REGION VIII NPDES WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICS CONTROL PROGRAM
DECEMBER, 1990
INTRODUCTION
This document is the 1990 annual revision to the original
Region VIII Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Policy. The contents
and procedures supplement, and, in the case of conflicts,
supersede EPA national guidance and other non-regulatory EPA
national documents on this subject. Requirements in this
document should be considered minimum, and can be expanded at any
time.
PURPOSE
This program provides significant controls over the
discharge of toxicants into waters of the United States in Region
VIII. These controls are called for by:
1. Section 101(a)(3) of the Clean Water Act;
2. State Water Quality Standards which uniformly
prohibit the discharge of toxicants or require
state waters to be free from toxicants;
3. EPA policy dated March 4, 1984 (5);
4. EPA's Basic Permitting Principles for Whole
Effluent Toxicity, dated January 25, 1989.
5. Surface Water Toxic Control Regulations published
on June 2, 1989.
GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE AND SUMMARY OF MODIFICATIONS
1. Whole Effluent Controls:
The primary impetus for the inclusion of WET limits is now
40 CFR 122.44 (d) which states that if a discharger "..causes,
has the reasonable potential to cause, or contributes to an in-
stream excursion above a narrative criterion within an applicable
State water quality standard...", the discharger's permit must
contain enforceable WET limits. These regulations also state
that numerical limits can be substituted for WET limits if the
"...chemical-specific limits for the effluent are sufficient to
attain and maintain applicable numeric and narrative State water
quality standards." In the case of ammonia and chlorine
toxicity, as noted later in this Policy, if the WET is due to
these substances, and numeric limits exist in the WQS for them,
the WET requirements may be appropriately modified as long as the
numeric and narrative WQS are satisfied.
1
-------
Previous versions of this Policy have called for the blanket
inclusion of enforceable chronic WET limits in all cases where
the receiving water had an aquatic life classification, less than
a 20:1 dilution ratio existed, and the discharge was not
intermittent. This revision no longer always requires chronic
limits under these circumstances. However, twice a year chronic
monitoring is still required under these scenarios. If this no
chronic limit approach is decided upon, an increase in annual
monitoring costs of about $1500 will occur because of the need
for multi-dilution acute tests as well as the single dilution
chronic tests (instead of the 100% only acute test dilution
called for when there were chronic limits). Chronic limits may
still be required if it is concluded that a discharge has the
reasonable potential to violate water quality standards
exclusively because of chronic toxicity. Under these
circumstances, the permit must contain appropriate WET limits to
assure correction'of the chronic toxicity problem. Thus, as
examples, facilities with measured in-stream chronic toxicity,
site specific chronic aquatic toxicity information, and
environmentally sensitive or pristine receiving waters may need
chronic toxicity limits, and/or the acute toxicity limits may
have to be less than 50% mortality. If chronic toxicity limits
are used, the definition may be as illustrated in the example
permit language in Appendix A, or, if it satisfies numeric and
narrative WQS, it may also be defined as chronic lethality (i.e.
death in the latter days of a chronic test)
The 1989 revision changed the definition of an acute
exceedance to 50% mortality. This definition is continued, but
in those instances where more than 20% mortality is observed,
accelerated testing to monthly sampling is now required.
The 50% acute limit applies at any test dilution and is
applicable at the end of the pipe. An exemption to this can be
granted if the discharger can show conclusively that
instantaneous mixing occurs naturally below the discharge, or if
a properly designed diffuser is in place. If this is done,
dilution can be allowed, and the 50% mortality would be
applicable at a dilution concentration commensurate with the
applicable instream waste concentration (IWC).
Testing' protocols in Appendix B are largely unchanged except
as follows: Temperature for the acute test reverts back to the
old twenty degrees Celsius +_ two degrees. This reflects the
latest thinking on what will be in the new acute manual and is
also a recognition of the trouble laboratories are having
maintaining the one degree tolerance level. Relatively coarse
filtration of the samples is allowed if aquatic organisms are
present. Individual.permission may be granted to run the acute
test in a CO2 enriched atmosphere if "pH creep" is influencing
results, and individual, case by case, relief can be granted to
the acute test's 10% mortality quality control measure if little
or no mortality was observed in the high effluent concentrations.
2
-------
The basic approach is contained in the block diagrams which
vary slightly from state to state and reflect practices in the
individual Region VIII states. Colorado presents a unique
situation because of an ongoing major disagreement with that
State over WET issues. This has resulted in numerous vetoes of
Colorado permits. The block diagram for Colorado applies to
those permits proposed to be issued by EPA following permit veto
and/or rejection of an ICS. It is expected that permits for all
major and all significant minor dischargers in each state will
contain the essence of the relevant diagram. As noted in
footnote (1) of the diagrams, exceptions can be made for those
facilities where there is no reasonable potential for the
discharge of Whole Effluent Toxicity. All permit Statement of
Bases should contain a detailed discussion of the reasons for
including, or not including WET limits in a permit based on a
reasonable potential determination. This will provide an
adequate administrative record should any challenge of the
determination be made by a discharger or environmental group.
The justification for the inclusion, or exclusion of limits
should contain a discussion of the following as a minimum:
a. Existence of a pretreatment program.
b. Whether or not categorical industries exist in the
system, or in the case of industry, if it is a
categorical industry.
c. Receiving water characteristics such as classification,
Q7-10, dilution ratios, etc.
d. Size of the discharge.
e. Number of commercial and industrial taps.
f. Compliance history.
g. History of fish kills in the receiving water.
h. Actual data showing WET in the discharge.
Flexibility exists in the type of species selected (the
discharger must first establish that any alternate species has an
equivalent sensitivity), monitoring frequency, and exact dates
for implementation by the permittee. Any deviation from the
diagram must be justified in the Statement of Basis. All major
and minor permits, for which it has been concluded that a
reasonable potential to discharge toxicity exists, must require
two-species testing, completion of a toxicity reduction
evaluation (TRE) if toxicity occurs (inclusion of TRE language in
the permit is optional), and an appropriate immediate or delayed
limitation of WET. The amount of the delay in the application of
limits is discretionary and dependant on physical characteristics
and other restrictions such as deadlines under Section 304(1) of
the 1987 CWA Amendments. All major permits, for which it has
been concluded that a reasonable potential to discharge toxicity
does not exist, must require two-species testing and a reopener
clause calling for the inclusion of limits if toxicity occurs.
The definition of when toxicity is occurring at a level to
warrant further action is left to the regulatory authority; a
specific definition can be incorporated in the permit, or it can
3
-------
be left to the judgement of the regulatory authority, much as it
is now for all other permit limitations.
It is expected that on rare occasions unanticipated events
may occur that will require adjustment in permit conditions to
accommodate these unusual circumstances. Appendix A contains
recommended permit language to provide flexibility in this
eventuality.
Testing protocols are presented in Appendix B. The permit
writer has the choice of referencing this document with its
testing protocol in the permit, or actually incorporating
Appendix B in individual permits.
As noted in the introduction, procedures outlined in this
document supplement or supersede previously published guidance
and other non regulatory national documents. Therefore, the
protocols in Appendix B shall prevail in any conflict with other
such references. Colorado has developed its own protocols which
are very similar to those in Appendix B, and their use satisfies
these requirements.
The major purpose of WET controls is to detect and eliminate
toxicity in those cases where its presence is unknown or caused
by interaction between otherwise innocuous substances. It must
be emphasized that if WET is demonstrated, and it is established
that it is due to a known toxicant, the toxicant must be
controlled by WET limits, specific numerical limits, or by both
methods. If the permit issuing authority feels that the toxicant
in question is, or will be in compliance with existing water
quality standards, WET testing or sampling procedures may be
modified or, in very unusual cases, the effluent limit may be
modified provided it can be shown that such actions are still
sufficient to attain and maintain applicable numeric and
narrative water quality standards. This will assure that the
main purpose of the test does not continue to be masked by the
known toxicant. As an example, if it is established that whole
effluent toxicity is caused by ammonia, and the discharger is on
an acceptable compliance schedule to reduce its ammonia levels or
is already complying with existing numerical ammonia standards
for the receiving water, and the permit writer believes the
narrative WQS are also being satisfied, the whole effluent
protocol could be modified by the permit issuing authority simply
by allowing the initial pH of the test samples to be reduced by
one or two units. Although this modification may mask some other
pH dependent toxicant, the test will still adhere more closely to
its basic intent than it otherwise would.
4
-------
2.
Numerical Limits:
Compliance with whole effluent toxicity limits does not
necessarily exclude the imposition of additional numerical limits on
specific pollutants when appropriate. These limits may be based on
numerical water quality standards if they exist; 304 (a) human
health and/or aquatic life criteria (see EPA 440/5-86-001, "the gold
book" or its successor); drinking water maximum concentration levels
(MCLs), or a combination of all three as circumstances warrant.
If conventional or non-conventional pollutants such as chlorine
or ammonia are causing whole effluent toxicity or otherwise
impairing water quality, numerical effluent limits may also be
included for these parameters. As noted earlier, once toxicity from
these pollutants is controlled numerically, whole effluent protocol
or limits may be adjusted under a refined set of assumptions
consistent with the intent of the whole effluent toxicity control
program.
Concerning toxic pollutants such as metals, in order to
supplant acute whole effluent limits, numerical limitations must be
based, as a minimum, on acute aquatic criteria, and applicable at
the end of pipe, unless a diffuser is present.
5
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
COLORADO (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 20:1,
1
YES
OR TO A CLASS 2 STREAM
W/O NUMERIC AQUATIC STANDARDS
1
i
(ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS (2)
i 1 ,
| MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS '
IblSCHARGE EXCEEDS 20 MGD FOR A
jPOTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY
L- — r ¦ - ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ —
DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 20 MGD FOR Ai
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY!
NO
YES
NO
T
! YES
(QUARTERLYj
i TESTING
MONTHLY
TESTING
QUARTERLY
TESTING
iMONTHLY I
I TESTING
'
NO
TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE
CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
1
YES
NO
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
YES
NO
REDUCE TESTING
CONDUCT A TRE;
CONTINUE TESTING
. : r I
;REDUCE TESTING] CONDUCT A TRE;
j TO ONE SPECIES j [CONTINUE TESTING
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
OR NO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH OR REPRODUCTION A appt tpart p
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILUTION*S) DESIGNATED IN THE NPDES
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL) THAN
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. EFFLUENT PERCENTAGE SHALL BE
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER Q7-10 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MORTALITY IS OBSERVED FOR ETTHFR
CERIODAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION
( 1 ) APPLICABLE TO ALL MAJORS AND SIGNIFICANT MINOR PERMITS EXCFPT THOCJ'P
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO DISCHARGE TOXICANTS. MAJOR DISCHARGERS
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MUST CONTAIN WET MONITORING AND REOPENER
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS.
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, CONDUCT only SINGLE DILUTION
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTION is GREATER THAN 4:1• IF
GREATER THAN 4:1 (<20% EFFLUENT), ALSO PROHIBIT ACUTE TOXICITY IN 100%
EFFLUENT, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING OF ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WELL. IF
CHRONIC LIMITS ARE NOT USED, REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWICE
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A
6
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
MONTANA (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 2 0:1, !-
DISCHARGE IS INTERMITTENT,i
OR TO A CLASS I STREAM j
YES
ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS (2)j
I
I DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2 0 MGD FOR A
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY
NO
| YES
j MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS j
'DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2 0 MGD"~FO"FTa"
iPOTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY
NO I
YES ;
QUARTERLY!
TESTING j
!MONTHLY
TESTING
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
YES
NO
!REDUCE TESTING
_L
CONDUCT A TRE;
CONTINUE TESTING
X
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
OR NO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
QUARTERLY
TESTING
MONTHLY
TESTING.
NO TOXICITY FOR
I TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
YES
NO
REDUCE TESTING i
TO ONE SPECIES j
CONDUCT A TRE;•
CONTINUE TESTING i
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH OR REPRODUCTION, AS APPLICABLE,
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILUTION(S) DESIGNATED IN THE NPDES
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL) THAN
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. EFFLUENT PERCENTAGE SHALL BE
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER Q7-10 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MORTALITY IS OBSERVED FOR EITHER
CERIQDAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION.
(1) APPLICABLE TO ALL MAJORS AND SIGNIFICANT MINOR PERMITS EXCEPT THOSE
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO DISCHARGE TOXICANTS. MAJOR DISCHARGERS
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MUST CONTAIN WET MONITORING AND REOPENER
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS.
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, CONDUCT ONLY SINGLE DILUTION
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTION IS GREATER THAN 4:1; IF
GREATER THAN 4:1 (<20% EFFLUENT), AL.^O PROHIBIT ACTE TOXICITY IN 100%
EFFLUENT,, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING OF ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WELL. IF
CHRONIC LIMITS ARE NOT "USED, REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWICE
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A.
7
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
NORTH DAKOTA (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 20:1,
DISCHARGE IS INTERMITTENT,
YES
ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS ( 2 ) j
MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS
'DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 20 MGD FOR Al
ipQTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY I
(DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 20 MGD FOR A
IPOTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY !
NO
QUARTERLY!
TESTING |
j YES ;
'MONTHLY •
iTESTING :
I NO
YES
QUARTERLY
TESTING
MONTHLY
. TESTING
; NO~~TOXICrTY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
NO TOXICITY FOR
;TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS.
i YES
[NOl
YES
—i—
NO
IREDUCE TESTING
I CONDUCT A TRE;
ICONTINUETESTING
i REDUCE TESTING i
TO ONE SPECIES !
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT J
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
iOF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
iOR NO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
! CONDUCT A TRE;
jCONTINUE TESTING
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH or ppDUAr\tir>mTn»r ¦»«
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILn?Tn5?c?52SS? ' APPLICABLE,
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCFM-r THE,NPDES
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. !ffWEn£^PErSaG^SHAL^Bp"
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER Q7-,0 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MDRTAt ttv to „
CERIODAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EPFlSSS CONCENTOMMn? ^
w1tHANOLREa1oNAb2eAPOTeSaL TrDISCHARGEATOXlSqPER«Tn EXCEPT TH°SE
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MOST CONTAIN S DISCHARGERS
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS. WET MONITORING AND REOPENER
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, CONDUCT ONLY SINGLE DILUTION
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTION IS GREATER THAN 4:1; IF
GREATER THAN 4:1 (<20% EFFLUENT), ALf^O FP.OH J FIT AO'TE TOXICITY IN 100%
EFFLUENT, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING L'F ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WELL. IF
CHRONIC LIMITS ARE NOT USED, REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWICE
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A.
8
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
SOUTH DAKOTA (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 2 0:1,
DISCHARGE IS INTERMITTENT,
OR TO A CLASS 9 OR 10 STREAM
YES
ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS (2)
'DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2 0 MGD FOR A
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY
MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS
DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2 0 MGD FOR A
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY
NO ;
YES
NO
YES
QUARTERLY
TESTING
- MONTHLY
TESTING
QUARTERLY
TESTING
MONTHLY
TESTING ,
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
NO TOXICITY FOR
i TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS .
fYESj
NO
: YES
NO
REDUCE TESTING
CONDUCT A TRE;
CONTINUE TESTING
I REDUCE TESTING!
: TO ONE SPECIES i
CONDUCT A TRE;
CONTINUE TESTING
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
lOR NO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
UP TO T'HREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH OR REPRODUCTION, AS APPLICABLE,
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILUTION(S) DESIGNATED IN THE NPDES
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL) THAN
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. EFFLUENT PERCENTAGE SHALL BE
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER Q7-10 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MORTALITY IS OBSERVED FOR EITHER
CERIODAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION.
(1) APPLICABLE TO ALL MAJORS AND SIGNIFICANT MINOR PERMITS EXCEPT THOSE
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO DISCHARGE TOXICANTS. MAJOR DISCHARGERS
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MUST CONTAIN WET MONITORING AND REOPENER
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS.
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, CONDUCT ONLY SINGLE DILUTION
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTT/'H IS i;nEATER THAN 4:1; IF
GREATER ?HAN 4:1 (<20% EFFLUENT), ALSO PROHIBIT ACUTE TOXICITY IN 100%
EFFLUENT, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING OF ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WELL. IF
CHRONIC LIMITS ARE NOT USED, REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWICE
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A.
9
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
UTAH (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 20:1,
;DISCHARGE IS INTERMITTENT,
I OR TO A CLASS 3C STREAM
YES
'ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS (2)
MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS
¦DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2F^GD~FOR~A~]
¦POTW OR 10 MGD FOR ANINDUSTRY {
DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 20 MGD FOR A
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY^
rm
i YES
NO
YES
quarterly;
TESTINGJ
'MONTHLY
!TESTING
QUARTERLY!
TESTING :
MONTHLY
TESTING
r "NO TOXICITY FOR " "
!TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS j
, .—: 1 *
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS.
NO
1
YES
NO
'REDUCE TESTING
CONDUCT A TRE;
CONTINUE TESTING
_L
REDUCE TESTING':
TO ONE SPECIESi
CONDUCT A TRE; !
CONTINUE TESTING.
up' TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
OR NO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH OP BPccnnnrmTm,
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILUTION???nSSTJSfwS APPLICABLE,
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCFNTTHE,NPDES
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. EFfSLS SSSaGESHALlIe"
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER 07-10 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MORTar ttv to
CERIODAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EFFLUENT CONCraraI??ON R
( 1 ) APPLICABLE TO ALL MAJORS AND SIGNIFICANT MINOR PERMITS FXPFPT thoqf
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO DISCHARGE TOXICANTS MAJOR D^rHARr^R?
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MUST CONTAIN WET MONITORIJK^Sn
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS. MONITORING AND REOPENER
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, C<~*HnnrT nrfr.y ^INGIE DTT tit ton
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTE,, crrvrER THAN I ?
GREATER THAN 4:1 (<20% EFFLUENT), ALSO PROHIBIT ACUTETOXir?Sv ™'innZ
EFFLUENT, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING OF ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WFTT^ rl
ARE N<^T ^®ED' REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWTCP
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A.
10
-------
REGION VIII WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXIC CONTROL PROGRAM
WYOMING (1)
NO
RECEIVING WATER
LOW FLOW DILUTION
GREATER THAN 20:1,
DISCHARGE IS INTERMITTENT,
OR TO A CLASS IV STREAM
YES
I ACUTE AND/OR CHRONIC TESTS (2) j
DISCHARGE EXCEEDS^ 2 0 MGD FOR A j
IPOTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY ;
NO
' YES
QUARTERLY
: TESTING i
MONTHLY
TESTING
MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTSj
DISCHARGE EXCEEDS 2 0 MGD FOR A
POTW OR 10 MGD FOR AN INDUSTRY,
, NO
QUARTERLY
TESTING
. YES_.
MONTHLY
TESTING i
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
YES
NO
REDUCE TESTING
CONDUCT A TRE;j
CONTINUE TESTINGI
i UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
I ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
IOF NO CHRONIC TOXICITY
[ORNO ACUTE TOXICITY (2)
NO TOXICITY FOR
TWELVE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
YES
REDUCE TESTING
TO ONE SPECIES
NO
CONDUCT" A TRET!
CONTINUE TESTING.'
UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER PERMIT
ISSUANCE, APPLY AN EFFLUENT LIMIT
OF NO ACUTE TOXICITY
CHRONIC TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN THE GROWTH OR REPRODUCTION, AS APPLICABLE,
FOR EITHER SPECIES, AT THE EFFLUENT DILUTION(S) DESIGNATED IN THE NPDES
PERMIT, IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS (AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL) THAN
THAT OBSERVED FOR THE CONTROL SPECIMENS. EFFLUENT PERCENTAGE SHALL BE
BASED ON RECEIVING WATER Q7-10 OR OTHER MINIMUM STATE FLOW REQUIREMENT.
ACUTE TOXICITY OCCURS WHEN 50% OR MORE MORTALITY IS OBSERVED FOR EITHER
CERIODAPHNIA OR FATHEAD MINNOWS, AT ANY EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION.
(1) APPLICABLE TO ALL MAJORS AND SIGNIFICANT MINOR PERMITS EXCEPT THOSE
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO DISCHARGE TOXICANTS. MAJOR DISCHARGERS
WITH NO REASONABLE POTENTIAL MUST CONTAIN WET MONITORING AND REOPENER
LANGUAGE IN THEIR PERMITS.
(2) IF CHRONIC TOXICITY LIMITS ARE USED, CONDUCT ONLY SINGLE DILUTION
CHRONIC TESTING UNLESS THE IN-STREAM DILUTION IS GREATER THAN 4:1; IF
GREATER THAN 4:1 (<20% 'EFFLUENT), ALSO PROHIBIT ACUTE TOXICITY IN 100%
EFFLUENT, AND REQUIRE ACUTE TESTING OF ONLY 100% EFFLUENT AS WELL. IF
CHRONIC LIMITS ARE NOT USED, REQUIRE MULTI DILUTION ACUTE TESTS AND TWICE
A YEAR SINGLE DILUTION CHRONIC TESTS. SEE EXAMPLE LANGUAGE IN APPENDIX A.
1 1
-------
TOXICITY REDUCTION EVALUATIONS
Actual procedures to be followed in a TRE are unique in every
individual situation. In addition, the discharger will always be
more familiar with his operation than the regulatory agency and an
excessive amount of procedural detail may inhibit an innovative
approach. In any event, a TRE in most cases should pursue the
following elements, most of which are self-evident.
If a problem is established, and if prior knowledge or
intuition is not helpful, initial efforts should be expended on
characterization and identification of the toxicant(s). Procedures
exist for rapidly narrowing the possibilities to certain groups of
pollutants such as metals, non polar organics, etc.(6) In many
cases, it is anticipated that the TRE may essentially terminate at
this point if it is conclusively shown that the problem is due to
one distinct pollutant whose source, and method of correction, is
known. This pollutant may be already controlled through a
compliance schedule linked to a numerical limit. Alternatively, a
numerical limit and/or compliance schedule may be subsequently
imposed on the permittee.
Once the problem has been identified and located, the ultimate
objective is elimination by process controls, pretreatment, combined
waste stream treatment, local enforcement, or whatever other measure
may be necessary.
It is anticipated that toxicity problems will be controlled in
most cases by following the above procedures. However, as noted
earlier, there may be situations when a well done and acceptable TRE
will reveal a problem requiring additional time consuming activity
before final resolution. Under these circumstances, relief may be
granted through the language noted in Appendix A. It is emphasized
that, under these circumstances, the discharger must convince the
regulatory agency that a thorough TRE has been done and more time is
needed to address the problem. Only then should permit relief be
granted.
EPA has developed guidance on TRE procedures (6) (7) (8). This
information has been widely distributed, and is available from the
Region VIII EPA Office.
1 2
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 . "Technical Support Document for Water Quality Based Toxics
Control", EPA 440/4-85-032, U.S. EPA, September, 1985.
2. "Methods for Measuring Acute Toxicity of Effluent to Freshwater
and Marine Organisms," EPA 600/4-85/103, U.S. EPA, March, 1985.
3. "Short Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of
Effluents, and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms, Second
Edition", EPA 600/4-89/001, U.S. EPA, March, 1989.
4. "Permit Writers Guide to Water Quality Based Permitting for
Toxic Pollutants", Office of Water, U.S. EPA, 1987.
5. "Development of Water Quality-based Permit Limitations for
Toxic Pollutants; National Policy", U.S. EPA Federal Register,
Vol. 49, No. 48, March 9, 1984.
6. "Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations, Phase
I Toxicity Characterization Procedures", EPA/600/3-88/034,
September, 1988.
7. "Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations, Phase
II Toxicity Identification Procedures", EPA/600/3-88 035,
February, 1989.
8. "Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations, Phase
III Toxicity Confirmation Procedures", EPA/600/3-88/036,
February, 1989.
13
-------
APPENDIX A
EXAMPLE PERMIT LANGUAGE
14
-------
USE THIS PAGE WHEN ONLY ACUTE TOXICITY IS LIMITED
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
3. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing - Acute Toxicity
Starting in the quarter of calendar year , the permittee shall, at
least once each calendar quarter, conduct acute static replacement toxicity
tests on a sample of the discharge. Quarterly samples shall be
collected on a two day progression; i.e., if the first quarterly sample is
on a Monday, during the next quarter, sampling shall be on a Wednesday, etc.
The replacement static toxicity tests shall be conducted in accordance with
the procedures set out in the latest revision of "Methods for Measuring the
Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms", EPA-600/4-
85-013 (Rev. March 1985) and the "Region VIII EPA NPDES Acute Test
Conditions - Static Renewal Whole Effluent Toxicity Test". In the case of
conflicts, the Region VIII Document will prevail. The permittee shall
conduct an acute 48-hour static toxicity test using Ceriodaphnia sp. and an
acute 96-hour static toxicity test using fathead minnows.
Acute toxicity occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for
either species at any effluent concentration. If more than 10 percent
control mortality occurs, the test shall be repeated until satisfactory
control survival is achieved, unless a specific individual exception is
granted by the permit issuing authority. This exception may be granted if
less than 10% mortality was observed at the dilutions containing high
effluent concentrations.
If acute toxicity occurs, or if more than 20 percent mortality occurs in
100% effluent in a routine test, an additional test shall be conducted
within four weeks of the date of the initial sample. If only one species
fails, retesting may be limited to this species. Should acute toxicity
occur in the second test, testing shall occur once a month until further
notified by the permit issuing authority?*
Quarterly test results shall be reported along with the Discharge Monitoring
Report (DMR) submitted for the end of the reporting calendar quarter (e.g.,
whole effluent results for the calendar quarter ending March 31 shall be
reported with the DMR due April 28, with the remaining reports submitted
with DMRs due each July 28, October 28, and January 28). Monthly test
results shall be reported along with the DMR submitted for that month. The
format for the report shall be consistent with the latest revision of the
"Region VIII Guidance for Acute Whole Effluent Reporting", and shall include
all chemical and physical data as specified.
If the results for four consecutive quarters of testing indicate no acute
toxicity, the permittee may request the permit- issuing authority to allow a
reduction to quarterly acute toxicit y testing on only one species. The
permit issuing authority may approve or deny the request based on the
results and other available information without an additional public
notice.If the request is approved, the test procedures are to be the same as
specified above for the test species.
15
-------
USE THIS PAGE (AND THE PRECEDING PAGE) WHEN ONLY ACUTE TOXICITY IS LIMITED BUT
TWICE A YEAR CHRONIC TESTING IS ALSO REQUIRED
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
4. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing - Chronic Toxicity
Starting ,the permittee shall, at least once during the six
month period from January through June, and at least once during the six
month period from July through December, conduct chronic short term toxicity
tests on a sample of the final effluent. If only two samples are
taken, the interval between samples shall be at least three months.
The chronic toxicity tests shall be conducted in general accordance with the
procedures set out in the latest revision of "Short Term Methods for
Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to
Freshwater Organisms", EPA/600-4-89-001, and the "Region VIII EPA NPDES
Chronic Test Conditions - Static Renewal Whole Effluent Toxicity Test". In
case of conflicts, the Region VIII procedure will prevail. Test species
shall consist of Ceriodaphnia sp. and fathead minnows. Dilutions of
percent only will be required plus the control. If acceptable control
performance criteria are not met, the test shall be considered invalid.
Chronic toxicity occurs when the survival, growth, or reproduction for
either test species, when exposed to a dilution of percent effluent or
lower, is significantly less (at the 95% confidence level) than the
survival, growth or reproduction of the control specimens.
Test results shall be reported with the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR)
submitted for the end of the calendar period during which the whole effluent
test was run (e.g. results shall be reported with the next routine DMR
covering the month in which the sample was taken). The format for the
report shall be consistent with the latest revision of the "Region VIII
Guidance for Chronic Whole Effluent Reporting", and shall include all the
physical testing as specified.
If the results for four consecutive samples of chronic whole effluent
testing indicate no chronic toxicity, the permittee may request the permit
issuing authority to allow the permittee to reduce testing frequency, and/or
reduce testing to one species, and/or modify testing to the acute test
program. The permit issuing authority may approve, partially approve, or
deny the request based on results and other available information. If
approval is given, the modification will take place without a public notice.
16
-------
USE THIS PAGE WHEN CHRONIC TOXICITY IS LIMITED
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Reqn-iTements
3. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing - Chronic Toxicity
Starting in the quarter of calendar year ,the permittee
shall, at least once each quarter, conduct chronic short term toxicity tests
on a sample of the final effluent.
The monitoring frequency shall be quarterly. Quarterly samples shall be
collected on a two day progression; i.e., if the first quarterly sanple is
on a Monday, during the next quarter, the saxtpling shall begin on a
Wednesday. If chronic toxicity is detected, the test shall be repeated in
less than four weeks from the date the initial sample was taken. The need
for any additional sarrples shall be determined by the permit issuing
authority.
The chronic toxicity tests shall be conducted in general accordance with the
procedures set out in the latest revision of "Short Term Methods for
Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to
Freshwater Organisms", EPA/600-4-89-001, and the "Region VIII EPA NPDES
Chronic Test Conditions - Static Renewal Whole Effluent Toxicity Test". In
case of conflicts, the Region VIII procedure will prevail. Test species
shall consist of Ceriodaphnia sp. and fathead minnows. Dilutions of
percent only will be required plus the control. If more than 20 percent
control mortality occurs, the test shall be considered invalid. Chronic
toxicity occurs when the survival, growth, or reproduction for either test
species, when exposed to a dilution of percent effluent or lower, is
significantly less (at the 95% confidence level) than the survival, growth
or reproduction of the control specimens.
Test results shall be reported along with the Discharge Monitoring Report
(DMR) submitted for the end of the calendar period during which the whole
effluent test was run (e.g. results for the calendar quarter ending March 31
shall be reported with the DMR due April 28, with the remaining reports
submitted with DMRs due each July 28, October 28, and January 28). Monthly
test results shall be reported along with the DMR submitted for that month.
The format for the report shall be consistent with the latest revision of
the "Region VIII Guidance for Chronic Whole Effluent Reporting", and shall
include all the physical testing as specified.
If the results for one year (four consecutive quarters) of whole effluent
testing indicate no chronic toxicity, the permittee may request the permit
issuing authority to allow the permittee to reduce testing frequency, and/or
reduce testing to one species, and/or modify testing to the acute test
program. The permit issuing authority may approve, partially approve, or
deny the request based on results and other -v-.-iiiabl- information. If
approval is given, the modification will take place without a public notice.
17
-------
USE THIS PAGE (AND TOE PRECEDING PAGE) IF BOTH ACUTE AND CHRONIC TOXICITY ARE
LIMITED
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
4. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing - Acute- Toxicity
Starting in , the permittee shall conduct quarterly acute static
replacement toxicity tests on a 100% effluent sample of the discharge. The
effluent shall be obtained from the sample required for the chronic toxicity
tests as noted in Part of this permit.
The replacement static acute toxicity tests shall be conducted in general
arr-orrfanf-g with the procedures set out in the latest revision of "Methods of
Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
Organisms", EPA-600/4-85-013 (Rev. March 1985) and the "Region VIII EPA
NPDES Acute Test Conditions - Static Renewal Whole Effluent Toxicity Test."
In the case of conflicts, the Region VIII procedures will prevail. The
permittee shall conduct the acute 48-hour static toxicity test using
Cericdaphnia sp. and the acute 96-hour static toxicity test using fathead
minnows. Dilutions of 100% only will be required plus the control.
Acute toxicity occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for
either species at any effluent concentration. If more than 10% control
mortality occurs, the test shall be repeated until satisfactory control
survival is achieved, unless a specific individual exception is granted by
the permit issuing authority. This exception may be granted if less than
10% mortality was observed in the 100% effluent sanple.
If more than 20% mortality occurs in 100% effluent in a routine test, an
additional test of 100% effluent shall be conducted within four weeks of the
date of the initial sanple. If only one species fails, retesting may be
limited to this species. Should toxicity occur in the second test, standard
acute testing involving a minimum of five dilutions and a control shall
occur once a month until further notified by the permit issuing authority.
Quarterly test results shall be reported along with the Discharge Monitoring
Report (DMR) submitted for the end of the reporting calendar quarter (e.g.,
whole effluent results for the calendar quarter ending March 31 shall be
reported with the DMR due April 28, with the remaining reports submitted
with DMRs due each July 28, October 28, and January 28). Monthly test
results shall be reported along with the DMR submitted for that month. The
format for the report shall be consistent with the latest revision of the
"Region VIII Guidance for Acute Whole Effluent Reporting", and shall include
all chemical and physical data as specified.
If" the results for four consecutive quarters of testing indicate no acute
toxicity, the permittee may request the permit-, issuing authority to allow a
reduction to quarterly acute toxicity test in-r on on.ly one species. The
permittee is to specify which species would used in the testing. The
permit issuing authority may approve or deny the request based on the
results and other available information without an additional public notice.
If the request is approved, the test procedures are to be the same as
specified above for the test species.
18
-------
C. Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
5. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE)
If it is determined by the permit issuing authority that a IRE is necessary,
the permittee shall be so notified and shall initiate a TRE immediately
thereafter. The purpose of the TRE will be to establish the cause of the
toxicity, locate the source(s) of the toxicity, and control or provide
treatment for the toxicity prior to the deadline for compliance contained in
Part of this permit.
If the TRE establishes that the toxicity cannot be eliminated by the
deadline contained in this permit, the permittee shall submit a proposed
compliance plan to the permit issuing authority. The plan shall include
the proposed approach to control toxicity and a proposed compliance schedule
for achieving control. If the approach and schedule are acceptable to the
permit issuing authority, this permit may be reopened and modified.
If the TRE shows that the toxicity is caused by a toxicant(s) that may be
controlled with specific numerical limitations, the permittee may:
a. Submit an alternative control program for compliance with the
numerical requirements.
b. If necessary, provide a modified whole effluent testing protocol
which compensates for the pollutant(s) being controlled
numerically.
If acceptable to the permit issuing authority, this permit may be reopened
and modified to incorporate any additional numerical limitations, a modified
compliance schedule if judged necessary by the permit issuing authority,
and/or a modified whole effluent protocol.
Failure to conduct an adequate TRE, or failure to submit a plan or program
as described above, or the submittal of a plan or program judged inadequate
fcy the permit issuing authority, shall in no way relieve the permittee from
the deadline for conpliance contained in Part of this permit.
19
-------
USE THIS LANGUAGE WHEN A TOXICITY LIMIT IS IN THE PERMIT
Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
Toxicity Limitation-Reopener Provision.
This permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative
procedures) to include a new compliance date, additional or modified
numerical limitations, a new or different compliance schedule, a change in
the whole effluent protocol, or any other conditions related to the control
of toxicants if one or more of the following events occur:
a. Toxicity was detected late in the life of the permit near or past the
deadline for compliance.
b. The TRE results indicate that compliance with the toxic limits will
require an implementation schedule past the date for compliance and the
permit issuing authority agrees with the conclusion.
c. The TRE results indicate that the toxicant(s) represent pollutant(s)
that may be controlled with specific numerical limits, and the permit
issuing authority agrees that numerical controls are the most
appropriate course of action.
d. Following the implementation of numerical controls on toxicants, the
permit issuing authority agrees that a modified whole effluent protocol
is necessary to compensate for those toxicants that are controlled
numerically.
e. The TRE reveals other unique conditions or characteristics which, in
the opinion of the permit issuing authority, justify the incorporation
of unanticipated special conditions in the permit.
USE THIS LANGUAGE WHEN A TOXICITY- LIMIT IS NOT IN THE PERMIT
Specific Limitations and Self-Monitoring Requirements
Toxicity Limitation-Reopener Provision
This permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative
procedures) to include whole effluent toxicity limitations if whole effluent
toxicity is detected in the discharge.
20
-------
APPENDIX B
REGION VIII ACUTE AND CHRONIC
TESTING PROTOCOLS
-------
REGION VIII EPA NPDES ACUTE TEST C0NDITICN5
STATIC RENEWAL WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY TEST
1. Temperature:
2. Light Duration and Type:
3. Test Vessel Size:
CERIODAPHNIA
20° C +_ 2°
16 hours-ambient
30 - 100 ml
4. Volume of test solution:(a) 15 - 50 ml
5. Age of test animals: less than 24 hr
6. No of animals per container: 5
7. No of replicates:
8. Renewal frequency:
9. No of dilutions (minimum):
10. Feeding:
11. Test duration:
12. Acceptable control:
mortality
4
daily
5 (+control)
none
48 hours
10 % or less (c)
FATHEAD MINNOWS
20° C +. 2°
16 hours-ambient
200 - 1000 ml
150 - 900 ml
5 +_ 2 days (b)
10
2 (minimum)
daily (solids removal)
5 (+control)
0.1 ml brine shrimp prior to
selection, and at 48 hrs
96 hours
10% or less (c)
13. Dilution Series: 100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6%, 0% (control).
14. Dilution water: Dilution water shall consist of the receiving water if not toxic.
If receiving water toxicity exists, the test shall be repeated with reconstituted water
of similar hardness to the receiving water (+15%).
15. Holding time: A maximum of 36 hours from the conclusion of sampling until the
initiation of testing should be maintained. Additional time is acceptable if
unavoidable shipping delays occur. Samples must be maintained at less than 4°C during
the entire holding period.
16. Filtration: Acceptable if aquatic organisms are present. Filters as small as 60
microns may be used (110 microns in special cases).
17. CO2 atmospheres: Permittees may receive individual case by case permission to
introduce CO2 enriched atmospheres over 100% and 75% dilutions if necessary to inhibit
"rising pH creep".
(a) Uniform volume shall be used in all replicates in a test series.
(b) All fish used in a test series must be born within 48 hours of each other.
(c) An individual, case fcy case exception may be errand j.f ]
-------
REGION VIII EPA NPDES CHRONIC TEST CONDITIONS
STATIC RENEWAL WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY TESTS
CERIODAPHNTA
25° C +_ 1°
16 hours-ambient
30 ml (minimum)
15 ml (minimum)
less than 24 hr (b)
1
10
daily (d)
(e)
FATHEAD MINNOWS
25° C + 1°
16 hours-ambient
200 - 1000 ml
150 - 900 ml
up to 7 days (c)
10 (minimum)
3 (minimum)
daily (d)
(f)
7 days
1. Temperature:
2. Light Duration and Type:
3. Test Vessel Size:
4. Test solution volume: (a)
5. Age of test animals:
6. No of animals per vessel:
7. No of replicates:
8. Renewal frequency:
9. Feeding:
10. Test duration:
11. Acceptable control
performance:
until 60% have 3 broods
in the control
20 % mortality or less;
three brood average total
of 15 or more.
20% mortality or less; avg. dry
weight gain per fish = 0.25 mg
more.
12. Aeration: If D.O. falls below 40% saturation, repeat test with aeration.
13. Dilutions: 0% (control), and other dilution(s) as specified in permit.
14. Dilution water: Dilution water shall consist of the receiving water if not toxic,
receiving water toxicity exists, the test shall be repeated with reconstituted water of
similar hardness to the receiving water (+15%).
15. Holding time: A maximum of 36 hours from the end of sampling until the initiation of
testing should be maintained. Additional time is acceptable if unavoidable shipment delay
occur. Samples must be maintained at less than 4°C during the entire holding period.
16. Filtration: Acceptable if aquatic organisms are present. Use filters as small as 60
microns (110 microns in special cases).
(a) Uniform volume shall be used in all replicates in a test series.
(b) Ceriodaphnia used in a test series must be born within 8 hrs of each other.
(c) All fish_used in a test series must be born within 24 hours of each other.
(d) Permittee shall use a minimum of three fresh effluent samples taken at intervals of tw<
or three days depending on weekend shipping arrangements.
(e) Reconmendation: 0.1 ml/day of "YCT" and up to 0.1 n\l/day of Selenastrum suspension
containing 3-4 x 107 cells.
(f) 0.1 ml of brine shrimp three times a day ot four !"">r intervals or longer, or 0.15 ml
twice a day at a six hour interval or longer.
1/3/91
-------
APPENDIX C
ACUTE AND CHRONIC REPORTING GUIDANCE
24
-------
REGION VIII GUIDANCE FOR ACUTE WHOLE EFFLUENT REPORTING
PERMITTEE NAME NPDES NO
50% MORTALITY TEST: pass fail LC50 % OUTFALL NO
TEST ANIMAL & AGE SAMPLE TYPE, TIME & DATE
Analysis Time & Date: Begin End
Dilutions
(% Effluent)*
Measurements
0%
6% 12.5%
25% 50%
75%
1 00%
No 0 Start of Test
No live after 24
hrs
No live after 48
hrs
No live after 72
hrs
No live after 96
hrs
Dilutions
(% Effluent)*
Max/Min Values
0%
6%
12.5%
25% 50%
75%
1 00%
Dissolved Oxvaen
/
/
/
/ /
/
/
Temperature °C
/
/
/
/ /
/
/
Receiving Water Used For Dilution (Y or N)?
Hardness: Receiving Water Effluent Recon. Water (if used)
Initial Total Residual CI2 in 100% Effluent
Initial NH3 (as N) in 100% Effluent:
pH in 100% Effluent: Initial After 24 Hours:
ANALYST'S NAME
LABORATORY
SIGNATURE DATE
* normally, a minimum of five plus control (0%)
COMMENTS
1/3/91
-------
REGION VIII GUIDANCE FOR CHRONIC WHOLE EFFLUENT REPORTING
CERIODAPHNIA
PERMIT NAME NPDES No_
MEAN NO PRODUCED: CONTROL EFFLUENT pass fail Outfall No_
Sample Type, Time, & Dates Analyses; Time & Date
No 1 Beginning
No 2 Ending
No 3 Initial Organism Age __
Control * 0% Effluent Effluent Sample = % Effluent (see Permit)
Receiving Water Hardness Reconstituted Water Hardness (if used)
CERIODAPHNIA r—
Total Number of Young Produced in Three Broods ("D"=dead)
Replicates
Sample ABCDEFGHIJ K** L**
Control
Effluent
PHYSICAL DATA - CONTROL
Measurement
Day
0
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
Day
6
Day
7
DO old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
T °C old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
PHYSICAL
DATA -
EFFLUENT
Measurement
Day
0
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
Day
6
Day
7
DO old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
T °C old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
Hardness*
* Testing Required only on days when fresh effluent is received in
laboratory (normally, initially, and days 3 and 5).
ANALYST'S NAME
LABORATORY SIGNATURE/DATE
1/3/91
-------
REGION VIII GUIDANCE FOR CHRONIC WHOLE EFFLUENT REPORTING
FATHEAD MINNOWS
PERMIT NAME NPDES No
FINAL MEAN WEIGHT:CONTROL EFFL pass fail Outfall No
Sample Type, Time, & Dates Analyses: Time & Date
No 1 Beginning
No 2 & 3 Ending
Mean
Initial Organism: Age Weight
Control = 0% Effluent Effluent Sample = % Effluent (see Permit)
Receiving Water Hardness Reconstituted Water Hardness (if used) _
FATHEAD MINNOWS
No of
Organisms /
Percent
Survival
Mean
Weight After 7
(milligrams)
Days
Replicates
Replicates
A
B
C D
A
B C
D
Control
/
/
/ /
Effluent
/
/
/ /
PHYSICAL
DATA -
CONTROL
Measurement
Day
0
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
Day
6
Day
7
DO old/new
/
/
/
/
/
(
T °C old/new
/
/
/
/
/
(
PHYSICAL
DATA -
EFFLUENT
Measurement
Day
0
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
Day
6
Day
7
DO old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
T °C old/new
/
/
/
/
/
/
Hardness*
* Testing Required only on days when fresh effluent is received in
laboratory (normally; initially, and days 3, and 5).
ANALYST'S NAME
LABORATORY SIGNATURE/DATE
1/3/91
------- |