
VI. Great Lakes
VII. Technical Information & Liaison
VIII. ADP Services
Total
IN-HUUSE
675.1
1069.1
6542.8
(2147.1)
(1502.5)
(0)
(362.7)
(577.1)
(319.3)
(242.9)
(0)
(417.7)
(33.0)
(940.5)
(0)
3057.6
947.6
945.0
243.3
277.3
13757.9
~~nq~
~T5nTA."
836.9
2155.9
4198.6
(530.7)
(184.0)
(0)
(560.0)
(619.4)
(0)
(1062.1)
(0)
(34.4)
(200.0)
(180.0)
(828.0)
629.5
1027.4
654.5
14.4
0
9517.2
TOTAL""
1512.0
3225.0
10741.4
(2677.8)
(1686.5)
(0)
(922.7)
(1196.5)
(319.3)
(1305.0)
(0)
(452.1)
(233.0)
(1120.5)
(828.0)
3687.1
1975.0
1599.5
257.8
277.3
23275.1
""""PERSONNEL"
FTTT nrsrrp —
rr 1 1
12.0
13.5
143.2
(57.0)
(30.4)
(0)
(7.4)
(8.7)
(10.0)
(4.7)
(0)
(6.0)
(1.0)
(18.0)
(0)
47.8
6.4
7.0
3.7
0
233.6
urr it
9.0
9.0
87.2
(11.6)
(40.5)
(0)
(4.5)
(8.9)
(0)
(2.5)
(0)
(6.1)
(0)
(31.1)
(0)
16.2
4.3
6.3
2.1
0
134.1
FTE
21.0
22.5
230.4
(68.6)
(70.9)
(0)
(11.9)
(17.6)
(10.0)
(7.2)
(0)
(12.1)
(1.0)
(31.1)
(0)
64.0
10.7
13.3
5.8
0
367.7
45
-------
TABLE V - 7
MAJOR RESEARCH OUTPUTS THAT WOULD BE PURSUED
WITH ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
PROPOSED RESEARCH EFFORT
PROPOSED
TARGET
DATE
ESTIMATED
RESOURCE
REQUIREMENTS
I. SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS
A. Acceleration of preparation of water
quality criteria documents for toxic
chemicals.
II. HEALTH EFFECTS
A. Accelerate development of minimum
health effects data sets for priority
pollutants.
B. Accelerate development of improved
health effects assay procedures.
C. Field validation of health effects
criteria.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES & EFFECTS
A. Fresh £ Marine Eco. Quality Criteria
1. Accelerate development of minimum
fresh & marine ecological effects
data sets for priority pollutants.
2. Accelerate development of guides
for translating criteria to field
situations.
3. Bioassay techniques for toxic hot
spot screening.
4. Accelerate development of pro-
cedures for predicting receiving
water impacts, based on effluent
bioassays, and ranking relative
importance of sources.
5. Field validation of ecological
quality criteria.
B. Exposure Analysis Predictive Techniques
1. Exposure analysis modeling system
for toxic metals.
Additional 8+
pollut./yr. at
$150K/chem.
Additional 8+
pollut./yr. at
$200K/chem.
2-4 yrs.J./
from start.
3 yrs. from
start.
Additional 8+
pollut./yr. at
$300K/chem.
1-5 yrs
from start.
1-5 yrs from
start.
3 yrs.
2-5 yrs. from
start.
2-5 yrs. from
start
$1200K/yr.
$1600K/yr.
$400K; 2.4 FTE/yr.
$250K; 1 FTE/
pollut./yr.
$2400K/6 FTE/yr.
$500K; 2 FTE/yr.
S300K; 1 FTE/yr.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
$1000K; 3 FTE/yr.
$500K; 2 FTE/yr.
\J Means that first outputs would be forthcoming at end of second year and outputs
would continue to be provided at least annually through end of fourth year.
46
-------
TABLE V - 7 (continued)
2. Model coefficient values for
existing organic pollutant ex-
posure analysis modeling system
3. Gross multimedia materials balance
assessment technique (includes
restoration of work cut in FY 1982.
C. Watershed Management/Wasteload Allocation
1. Effects
a. Accelerate documentation of
ecological effects of NPS
pollution.
b. "Wet weather" time variant
water quality criteria.
2. Predictive Methods
a. Accelerate work on improvement A
validation of wasteload allocation
models for toxic pollutants.
b. Techniques for predicting water
quality & economic benefits of
proposed control measures,
especially AST/AWT.
c. Increased level of assistance to
model users through center for
Water Quality Modeling.
3. Rural NPS Management
a. Cost & effectiveness data bases
on existing rural NPS management
practices.
b. Technique (& data bases) for
calculating economic benefits
of rural NPS control.
c. Identification of secondary
impacts of rural NPS control.
D. Clean Lakes
1. Accelerate work on characteriz-
ing lake restoration/protection
techniques. 47
10 pollut./yr
3 $50K/pollut.
1-4 yrs. from
start.
1-10 yrs from
start.
2-10 yrs from
start.
1-4 yrs from
start
1-10 yrs from
start
1-5 yrs from
start.
1-3 yrs from
start.
2 yrs from
start
1-5 yrs
from start
$500K; 0.5 FTE/yr.
$300K; 2 FTE/yr.
$300K/yr.
$600K; 1 FTE/yr.
for early years;
increasing to
possibly $1500K;
3 FTE/yr in the
mid-years.
$500K; 2 FTE/yr.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
continuing $100K; 2 FTE/yr.
$2400K; 7 FTE/yr.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
S300K/0.5 FTE/yr.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
-------
TABLE V - 7 (continued)
E. Dredge & Fill
1. Complete methodology for systema-
tically evaluating impacts of
dredged material extraction and
transport, as well as disposal.
F. Wetlands
1. Characterization of wetland
structure & function.
2. Techniques (& associated data
bases) for estimating ecological
impacts of human activities on
wetlands.
G. Ocean Disposal
1. Additional technical assistance
2. Accelerate development of
techniques for assessing
marine discharge impacts.
3. Re-evaluate of ocean disposal
vs. other alternatives.
IV. MONITORING SYSTEMS & QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Accelerate work on more cost-effective
& sensitive methods for volatile organic
and multi-element analysis of water,
sediments, & biota.
B. Reference methods and approaches for
measuring "biological integrity".
C. Accelerate standardization of reference
methods for toxic pollutants.
D. Refine Master Analytical Scheme &
extension to cover inorganics.
E. Accelerate development of non-volatile
organics measurement methods.
F. Accelerate development of metal species
measurement methods.
1-3 yrs from
start.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
1-5 yrs from
start
1-5 yrs from
start
2 yrs from
start
2 yrs from
start
2 yrs from
start
1-5 yrs from
start
1-3 yrs from
start
1-2 yrs from
start
2 yrs from
start
3 yrs from
start
4 yrs from
start
$250K; 4 FTE/yr.
$500K; 7 FTE/yr.
$400K; 3 FTE/yr.
S300K; 1 FTE/yr.
$200K; 1 FTE/yr.
$600K; 9.3 FTE/yr.
$250K; 1 FTE/yr.
$400K/yr.
$300/yr.
$500K/yr.
$500k/yr.
48
-------
TABLE V - 7 (continued)
G. Standardized methods and approaches for 2 yrs from
monitoring ocean dumping sites. start
H. Standardized methods and approaches for 2 yrs from
measuring lake quality & trophic state. start
I. Establish a National Quality continuing
Assurance Operations Center
V. CHESAPEAKE BAY
(None)
VI. GREAT LAKES
A. Predictive techniques for translating
allowable human exposure levels of
toxic organics into maximum permissi-
ble loadings to Great Lakes.
B. Refine & update of information on
nutrient additions to Great Lakes.
C. Techniques for predicting impacts of
hydro logic modifications in G. L.
basin (viz., wetlands)
VII. TECHNICAL INFORMATION & LIAISON
A. Expand information transfer Annually
activities in priority areas.
1-5 yrs
1-4 yrs from
start
2-3 yrs from
start
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
$300K; 1 FTE/yr.
$400K; 6 FTE/yr.
$2000K/yr.
$500K; 1 FTE/yr.
$400K; 1 FTE/yr.
$200K; 1 FTE/yr.
49
-------
VI. RESEARCH PROGRAM OPTIONS
MAJOR CONCERNS
The broadening of emphasis by the Agency to include a water quality based
approach to water pollution control will require a broader array of scientific
information and technical tools than with the narrower point source technology
based control approach. The primary impact of the water quality based
approach on municipal, industrial, and agricultural point source pollution
contributors will be the requirement to implement pollution control measures
over and above those required by the technology based approach in those
instances where they are needed to permit the practice of desired water uses.
Since additional increments of point source pollution control beyond the
technology based levels will be at substantially higher unit costs, the need
for and benefits of them will have to be more clearly demonstrated. This
approach will result in greater pressure to implement lower cost NPS controls
as an alternative to further point source control in achieving ambient water
quality goals. As in the case of further point source control, this also will
require a clear demonstration of the benefits of proposed NPS control
measures.
Of the scientific information and technical tools needed to implement a
cost-effective water quality based program, the following have the most
serious deficiencies and will require the greatest amount of resources and
time to correct:
1. Minimum data sets for priority pollutants (needed in water quality
criteria preparation).
2. Procedures for taking into account local conditions affecting
pollutant toxicity in translating laboratory-derived water quality
criteria into realistic, valid, and defensible "real world" water
quality standards for toxic pollutants (especially metals).
3. "Wet weather" time variant water quality criteria designed to identify
reductions in ecological, recreational, and other significant impacts
that would result from incremental reductions in NPS pollution
contributions.
4. Data base needed in predicting reductions in NPS loadings to receiving
waters that would result from the implementation of a given set of
rural (and urban) BMPs.
5. Economic benefit analysis techniques and associated data bases needed
to demonstrate where the cost of implementing further point and/or
nonpoint source controls is in line with the additional benefits to be
derived.
6. Technical base for identifying remedial measures necessary to protect
human life in Great Lakes Basin from PCBs and other organic toxicants.
7. Exposure analysis & load allocation predictive techniques for priority
toxic pollutants.
51
-------
8. Source of technical expertise to provide guidance and assistance to
Headquarters and Regional programs in assessing and resolving water
quality problems caused by toxic pollutants.
Other elements of the technical base with nearly equally serious
deficiencies, but which can be corrected with less resources and in a shorter
time are:
9. Toxic hot spot screening techniques.
10. Wasteload allocation predictive techniques fully applicable to AST/AWT
need assessments.
11. Techniques for assessing impacts of proposed projects for the
extraction, transport, and disposal of dredged material containing
toxic pollutants.
12. More cost-effective and sensitive reference measurement methods for
toxic pollutants in sediment and biota, as well as water (with
detection levels at least as low as the maximum levels considered
acceptable).
The most significant need remaining where significant additional resources
may be needed, but only for the next one to three years is:
13. Technical assistance in the preparation, revision, and implementation
of regulations and associated guidelines covering marine discharge and
dumping activities.
DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS
BASIC OPTIONS
The basic options available to ORD in responding to the above concerns
are:
1. Obtain new resources.
2. Shift resources from other research pursuits within the Water Quality
research area to these areas.
3. Shift ORD resources from outside the Water Quality research area to
these areas.
4. Seek funding contributions and/or FTE allocations from EPA
programs that have presented the need until the need is satisfied.
5. Seek to meet the need to the extent possible from outputs being
pursued under the Toxic Substances, Solid Waste, or other research
programs, other EPA activities, or under programs of other Agencies
(e.g., Corps of Engineers).
52
-------
6. Redefine ORD responsibilities to exclude the pursuit of a given class
of needs.
7. Determine that the priority of the need is too low to warrant a
response.
NEED NO. 1
With regard to Need No. 1, above, for the minimum data sets, only three of
the designated options appear viable. These are Options 4, 6, and 7. Given
the decision by the Agency Ranking Committee to substantially cut the level of
resources a located to this area in FY 1982, Options 1-3 don't appear to be
™±AUrSr9; JhlS ^VeS °pti°nS 4» 6' and 7' Of these> Onions 4 and 6
appear to be about equally reasonable for ORD to pursue.
NEED NO. 2
n%m°SR V- 6 initral apProach 1n ^spondi ng to Need No. 2, above is
R - r . ,
tMn th« Be9lnnin9 in FY 1982, emphasis will be shifted from other pursuits
^Un Jhn-Sr qUa lt:V"lteuria area to resP°nd to th1s n"d. Options 1 and
3 also should be explored in the next budget exercise.
NEED NO. 3
Need No. 3 requires such an amount of resources over such a long period
that Option 1 should be pursued in the next budget exercise. Within the next
three years it is expected that some portion of the $900K/11 FTE allocated to
work on NFS effects can be shifted to this specific need: Thus, Opt°on 2 wi?l
become increasingly more viable as current wort in this general area i?s
completed and as needs associated with the Chesapeake Bay, and later the
Clean Lakes programs are substantially satisfied. Option 3 should a so be
pursued in each budget exercise. =»nuuiu ai^o oe
NEED NO. 4
currenJV::^?.:.;1?!!!^? C^ce of b*1n? co_vered * Wo* I because of
nton 2 a **"** °Ption 5. in combination with
Options 2 and 3 should be pursued. -
NEED NO. 5
iointl! rflEL8!;?*!11 re?p??ding to th1s need area will be for ORD and OWWM to
jointly determine the relative responsibilities of the two programs. Those
t6 k S I"6? '-*01 r"Pns1b111^ «" then be sought to be under-
> 1n C0mbi"at1°" «* <»"™ * and 5
NEED NO. 6
n^Wltih Ueed N°* J» this one also has a Sl9"1ficant chance of being funded
Option 1 because of current Congressional interest.
53
-------
NEED NO. 7
Options 1 and 3 should be pursued in the next budget exercise. To get the
necessary effort underway at a minimal level, Option 2 should be explored,
especially as the Chesapeake Bay Program draws to a close.
NEED NO. 8
Since this need, historically, has been viewed as a responsibility of the
operating programs to meet, Option 4 should be pursued first, followed by
Option 1.
NEEDS NO. 9 & 10
It is reasonably likely that these needs can be met through Option 2,
although outputs may not be quite as timely as is desired.
NEED NO. 11
This need could be met in a more timely fashion if the S450K/12 FTE
allocated to this work were augmented with extramural funds or if the Corps of
Engineers' assistance could be enhanced. Options 5 and 2 appear to offer
greatest promise.
NEED NO. 12
The most promising opton at this point for this need is No. 5. It wi 11 be
pursued initially, with Option 3 attempted in the next budget exercise.
NEED NO. 13
The first choice for meeting this need is Option 4, followed by Option 2.
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR REALLOCATION
It is believed that the allocation of FY 1981 and 1982 resources among
sub-areas within the Water Quality research area are reasonably reflective of
current priorities, at least to the extent that no substantial shift in
resources should take place before the end of FY 1982. In FY 1983, however,
the Chesapeake Bay research needs are expected to be satisfied, allowing for a
redistribution of the $1975K/10.7 FTE allocated to it.
After approximately FY 1985, sufficient progress likely will have been
made on the high priority Clean Lakes related needs (scheduled to be pursued
with the planned $800K increase in FY 1982) that consideration can be given to
shifting a portion of the FY 1982 increase to other sub-areas.
Of course, there will be a turnover of resources within each sub-area as
outputs are produced and others are undertaken. The list of important needs
to be addressed by each is long enough to justify at least the current level
of resources for each through most of the decade, except for the two areas
identified in the previous two paragraphs. Thus, the primary options that
will have to be pursued for the majority of "big ticket" items identified are
No. 1 and 3.
54
-------
PRIORITY ARRAY FOR SEEKING NEW RESOURCES
The order of priority for the use of new resources are:
1. Formation of a Technical Assistance Team to support toxic pollutant
management activities of EPA client offices.
2. Development and field validation of procedures for applying laboratory
derived water quality criteria to field situations.
3. Development of exposure analysis and load allocation predictive
techniques, with the latter applicable to both specific toxic
pollutants and general effluent toxicity measures.
4. Acceleration of work on: a) minimum data sets for water quality
criteria for priority pollutants; b) measurement methods for toxic
volatile organic pollutants; c) exposure analysis predictive
techniques; and d) wetland impact assessment methods.
5. Development of "wet weather" time variant water quality criteria.
6. Development of economic benefit analysis techniques and associated
data bases.
7. Acceleration of Great Lakes research on health risks from PCBs and
other toxic organics.
8. Compilation of rural BMP effectiveness data base.
PRIORITY ARRAY FOR REALLOCATION OF BASE RESOURCES
After FY 1982, consideration should be given to a redirection of base
resources, increasing emphasis in the following areas (arrayed in the order in
which funding should be considered.
1. Toxic hot spot screening methods.
2. Interim gross wasteload allocation techniques applicable to general
toxicity type assessments.
3. More cost-effective and sensitive reference methods for measurement of
toxicants in water, sediment, and biota.
4. Techniques for assessing impacts of proposed dredge and fill projects
involving spoils containing toxic pollutants.
5. Technical assistance to the Agency's marine pollution control
activities.
IQOOA* Prfv1ously indicated, there will be a significant redirection in FY
1982 in the water quality criteria sub-area. Primary emphasis will be shifted
to the development of procedures for translating laboratory derived criteria
to field situations. Additional resources still will be needed to provide the
necessary outputs in a reasonably timely manner.
55
-------
Without substantial increases in resources, there simply is no way in
which the technical base essential to the implementaton of a defensible water
quality based program can be provided in this decade. The underpinning of a
meaningful water quality based program will be a capability to evaluate the
real costs, risks, and benefits of alternative pollution control measures in
order to make intelligent decisions on water quality goals and the strategy
for their achievement.
ft U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1981 -757-064/0242
------- |