UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                          WASHINGTON  C C  20460
Deceitiber 11, 1986
Honorable Lee M. Thcwas
Administrator
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S. W.
Washington, D, C.  20460

Dear Mr. Thomas:

     The Science Advisory Board's Water Quality Based Approach Research
Review Subcommittee has completed its review of the Agency's Water Quality
Based Approach research program and is pleased to forward its final report
to you.

     The Subcommittee rat in public session on July 8-9, 1986 at EPA's
Environmental Research Laboratory in Duluth, Minnesota.  Prior to its
meeting, the Subccnnuttee received a document prepared by the four EPA
laboratories that carry out research in this particular program and
entitled "Reference Material £or Science Advisory Board Review of Water
Quality Based Approach Cor the Control of Toxics - Freshwater,"

     The major issues addressed by the Su&cotmittee included the following:

     *  Use attainability: application of the ecoregion concept.

     *  Development of water quality criteria and advisories: data require-
        ments and utility,

     •  Effluent toxicity; practicability o£ toxicity limits, chemical
        identification.

     •  Exposure; fluctuation, duration and frequency.

     *  Validation - Evaluations: national criteria, site specific
        criteria and ecfluent toxicity.

     •  Waste load allocation: level of sophistication required,

     •  Methods standardization and accuracy: when  is a method ready for
        use?

-------
                                  - 2 -
     One of the Subcommittee's major conclusions is that methods tor
deriving water quality criteria have undergone a steady evolution and
extensive scientific review.  These methods and the resulting criteria
have wide acceptance by the scientific and regulatory coraunities.  Many of
the Subcommittee's recommendations are directed at further strengthening
the water quality based approach, and integrating it with work related to
other areas of toxic controls needing attention.

     Thank you for the opportunity to present the Subcommittee's views on
this important research program.  We request that EPA officially respond
to the scientific advice provided in this report.
                                 Sincerely,
                                              }
                                              L- -
                                 Kenneth Dickson, Chairman
                                 Water Quality Based Approach Research
                                   Review Subeowmittee


                                   \\ ^T0" V • '  ' - -i
                                 Norton Nelson, Chairman
                                 Executive Commit t^e
                                 Science Advisory Board

-------
                                             SAB-EC-87-Q11
Review of IPA Water Quality Based Approach Research Program
            by the Water Quality Based Approach
               Research Review Subcommittee
                          of the
                  Science Advisory Board
                      December 11,  1986

-------
                          EPA NOTICE

     This  report has been written as  a  part of the activities of
the Science Advisory Board, a public  advisory group providing
extramural scientific information and advice to the Administrator
and other  officials of the Environmental Protection Agency.  The
Board is structured to provide a balanced expert assessment of
scientific matters  related to  problems facing the Agency.  This
report has not been  reviewed for approval  by the Agency,  and
hence the contents of this report do not necessarily represent
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                         TABLE OP CONTENTS

 I.   INTRODUCTION                                          /
     A,   Origins  and  Purpose of  the Review                         !
     8,   Application  of Research Program Results  to
          Regulation Development                                    2
     c.   Historical Development  of Water Quality  Criteria         4
 II.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS                                8
HI.  WHOLE  EFFLUENT APPROACH                                       13
 W.   NATIONAL WATER QUALITY CRITERIA GUIDELINKS/ADVISORIES         17
      A.   Background                                               1"?
      B.   Overview of l§85  Guidelines Approach  to
           Establishing Water Quality Criteria                      17
      C.   Intensity (Exposure Concentration)                       19
      D.   Duration (Averaging Periods)                             22
      E.   Frequency                                                24
      F.   Aquatic Life Advisories                                 27
      G.   Selection of Chejnicals to Develop Criteria and          29
           Advisories
   V.  VALIDATION RESEARCH                                           j2
  VI.  USE ATTAINABILITY AND  ECOREGIONS                              34
 VII.  WASTELOAD ALLOCATION                                         40
VIII,  METHODS STANDARDIZATION                                       42
      A,   Field Methods                                            42
      B.   Basic Biology of  Test  Organisms                          43
      C.   Publication of  Standardized Methods                      43

-------
IX.   AREAS RELATED TO THE WATER QUALITY BASED APPROACH Tn
     TOXIC CONTROLS NEEDING ATTENTION
                                                              45
     A,    Nonpoint Sources
                                                              45
     B.    Technology Transfer
                                                              46
     c.    Sediments
                                                              4?
     D.    Biotechnology
                                                              49
     E.    Saltwater
                                                              49
     F.    Monitoring

V                                                             50
x-   LITERATURE CITED
                               ll

-------
             O.S Environmental Protection Agency
                   Science Advisory Board
  Water Quality Based Approach Research Review Subcommittee
Dr. Kenneth Didcscn, ehaisnan
Institute of Applied Sciences
North Texas State University
P.O. Box 13078  NT station
Denton, Texas  76203
Dr. Terry F. Yosie, Director
Science Advisory Board
U.S. l.P.A.
401 M. Street, S.W.
Washington, D,c.  20460
Dr. Harold Bergman
Dept. of Zoology 6 Physiology
University of Wyoming
University station Box 3166
Laraaie, Wyoming  82071
Dr. Jeffrey Black
School of Biological Sciences
University of Kentucky
101 Morgan Building
Lexington, Kentucky  40506
Dr. Richard Kiaerle
Monsanto Corporation
SOQ H. Lindbergh Blvd,
St. Louis, Missouri  63167-5842
Dr. John Neuhold
Dept. of Wildlife Sciences
College of Natural Resources
Utah State University
Logan, Utah  84322
Dr. David Maschwitz
Minnesota Pollution Control
 Agency
1935 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota  55113

Dr. Thomas Waller
Dept. of Natural Sciences s
  Mathematics
Environmental Sciences
University of Texas at Dallas
P. 0. Box 688
Mail Station SI-22
Richardson, Texas  75080
                              1X1

-------
I.   INTRODUCTION
A.   Origins and Purpose of the Review
     At the  request  of  IPA's  Office  of  Research  and
Development, the Science Advisory Board (SAB) has conducted a
series of  reviews of its ongoing  research programs.  The SAB
reviews are conducted under the auspices of its  Executive
Committee which has  formed  specific  subcommittees  of
qualified  experts to address the scientific  issues relevant
to each program.  The purpose  of these reviews is to  peer
review of existing and planned scientific research, and to
communicate to the Agency's research scientists,  program
office  personnel  and senior managers - including the
Administrator,  Deputy Administrator  and  Assistant
Administrator for Research and Development - the progress, or
lack thereof, made in meeting research  needs pertinent to the
development of regulations and policies,
     The Executive Committee established the Water Quality
Based Approach Research Review Subcommittee to conduct the
review  of EPA's  water  quality  based approach  for the
control of toxicants in freshwater.  The Subcommittee met In
public  session  on July  8-i,  1986 at EPA's Environmental
Research laboratory in Duluth,  Minnesota.
     Prior to  its meeting,  the Subcommittee received  a
document entitled "Reference Material  for  Science  Advisory
Board Review  of Water Quality Based Approach for the Control
of Toxics - Freshwater,11 and  prepared by  the four EPA
laboratories  that  carry out  the  research in this  particular
program.   These  include  the Environmental   Research

-------
Laboratories  in Athens,  Corvallis,   and Duluth  and the
Environmental Monitoring and  Support  Laboratory  in
Cincinnati,  SPA staff also provided supplementary support
documents.
     These  documents fulfilled two functions:  1) summarizing
existing research  and facilitating discussion of proposed
research and the future needs of the  research program,*  and 2)
identifying seven  issues  for the Subcommittee's  review.  The
issues presented included:
     *  Use attainability;   application  of the ecoregion
        concept.
     •  Development of water quality criteria and advisories;
        data requirements and utility.
     *  Effluent toxicity:   practicability of toxicity
        limits, chemical identification.
     *  Exposure:   fluctuation,  duration and frequency.
     *  Validation -  Evaluations* national criteria, site
        specific criteria and effluent toxicity.
     *  Waste  load allocation:   level  of sophistication
        required
     •  Methods  standardization  and  accuracy:  when is  a
        method ready for use?
     The Subcommittee  could also raise additional issues that
it deemed appropriate.
B.   Application of Research Program Results to Regulation
     Development
     The primary purpose of the various research programs
within the Office  of Research and Development is to generate
technical  data and support for EPA regulatory and other
activities carried out under its authorising statutes.  The
primary clients for the water quality based approach research
program include the Office of Water and  the Office of Federal
Activities.    Program priorities  are  established  by ORD

-------
working through a decision making mechanism called   research
committees which  are co-chaired by ORD and regulatory office
representatives.  Five  such  committees exist to plan all  of
EPA's research, and the work of this particular research
program is planned  by the Water Research  Committee.
     The major regulatory activities the water quality based
research program  is designed to support in current and future
years include the following:
     1.   Single chemical  numerical water quality criteria
will continue to be the starting point  in developing water
quality  based approach  NPDES permit limits,  and for
evaluating treatment effectiveness under  the technology based
approach permits.
     2.   Approximately five additional water quality criteria
documents per year will be issued  over  the next five years
for the accelerated control of toxics in NPDES permits, land
banning for SCRA  and site investigation for Superfund,
      3*  Where data  are lacking to  develop a  criteria, water
quality  advisories will be  issued,  about sixty per year for
the next five years, to aid in screening NPDES permits,  in
controlling toxics in the water quality based approach.
     4.  A greater use of  biomonitoring or whole effluent
toxicity testing  will be made in the  next five years  to
determine if wastewater effluents are toxic and to establish
NPDES  toxicity permit  limits in conjunction with,  single-
chemical  criteria  in the water quality based approach.
                         - 3 -

-------
     5.   Biomonitoring or whole effluent toxieity testing
will  be incorporated  in toxicity  identification,  toxic
reduction evaluation (TRE's) and pretreatment prograns to
control toxics in response to the Domestic Sewage study and
National Municipal policy.
     6,   In the  longer term,  NPDES permits will  need to
address  mixtures of pollutants from single discharges as well
as those resulting from multiple discharges.
     7.   To aid in reviewing and  issuing  the next  round of
NPDES permits, a greater use will be made of user-friendly
mathematical  models, wasteload  allocation software,  and
especially  expert systems.
     8.  The need for and value of the control of diffuse and
nonpoint source pollutants will be based on improvement in
water quality using  water quality  criteria  for known
compounds and  ambient toxicity testing for unknown compounds.
      9,   The ability to easily  characterize  wastewater
 effluents,  chemically  and/or biologically,  will  continue to
 be vital to the technological and water quality based
 approaches.
 C.   Historical Development  of water Quality criteria
      Since 'the  passage of  the  1972  Clean  Water Act
 toendiaents, the development of  water quality criteria for the
 purpose of setting water quality standards has  undergone a
 steady evolution resulting  in  more sophisticated approaches
 that have become increasingly equitable  to both user and
 environment.
                          - 4 ~

-------
     In 1971 the Environmental Protection Agency requested
the  National Academy  of  Sciences  (HAS)  to revise the ises
Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee (NTAC) to
the Secretary of interior entitled "Water Quality criteria."
The guidelines used by the Academy were similar to those used
by the NTAC,  and were  based upon the 1965  ammendments to the
1948 Water Quality Act.  This Act authorized the states and
the Federal government to set standards for interstate and
coastal waters,  considering the uses  for such waters,
     The  NAS document produced  (NAS,  1972)  thoroughly
utilized the information  available at  that tine.  An effort
was made to define toxic levels at both the acute and chronic
levels   for  several   categories  of  water  use  including
recreation and aesthetics, public water supplies,  freshwater
aquatic  life  and wildlife,  saltwater  aquatic life and
wildlife, and agricultural and industrial uses.  Though these
criteria proved useful  in guiding  both state and  Federal
authorities, it was not  until the Congress passed the 1972
amendments that the Environmental Protection Agency (IPA) was
charged with, the responsibility  for establishing water
quality  criteria.  The Agency responded with  the publication
in 1976 of  "Quality  Criteria for Water" (EPA 1976) which
derived  acute and chronic toxicant levels using conservative
safety  factors.
      On May 18, 1978 and  again on March  15,  1979 the
 Environmental  Protection Agency published  in the  Federal
 Register guidelines  for the formulation of water  quality
 criteria. These guidelines improved over previously published
                          - 5 -

-------
guidelines  in that  they considered  the  quality  of the
published  data used in generating  the criteria.   Also
considered were  environmental differences,  and other
biological  and physical factors which may have an effect on a
criterion.  Both acute and chronic levels were promulgated by
using the methodology.   In  reviewing the guidelines, the
Science Advisory  Board commented on the magnitude of the
variation encountered in the  data  leading to the formulation
of a criterion level  and suggested  means to reduce this
variation (EPA 1980).
     In  1982,  the Environmental  Protection Agency prepared a
draft Water Quality Standards Handbook (EPA 19S4a) which
introduced  site specific considerations into the guidelines.
EPA also included the concept of  ecosystem protection  which
was directed  toward structural  elements of the ecosystem
(protection of a  specified  number of families within any
affected site).
     These  changes  in the guidelines resulted significantly
 from research on an ever increasing data base.by EPA
 scientists.  The  level of  thinking  (i.e.,  hypothesis
 generation and subsequent research activity) directed the
 evolution  of  criteria formulation.
     At the present  time, this hypothesis generation/testing
 process has  moved the Agency into  a  water quality based
 criteria  formulation methodology in which  such previous
 imponderables  as duration and  frequency  of exposure are
 considered with implications directed to control technology.
 Though  this approach is subject to some criticism  (EPA l9S4b)
 it  represents a  major scientific advance  in criteria
 formulation,
                         - 6  -

-------
     The  future research agenda includes the area of whole
effluent effects which  revolves around the  concept  that
organisms and ecosystems  are  not stressed by individual
toxicants  but  by  interactions of  complex mixtures.
Methodologies  for the testing of whole  effluent effects are
being developed by 1PA scientists and  others.
     The  Subcommittee commends EPA,  mud particularly the
water quality criteria research  group  of the Office  of
Research and  Development and the Criteria  and  Standards
Division within  the  Office of Water,  for  seeking  ever
increasingly relevant and refined methodologies for criteria
formulation.
                           7 -

-------
II.  CONCLUSIONS  AND RECOMMENDATIONS
     The Subcommittee reached the following conclusions and
recommendations in  its review of the research program:
*    National  Water Quality criteria  development  is an
important function of  IPA'a research  laboratories.  The
Subcommittee recommends  that  the  EPA continue its program of
developing criteria and periodically reviewing and updating
the criteria development guidelines.
»    The methods for deriving water quality criteria have
gone through a steady evolution and extensive reviews.   These
methods and  the  resulting criteria have wide  acceptance by
the scientific and  regulatory communities.
*    The  whole  effluent and  ambient  toxieity methods
developed  in support of the water quality based approach to
toxics  control appear to be major advances in  water quality
management.   However,  demonstration that  the removal of
effluent  or other  source(s)  of  toxicity to these  surrogate
species results  in demonstrable positive ecosystem response
should be an important  goal  for the Agency.  Additionally,
efforts to develop methods to assess toxicity persistence in
receiving waters,  sediment  toxicity,  or bioaccumulation,
teratogenic,  mutagenic,  or carcinogenic  potential  should be
expanded  and be interfaced  with single chemical fate and
effects data.
*    The recent addition of duration/frequency  of exposure in
the water quality criteria  framework is  to be commended,
*    From  a  scientific  perspective, spills,  and  resulting
exceedences  greatly above criteria concentrations,  represent
•the greatest remaining weakness  in the  current intensity-
                         - 8  -

-------
duration-frequency regulatory framework; thus, in spite of
the statutory and practical limitation for regulating spills,
the EPA research program should stress them.
•    The Agency needs to evaluate the scientific  basis and
efficacy of the one-hour averaging period for the  criterion
Maximum Concentration  (CMC)   and the  four-day averaging
period for the Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC).
*    The one-hour  and four-day durations  (averaging periods)
for  the CMC and  CCC,  respectively, present a practical
problem for state agencies that must monitor effluents and
receiving  streams  for compliance.   The  Subcommittee
recommends that EPA develop appropriate guidance for states.
*    Quantitative  data on the relationships between frequency
of exceedence  of a criterion (CMC and CCC)  and  ecosystem
damage  and subsequent rates of  recovery  are lacking.  The
Agency  needs to conduct research to establish a scientific
base to  establish the frequency  component of national water
quality  criteria.     The three-year  frequency of  excursions
of the CMC and CCC now allowed by the EPA appear to be based
on  stresses  caused by more  catastrophic  events than
excursions of the CMC or CCC  are  likely to  cause.  The
Subcommittee recommends a thorough review  of the recovery
literature and a reassessment of the frequency issue.
*    The Subcommittee supports the use of field validation
studies to  investigate  the  reliability  of currently
recommended "short-chronic11 effluent toxicity test  procedures
for  predicting adverse ecological  effects in  receiving
streams*   In addition,  research  should  be conducted  to
                         _ 9 -

-------
develop standardized field methods for performing validation
studies on water quality criteria for specific chemicals,
*    The ecoregion methods of defining regional  patterns  in
water chemistry and aquatic biota can be a valuable tool  to
help states  define attainable goals in water quality and
aquatic community  improvement.   The  Subcommittee recommends
the EPA continue to inform states of the ecoregion concept
and assess ways in which the concept can be used  in  state
regulatory  programs,
*    In the  further  development and  application of the
ecoregion/use-attainability program,  the EPA should very
carefully evaluate:  1) the  scale of the ecoregion mapping
effort; 2)  alternatives for  the  biological measurements?  3)
special  applications  for  nonpoint source  pollution;  4)
special  applications for retrospective  analysis  of  water
quality  improvement/degradation? 5) user needs? and 6)user
education.
*    Pollution from nonpoint sources is a significant road
block  to attaining the  national goal of  fishable-swimmable
waters  in  many parts  of the  country.  The Subcommittee
recommends  that EPA  research  laboratories expand  their
efforts to  define and characterize nonpoint source pollution
leading  to  the more effective implementation  of control
measures.
*    The Subcommittee  does  not support the development of
Aquatic  Life Advisories unless  a minimum  data  base  is
established,  a scientifically sound method is developed to
derive the  advisory concentration(s)  and the method  undergoes
review by  the scientific  community.   The Subcommittee
                         - 10 -

-------
recommends that EPA consider an aquatic hazard assessment
approach  which  relates environmental exposure  to  effects as
an alternative  to the present advisories approach,
*    The selection of chemicals to develop  criteria and
advisories  is  an  important  activity.   The  Subcommittee
recommends that the Agency develop selection criteria.   It is
suggested that hazard evaluation approaches be used which
relate estimates  of exposure to toxic effects.  Utilization
of  environmental  fate  models   and  quantitative
structure/activity relationships is recommended.
*   The Agency needs to develop guidance materials including
manuals and  computer based expert systems to aid state agency
and industrial  personnel  in exposure assessment and wasteload
allocation.
*    Research  is  needed to develop methods to assess the
impacts of toxic chemicals on the structure and function of
aquatic ecosystems.
*     Research on the  basic  biology (e.g.,  physiology,
pathology,  nutrition and  ecology) of  test  organisms  is
needed.
*     The Agency  should continue  to  develop and  publish
laboratory  and field methods for assessing the effects of
toxic  chemicals*
*     A critical  need exists for  a  proactive  technology
transfer program to assist state  agencies  and industry  in
implementing the water quality based  approach  for toxics
control.
                           11 -

-------
*    The Agency needs to coordinate this research program
with,efforts  to develop  sediment  criteria  for  toxic
chemicals.
•     The Subcommittee  recommends that EPA  explore  the
inclusion of research on the potential  environmental  impacts
of biotechnology as part of its endeavors in  support of water
quality based toxics control.
*    The Subcommittee recommends  that  the Agency incorporate
research on marine and  estuarine  ecosystems  into  its
activities in support of this research program.  A parallel
effort to that  underway for  freshwater ecosystems  is  needed.
»    EPA should develop a water quality monitoring  program to
assess the efficacy of the water quality based approach for
toxics  control  to improve  water quality  limited aquatic
systems.
                    - 12 -

-------
III. WHOLE EFFLUENT APPROACH
   .  ,The transition from the technology based approach to the
water quality based approach is fundamental  to  EPA's policy
for the development of water quality based permit  limits for
toxic pollutants.   The  development of the Cerigdaphnia dubia
ani^  Piaephal^g promelas seven-day  effluent  and ambient
toxicity  tests represent  significant  milestones  in  the
implementation of this policy.   The Subcommittee  commends EPA
for the progress made in this area and encourages continued
support as the methodologies are refined and expanded and
experience is gained on interpretation of results*
     The  use of effluent  and  ambient  toxieity  tests to
evalutate potential   impacts  is  not without precedent.
However,  the use  of the Cjsr_iodap_hnia, dub^a and PiTnephaj.es
proiae 1 as tests as  proposed  in the Technical Support Document
for  Water Quality Based Toxics Control (IPA 1985)  is a
relatively recent  development and changes in methodologies,
interpretation, and direction should be anticipated.  The
implementation of  these  methods does  not,  nor  was it
intended,  to address all aspects of toxics in the  aquatic
environment,  nor have  all the questions directly addressed by
these  methods been resolved.   EPA should  pay particular
attention to such issues as bioaccumulation, persistence,
sediments, multiple discharges, and teratogenic,  mutagenic,
and carcinogenic potential  for initiation and/or promotion.
     Bioaccumulttion,  or the potential  for bioaccumulation of
industrial chemical constituents from  effluent  mixtures, is
not  addressed by current effluent or ambient toxicity test
                        - 13 -

-------
methodologies.   Bi©accumulation,  in the  case of  single
discharges where manufacturing processes can be identified or
where  scans  for  priority  pollutants  might  demonstrate
presence  of bioaccumulated  chemicals,  may be regulated by
monitoring body burdens of resident organisms or through
water quality criteria, where appropriate.   However,  EPA
should  direct some effort  toward this  process within the
framework of  complex effluents with unKnown constituents.
What  is  needed  is   a  kind  of  generic n-oetanol/water
partition  coefficient perhaps to be found in a HPLC approach.
     Persistence is addressed, in part,  by ambient toxicity
measurements  when  tests are  conducted  on  site.   Few data
appear to  be available regarding correlations between on site
ambient toxicity measures and samples shipped to a  laboratory
for evaluation.  It remains to be seen if predicitive methods
currently  under development  will  contribute significantly to
the current understanding of persistence.
   If one  defines as  an  objective of the water guality based
approach the maintenance of structure and function of aguatic
environments,  the problem of  regulating  multiple discharges
may need to be focused.   In  the case of multiple discharges,
EPA  should emphasize measurement of  the  system  (ambient
toxicity)  and  not the effluent.  Only after the fractionation
schemes currently under development become available for
widespread use is it  likely that both satisfactory regulatory
and measurement tools will become available to fully evaluate
                           - 14 -

-------
and manage multiple discharges.
    'The species  currently used  in  effluent  toxicity
evaluations  by EPA, an
-------
Subcommittee believes this  demonstration  represents an
important undertaking for EPA and one for which particular
attention should be paid to ecologically  significant
inprovements, rather than improvements which represent merely
statistical  significance*
                           - 16 -

-------
IV.  NATIONAL WATER QUALITY CRITERIA GUIDELINES/ADVISORIES
A.   Background
     EPA published revised National Water Quality Criteria
Guidelines in 1985,  In this section,  the  Subcommittee
addresses  some specific issues that comprise  an integral part
of the three-part  water  quality  criteria by following the
procedures advanced in the 1985 Guidelines document.   The
Subcommittee supports the continued development and updating
of  aquatic life  criteria  and encourages  the Agency  to
continue research and development activities in this area. In
addition,  an assessment of the development of "Advisories" by
the agency is  discussed in  the sections of this report which
follow,
B.   Overview of 1985 Guidelines Approach to  Establishing
     Water Quality Criteria
     Briefly,   acute  toxicity data are  collected  on
ecologically or cominercially important organisms.  Genus Mean
Acute Values  (GMAVs) are computed by talcing the geometric
mean of the LCSOs or ECSOs reported for members  of the sane
genus.  The GMAVs generally  conform to a  log  triangular
distribution, and estimation methods  are applied to derive
the Final Acute Value  (FAV) as the fifth percentile of this
distribution, since the FAV is  calculated from point toxicity
estimates  that cause an adverse effect in the test population
(i.e., 50% mortality),  the Criterion  Maximum Concentration
(CMC) is calculated as  the FAV divided by two, and provides a
"safe"  level  to  95%  of the  species  tested.    This
concentration, on  the average if not exceeded over a one hour
period more  than once every  three  years,  is intended to
                         - 17 -

-------
protect  the receiving water from acutely toxic effects.
     She assessment of chronic toxicity data  for aquatic
animals  and  plants,  as  well  as  information  on
bioconcentration of chemicals in aquatic organisms, yields a
Final  Chronic,  Final  Plant and  Final Residue Value,
respectively.  The Final Residue Value is included to prevent
aquatic  organisms from obtaining  body  burdens  that  are
believed  to  pose significant risk to huaan and wildlife
consumers.   The  lowest of  the above  three  values  is
designated as the criterion Continuous Concentration  (CCC),
which provides an estimate of the highest four day average
concentration that, if not violated with a frequency greater
than once every three years,  is  advanced as being protective
of aquatic organisms  and their uses  from  being  unacceptably
affected  by  chronic exposure.  In  the  development  of a
criterion, additional data regarding  the effects on community
structure and/or  functional processes  (e.g.,  respiration,
productivity,  nutrient cycling) or behavioral responses
(e.g., preference  and avoidance, swimming endurance, cough
response) are also reviewed and professional judgment  is
used  to  evaluate the  reasonableness  of  the  two-number
criteria,  fresh  and saltwater,  derived via  the formal
procedure.
     One of the most  important features of stating criteria
in  accordance with  the  revised 1985 guidelines is that
criteria are stated in terms  of  three properties:   1)
concentration  (intensity); 2) duration;  and  3)  frequency.
Specifying criteria in such terms facilitates application of
dynamic statistical  models for determining water quality-
                          - 18 -

-------
limited situations,  rather than  using  the  conservative and,
hence,  less cost-effective steady-state model based on 7Qio
flow or the worst-case scenario (Jaworski and Mount,  1985).
c.   Intensity  (Exposure concentration)
     "Intensity11 is  defined by EPA in the Technical Support
Document (EPA,  198Sa) as "how nuch of  a  pollutant (or
pollutant parameter  such as  toseicity),  expressed  as  a
concentration,  is allowable.w   The "Intensity" values for
single chemicals or  whole-effluent toxicity are specified in
terms of the CMC for protection against acute effects
and the  CCC  for protection  against  chronic   effects.
The methods for deriving these criteria  values have gone
through a steady evolution and extensive review,  as discussed
in the above sections.   And although the  resultant  criteria
(intensity) values  have been a  matter of disagreement for
several individual  chemicals  (e,g.f selenium)  or because of a
perception that national  criteria are overly  conservative,
the criteria and their methods of derivation have been widely
accepted by the scientific and regulatory communities.  Use
of  the steadily improved criteria  values in  the NPDES
permitting process has  no  doubt been responsible for much of
the considerable improvement  in surface water quality in  the
past  decade.    Moreover,  the recent incorporation  of  a
mechanism for  reasonably incorporating  duration and frequency
of exposure in the regulatory framework (see  sections IV.D and
IV.E  below)   will  undoubtedly  result  in  additional
improvements  in surface water quality.  However,  once  the
nation  begins to achieve the water  quality improvements
                          - 19 -

-------
possible through the addition of duration/fre
-------
Unfortunately,  spills are not regulated discharges under
NPDES permit limits.   From a  purely  scientific perspective,
however, "spills  and resulting exceedences greatly  above  the
CMC, lio doubt represent the greatest remaining weakness in
the consideration of "intensity of exposure" in the currant
intensity-duration-frequency regulatory framework.
     In view of  the apparently critical importance  of spills
in defining  biological integrity,  and because of the problem
that this causes for the scientific basis of "intensity  of
exposure" in the current regulatory strategy, the EPA
research program should siore aggressively address spills.
Even within the  current  statutory and practical limitations
for regulating spills, a better scientific understanding of
the frequency  of spills in different types of water bodies,
resulting magnitudes of excursion, and the extent  of
resultant ecosystem  damage can,  at  least, help define  the
nature of the problem.  If data  show that spills are now a major
contributor  to significant water  quality  degradation,
alterations in the Clean  Water  Act and EPA regulations might
be necessary,  A research program to consider the prevalence
of spills,  resultant  effects  on national  water quality,  and
possible solutions might include the following:
     1.   Studies  of  spill intensity, frequency and duration
          in  typical surface waters and  for  different
          industrial sectors.  Such studies  could  use
          existing data from self-monitoring reports and  fish
          kill  records,  as well  as  collection of  new
          information  using ambient toxicity tests and field
          studies,
                          - 21 -

-------
     2.   Studies  in the  laboratory  and field (model
          ecosystems?)  on the relationships  of levels of
          exceedenee over the CMC (e.g., 2X, 20X,  200X CMC)
          causing ecosystem destruction for different classes
          of chemicals.  These kinds of studies could be done
          in conjunction with the current research efforts on
          time requirements for ecosystem recovery.
     3.   Engineering  studies on designs and operating
          practices to minimize occurrence or to effectively
          contain or dilute spills in different industrial
          sectors.
     4.   Studies of ecosystem parameters that are impacted
          by spills, for example the ratio of autochthanous
          and allochthanous  activity, energy  state  of
          ecosystem (level of system eutrophy),
D.   Duration (Averaging Periods)
     As advanced in the 1985  Guidelines, EPA specifies a one
hour  averaging   period  for  the  Criterion  Maximum
Concentrations  and a  four  day  averaging  period for the
Criterion Continuous Concentration.  The CMC  portion of  a
National  Water  Quality Criterion represents the average
concentration in over one hour which, if not  exceeded aors
frequently than once every three  years, will  protect from
acute toxicity 95% of the aquatic  organisms in the receiving
system. The CCC  comprises the four-day average  concentration
which,  if  not exceeded more  frequently than once every  three
years,  will protect from chronic toxicity 95% of aquatic life
in the recovery  system 95% of the  time.
                         - 22 -

-------
     Acute and chronic toxic effects are a function of both
intensity (concentration)  and duration (time).  In developing
the CMC, results of 48-hour  to  96-hour LC50 or EC50 toxicity
tests that have a constant exposure concentration are used.
Many chemicals express their toxicity rapidly while some act
more slowly.   In establishing a one hour averaging period for
the CMC, EPA has taKen a  conservative position that protects
against  fast acting chemicals.   The effects on ecosystem
integrity of an exceedance  of the CMC  for a  duration
(averaging period) in excess of one hour will depend  on the
magnitude  of the  excursion above the  CMC  and  length of
excursion.   The effects will be chemical-specific depending
on the  rates and modes of  action  and,  thus, the rates at
which effects are expressed.  Another  factor influencing
whether or not an effect  is  observed results from whether or
not the exposure is constant or fluctuating.   Field studies
conducted by  EPA and others have shown that concentrations of
chemicals  in receiving  systems are usually continuously
fluctuating  and not constant  (Mount et  aju,  1986).  Thus,
several factors influence the magnitude-duration interaction
to cause an effect.  Scientific  data on the ecosystem effects
of exceeding the one-hour  averaging period of the CMC by
different magnitudes  (and, similarly, data on the ecosystem
effects of exceeding the four-day averaging period of the ccc
by different magnitudes) for  different  chemicals are not
available  to  validate the degree  of protection provided by
these averaging periods.
                        - 23 -

-------
     The Subcommittee  concludes that the Agency needs to
conduct a literature  review to ascertain what is  known about
the duration  and node  of exposure  (i.e.,  continuous versus
fluctuating)  for chemicals having different  rates and modes
of action.  EPA should use the  results of this  literature
review to evaluate the efficacy of the  one-hour averaging
period for the CMC  and  the four-day averaging period  for the
CCC.  The results  could also be used to identify research
needs to develop the scientific knowledge necessary to relate
averaging period to rates and modes of action.  Rather than
having the sane averaging periods for the CMC  and  CCC for all
chemicals,  it should  be possible to have different averaging
modes of action. The  use of m one-hour duration for the CMC
and a four-day duration for the  CCC  poses  practical problems
for regulatory agencies that must  monitor  (or require the
monitoring  of) effluents  and  receiving  streams  for
compliance.   The Agency should examine the duration aspects
of criteria  from both  the scientific perspective and the
practicality of implementation.
E.   Frequency
     Both the  CMC and the CCC in the 1985  Guidelines have an
allowed excursion frequency of once every three years.  From
a scientific viewpoint, it is extremely important that the
allowed frequency utilized  in water quality criteria be
derived from  a strong scientific  data  base regarding the
ability of aquatic  ecosystems to withstand acute  and  chronic
stress and still maintain their structural  and  functional
                          - 24 -

-------
integrity.   The  Agency,  in developing the Technical  Support
Document  (TSO)  for  Mater Quality  Based  Toxics Control,
reviewed the available  scientific literature  and  concluded
that most unstressed biological communities would not be
"sufficiently" affected if, on the average, one exceedance
event occurred  every three years.  The TSD acknowledges  that
the frequency with  which  a criterion can be allowed to be
exceeded depends on the structure and  function of the aquatic
community, on the spatial relationships to other non-affected
areas, on the presence or  absence of  other stresses, on the
size  of the impacted area, on the  type  and size of the
ecosystem,  on the interval between  exceedanees,  on the  time
of year of the  exceedance  and a host of other factors.   Thus,
the exceedance  frequency could be site specific,  just as the
CMC and CCC can be site specific.
     It is evident  that quantitative data on the relative
contributions of the above factors to the rates of ecosystem
recovery are currently lacking and that a carefully developed
research  program is needed to establish a scientific base
upon  which  to establish  the frequency  component of  both
national water  quality criteria and the waste load allocation
of the water quality based approach for toxics  control.
     From the discussions presented  at the Duluth meeting,
the Subcommittee believes that EPA is aware  of the limited
nature of scientific knowledge related to the  frequency with
which different  ecosystems can be stressed and still maintain
their integrity.
                          - 25 -

-------
     The initiation  of- a literature  review to  identify
factors controlling  the  recovery of aquatic systems from
disturbances (Niemi  project) represents a start.  The results
of this effort should augment the information assembled in
the Technical Support Document for Water Quality Based Toxics
Control.  EPA should use this study to assess the scientific
knowledge regarding the  recovery of ecosystems from stresses.
It should also serve  to identify research needs on  the topic
and to further  focus EPA's efforts.
     From both the Technical  Support  Document  and  the
Subcommittee's experience,  it is evident that most  knowledge
regarding rates of recovery stems from  studies  following
major spills  of  chemicals   (i.e.,  major  stresses  on
ecosystems).  Comparison of  an exceedance of a CMC and/or a
CCC in a National Water Quality  Criterion  to the stresses
 produced by a spill and its impact on the rate of recovery of
 ecosystems  appears   to  be  tenuous.   EPA  needs  to
 experimentally determine  the relationship between the degree
 of exceedance of the  CMC and  CCC,  and  structural  and
 functional  responses  of  ecosystems  as  well  as   the
 relationship  between  the  frequency of  exceedances  and
 structural and functional  responses of ecosystems,  and rates
 of subsequent recovery.   Scientific data do not  appear to
 exist to judge the  appropriateness of an allowed frequency of
 once  in three years for exceedances of the CMC and CCC.   EPA
 should use caution in applying  the results of  studies of
 recovery of ecosystems  following spills  of chemicals to
 establish the  frequency for  National Water Quality Criteria,
                          * 26 -

-------
fhe ecosystem stress caused by an exceedance of the CMC or
CCC more  than once  in  three years  is  probably far  less
catastrophic than a  spill  of toxic chemicals in which the
concentration  of chemical may  be exceedingly  high (much
greater than a factor of two above  the CMCi see Section  IV,e,
above) and cause lethality to all  or most organisms,  in
contrast,  an exceedance of a CMC and/or CCC of 10-20% several
times a year  may not be measurable  in  terms  of ecosystem
impact  due to  the  inability to assess  structural  and
functional ecosystem responses with great accuracy,   EPA
needs to initiate research efforts  to  address these issues.
F.   Aquatic Life Advisories
     Overall,  the Subcommittee reacts  negatively  to the
development of water quality  criteria advisories because it
believes  that the issuance of any number as guidance based
upon  a  compilation  of disparate  data  represents  a  step
backwards   to  the pre-197S  approach,  and completely  ignores
the technical progress  made in establishing  a method to
derive water quality  criteria and a state-of-the-art approach
to environmental safety  assessment.
    The Subcommittee does not recommend the  use  of the
advisory concept unless EPA:   1)  establishes  a  minimum  data
base? 2} develops a scientifically  sound  method to derive the
advisory  concentration,* and 3)  provides a  procedure for
appropriate review by the scientific community combined with
ample opportunity for public comment*
     The Subcommittee is concerned that  users  of advisories
would view any concentration values given therein as criteria
which could be  translated  into standards.  If data  used to
                         - 27 -

-------
develop advisories  are  insufficient, there might  exist a
great potential for misuse.  The inability of EPA to issue
aquatic life water quality criteria at the pace that some
people would  like  must not  be  the  driving  force to
inappropriate guidance that will result in scientifically
unsupportable  regulations at  the  state level.  EPA, the
states and  the scientific community have made too much
progress in the past decade to adopt a quick fix that will
create as many or more problems as it is supposed to resolve.
     The Subcommittee believes that, within the current Toxic
Substances  Control Act's  preraanufacturing notification (PMN)
process and the  NPDES regulatory programs, there exists a
scientifically sound alternative to derive "advisory
concentrations." The  conceptual basis  of the  alternate
approach lies  within the framework  of  the aquatic hazard
assessment process for which there  is adequate documentation
(Cairns et al., 1978; Dickson et al., 1979? Bergman et al.,
1986?  Kimerle, 1986 Gilford,   1985; EPA,  1985a),  The
concepts which  are applicable are as follows:
     o   The ,-hazard assessment process utilizes some  estimate
         of .exposure  and  the toxicologica1ly  safe
         concentration to derive the margin of safety.  The
         decision or assessment is always based on the margin
         of safety,  the difference between the exposure and
         effect concentrations.   The current EPA water
         quality approach requires that a margin of safety of
         at least one be maintained to protect aquatic life.
                           - 28 -

-------
     o   Less  than  the complete  amltispecies  acute  and
         chronic data base  now required  for deriving water
         quality  criteria  can  be successfully used  by
          employing the concept  of uncertainty  (Gilford,
         1985?  EPA,  1985a).  Uncertainty factors  of  one to
         one thousand are  used, depending on the  extent of
                                s
         the toxicological data  base, to  arrive at  an
         estimate of the concentration that will be safe for
         aquatic  life.
     o   Data are collected  in tiers with an initial minimum
         acute  toxicity and exposure data base.  The trigger
         for requiring additional  data beyond  the miniaum is
         the margin of safety.
     Some members of  the Subcommittee were supportive of the
development of Advisories  for the practical reason that
advisories can  serve a very useful purpose for state agencies
who need information regarding the potential hazards of toxic
chemicals.  A real need exists  in state  regulatory agencies
for "guidance"  on chemicals  lacking enough data to establish
criteria.
G.   Selection  of  Chemicals to Develop criteria and
     Advisories
     The Subcommittee believes that  the overall water  quality
approach to manage the  discharge of toxic chemicals in  toxic
amounts is technically and strategically sound.  However,
since the  development of the comprehensive method to derive
chemical-specific water quality criteria in 1980 and  the
revisions up to 19S5, EPA has completed and  issued very few
                         - 29 -

-------
two-number aquatic life water criteria documents  from the
original  priority pollutant  list of 129 chemicals.  An issue
that needs to be addressed,  in light of the fact of limited
resources,  is  how to  identify chemicals needing the
development of  full aquatic life water quality criteria.
Although the list of 129 chemicals has some chemicals that
are  of national importance and deserve a  national  water
quality  criterion,  many of the chemicals  on the  somewhat
arbitrarily chosen list of 129 probably should receive a
lower priority than many chemicals not  currently on  the list,
     The  Subcommittee concludes that it  would be worthwhile
to develop a procedure  to  identify and set priorities for
chemicals that need a water quality criterion.  Further, it
suggests  that the basis of that procedure might  utilize some
of the newer concepts of hazard evaluation and approaches to
estimate exposure and  toxic effects.   Chemicals that
demonstrate a  large margin of safety between an  estimated or
measured  exposure and an  estimated or measured toxicity data
base could receive a lower priority for consuming limited
resources than a chemical with an obviously smaller margin of
safety.   Many  new techniques are now available  to  use
physical/chemical  property  data to  "model"  exposure
concentrations  in  air,  water and  soils.   Models  are also
available to  predict transformation  processes  like
hydrolysis, photolysis,  adsorption,  partitioning,  and
degradation which  alter the concentrations of  chemicals in
                         - 30 -

-------
the various environmental compartments.  A direct approach to
determine  if exposure is of national concern is to measure
exposure concentrations  in water, sediments, and fish.  To
estimate toxieity the use of quantitative  structure/activity
relationships  and  existing published acute toxicity  data
could  provide a valuable starting point.   Actual acute
toxieity and short term "chronic11 tests could be performed
with a minimum  number of species.
     The EPA staff in both QRD and the Office of Water should
examine  the TSCA-PMN process and NPDES Technical  Support
Documents for guidance on how to deal with the uncertainty of
less  than  complete data  bases  and  to  make  expeditious
decisions,
     As factors for selecting chemicals for which criteria or
advisories are to be developed,  the Agency should include
chemicals commonly encountered by  state agencies in receiving
waters,  landfill leachates, petroleum product spills and
hazardous waste sites.
                          - 31 -

-------
V.   VALIDATION RESEARCH

    • ©ne  type  of  validation  study  presented to  the
Subcommittee  involved  investigations of the  use of effluent
and ambient stream  toxieity tests for predicting effects on
aquatic systems  that receive toxic discharges.  A  principal
objective of these  investigations,  conducted at eight field
sites, was to evaluate  the relationship between toxicity
results  observed  in  Ceriodaphnia  reproduction  tests and
fathead minnow larval growth tests with ecological survey
data  collected in   the  receiving waters.   While  the
Subcommittee was cognizant of the labor-intensive efforts
(costs) required by  such  investigations,  it strongly supports
the appropriateness  of  this approach  for  validating the
currently recommended  effluent toxicity test procedures for
predicting adverse ecological effects.  It  recognizes that
the  inherent  properties and  complexities of natural
(ecological)  systems make  it difficult to obtain  definitive
correlations  between toxicity  test data  and  biological
effects   that may ultimately  result  in  the  aquatic
environment.  For this reason, the Subcommittee suggests  that
EPA continue these or similar types of validation studies,
but that other ecological  parameters in addition to "species
richness"  be used and  evaluated in the validation process.
     Another area  of  validation effort  addressed by the
Subcommittee  involved the field studies performed at the
Monticello Ecological  Research Station (MERE) to evaluate the
utility of water quality criteria established for specific
chemicals (i.e.,  PCP,  ammonia, chlorine).  The Subcommittee
                            - 32 -

-------
believes that it is desirable for EPA to continue this type
of research, for  it appears to be a logical  approach for
validating numerical values  derived for  national  criteria.
However,  due to high variability in the other  ecosystem
parameters monitored during the validation experiments, data
showing the degree of protection  to  other structural and/or
functional components are limited.  As with the validation
investigations described for complex  effluents, it should be
noted  that  environmental  variables encountered  in site-
specific  studies  confound the  determination of  precise
correlations between field  data and laboratory test  results.
Therefore,  an area of future research worthy of consideration
involves  the development  of standardized field methods for
performing  validation studies.  Research should  also be
conducted using the MERS to further evaluate the degree of
protection  afforded by national  water quality criteria to
ecosystew components other than fish.
                         - 33 -

-------
VI.  USE ATTAINABILITY AMD ECOREGIONS
     The fact that water quality characteristics and aquatic
communities vary  regionally with climate,  surface  geology,
soils, vegetation and  land use patterns is not a new concept.
The ecoregion napping program  developed by the  staff  at  the
Environmental Research Laboratory -  Corvallis presents  a
consistent and defensible representation of these patterns
nationwide.   Tests of  ecoregion delineations in  at  least  two
states, Arkansas  and Ohio, have demonstrated similar water
chemistry  and stream communities within an ecoregion  and
differences in these characteristics  between ecoregions.
     Since water quality varies  naturally from place to
place, it is not  only  appropriate but imperative that Federal
and State  regulatory agencies consider this fact  in their
efforts to achieve the  national goal  of fishable-swimmable
water "wherever  attainable."  When setting water quality
standards and effluent  limitations,  states must be aware of
the local  water quality background and the aquatic community
being protected.  The ecoregion approach is a tool that can
help  states  and  EPA regional  offices  define regional goals
for attainable water  quality and aquatic biota.  This tool is
especially useful  in  defining the water  quality and  aquatic
commmsity  attainable in a given region.  Thus, regulatory
officials  and scientists can establish reasonable goals for
expected improvements following pollution abatement efforts.
Ecoregions will not,  however,  replace  the need  for wasteload
allocations  and  site-specific toxieity  studies necessary to
establish effluent limitations for individual dischargers,
although they will facilitate nodal ing for wasteload alloca-
                          - 34 -

-------
tion within each region.
     In Minnesota,  as  one example, the ecoregion  approach is
being used for two  primary purposes as follows:  l) to assist
the  Minnesota Pollution  Control Agency  (MPCA) focus and
prioritize its nonpoint source pollution control programs;
and  2)  to aid in the analysis of statewide water  quality
data.   In the  first instance, the MPCA has assessed
characteristics within Minnesota's eight ecoregions that are
pertinent to  the evaluation of nonpoint sources and to the
application of best management  practices for nonpoint. source
pollution control.   Many of Minnesota's lakes are impacted by
nonpoint source pollution.   To help address this problem, the
MPCA is working on a total  phosphorus water quality  standard
for  lakes using the ecoregion  concept.  Assessing lakes by
ecoregion helps define the trophic  status that  can be
achieved  in a  given lake.   The MPCA has identified  regional
patterns  in several  lake  characteristics that can affect
trophic  status such as  morphometry  and stratification
patterns, as well as nutrient concentrations.  Under the
second  example, the  MPCA has analyzed its ambient water
quality data  by  ecoregions for the biennial report  of  water
quality to Congress (3Q5b Report).
     The Subcommittee  recognizes  the absolute necessity for
improved strategies of use attainability analyses as well as
the potential  value of the ecoregion concept as a regional
tool to help agencies  define  patterns in water chemistry and
                        - 35 -

-------
aquatic biota, which are in turn helpful in defining use
attainability.
     The Subcommittee has several  concerns  about both the
development  and the application of the ecoregion mapping
concept  and  use-attainability analysis  method.   in the
further development and application of the  ecoregion/use-
attainability framework, the Agency should  very carefully
evaluate: 1)  the scale of the ecoregion mapping efforts;  2)
alternatives for the biological measurements;  3} special
applications for  nonpoint source pollution;  4)  special
applications for retrospective analysis  of water quality
improvement/degradation,*  5)  user needs; and  6)  user
education.
     1)  Scale.  The most reasonably attainable  and usable
scale of the ecoregion mapping effort  should be carefully
evaluated.   The tendency for these kinds  of efforts  is  to
continue to develop finer and finer scales in the analysis
and  mapping.  This  tendency is  driven by the correct
perception that a course (national, regional) scale is not
useful  for  local  application of  ecoregion maps to use-
attainability questions.  But this fact must be balanced with
the actual  need (or lacK  of need)  for fine scale maps at all
localities, as well as the achievability of  such maps  given
the data limitations that are  likely to exist.   One option
for  the Agency to  consider would be the  completion  of
national and regional maps for analyses  at those levels,
accompanied by m guidance document  and  training programs  to
assist state  agencies  in data collection and mapping at finer
                         - 36' -

-------
scales for  surface waters  where it is appropriate and useful
for use-attainability analyses.   This  local  level analysis
and ecoregion  mapping approach  may  be  very useful  for
important surface waters to set site-specific water quality
standards,  to  set effluent limitations  for specific
discharges, to establish nonpoint source controls,  and to
evaluate progress in attaining water quality improvements.
     2) Biological Measurement Alternatives.   The  biotic
index approach, based  on fish community  analysis,  offers
considerable  promise for  ecoregion  mapping  and  use
attainability analysis.   However, alternative approaches
should continue to be  considered by the Agency and used, if
and where  appropriate.   Two examples of  alternative
approaches  include  fish Habitat Evaluation Procedures  (HEP)
and ecosystem function measures.  The HEP approach has been
developed extensively  by  the U,S.  Fish  and Wildlife Service
and could be very  useful  for use-attainability analyses  and,
thus,  local scale ecoregion (habitat)  mapping  (see Dickson
and Rodgers, 1986).  Ecosystem function measurements (e.g.,
primary production or  production/respiration) may be very
useful for  analysis and management of many  nutrient-related
nonpoint  source pollution problems.  In a previous manual on
water body surveys and assessments,  EPA (1984b) reviewed a.
number of  biological  measurement  alternatives  for use-
attainability  analyses.   The  Subcommittee  recommends
continuation  of this   practice rather  than  selecting any
single method  for biological assessment of surface waters.
     3)   No_npoint Source Apjg lie actions.   The Subcommittee
agrees  that  the ecoregion mapping approach would be
                        - 37 -

-------
especially  useful in nonpoint source evaluations  (as
presented in  the Minnesota example, above),   since this type
of  application was not discussed extensively  during  the
review,  the  Subcommittee can only recommend  that the Agency
carefully consider whether the  ecoregion  mapping  effort
(including preparation of guidance  to  regional and state
agencies) accounts  for the variables that would be most
important  for nonpoint  source problems  (e.g.,  soil
erodability,  prevalent  agricultural  crops,  primary
production),
     4) Retrosgective Analysis App_l igations.  The  Subcommittee
suggests that the ecoregion  mapping/use attainability
framework should be applied to the assessment of national and
regional progress in achieving surface  water quality
improvements.   Although  states are  required  to  submit
biennial National Water  Quality inventory reports (SQSb
reports) that  are   reviewed  and  summarized  by EPA, too
little effort appears to be expended by  EPA  in compiling
these  kinds  of "progress  reports."   such  progress reports
should be very useful for EPA in allocating resources for
further improvements  that are needed and achievable.  The
ecoregion concept could  be useful  for subdividing this
problem if the ecoregion mapping exercises were approached
with such an application in mind (also see Section IX. F).
     s)   jser Needs. As in any research  program  where the
products of national-scope research efforts are to be applied
to  local-scale problems, it  is   imperative that the
                          - 38 -

-------
 researchers maintain frequent contact with regional and local
 users to be sure that the intended research product will meet
 local" needs.  Thus, the Subcommittee encourages the  research
 team  at  ERL-Gorvallis  to continue solicitation of  critical
 input from regulators and  regulated  parties in the field
 through  presentations at  national,   regional and  local
 meetings   and workshops.   During  these  exchanges,  the
 research team should  invite critical  input  on alternatives
 (e.g», biotic index,  HEP, ecosystem structure and function,
 ambient  toxicity  assessment)  as well  as  special  needs
 associated with  various  applications  of  the ecoregion
 mapping/use-attainability  framework  (e.g.,  point source,
 nonpoint source, ambient toxicity assessment).  The Agency
 should also continue applications/demonstrations, such as
those in Ohio and Arkansas, prior to settling on the final
form for  the ecoregion mapping/use-attainability approach.
     6)   H§er  Education,  once fully developed, a  carefully
prepared,  complete  guidance document should be drafted (e.g.,
BPA,  !Si4a)  and  subjected to  scientific and user review.  The
final draft of this document should then be used as the basis
for regional  workshops  on the  application  of  ecoregion
mapping/use-attainability in regional and state programs.
The successful effort by  EPA  on  the preparation  and
dissemination of the Technical  Support Document for Water
Quality Based Toxics  Control (EPA,  1985a) should provide an
excellent example for this program.
                           - 39 -

-------
VII, WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
     Exposure assessment involves predictions of how much,
how long and how frequently  a receiving system is subject to
concentrations of chemicals  and/or effluents exceeding water
quality criteria.  The  spatial and temporal extent of aquatic
life exposure to toxicants will  vary depending on variations
in  the  assimilative  capacity  of the  receiving water  and
variations in effluent composition and  quantity.   Regulatory
agencies utilize wasteload  allocation (WLA) models in the
water quality based approach for toxics control to predict
exposures and to calculate the effluent quality required to
meet the  criteria and protect  the beneficial uses  of  the
receiving water.
     The  major responsibility  within EPA for conducting
exposure  assessment  research  and  developing  WI*A  models
resides with the Environmental Research Laboratory at  Athens.
This laboratory currently has six major  research activities
to  support wasteload allocation  and permitting from a single
chemical modeling perspective.  They include:
     *   Environmental  and  chemistry processes
         characterization and research
     *   Biodegradation and bioaceumulation processes
         characterization
     •   Expert systems  to  predict chemical/physical
         reactivity and transport properties
     •   Expert systems for  environmental management
     •   I^ad allocation models  development and  evaluation
     *   Technology transfer and user assistance
     Based on the materials  supplied  to the Subcommittee and
                             - 40 -

-------
on the presentations  at Duluth,  it  appears  that the
activities at Athens  effectively  address the major research
and development needs related to exposure assessment and
wasteload allocations.  The development of  expert systems  to
assist users  (i.e., permit writers  and environmental decision
makers)  is  an important area  which  the  Subcommittee
recommends for a high priority in allocation of resources.
For the Agency's water {juality based toxic  controls program
to succeed, permit writers must be able to effectively use
environmental fate and load allocation  models.  These models
are  complex  and require significant  understanding and
experience on the part of the user.  Expert systems provide
an effective means  of transferring the  knowledge and skills
of environmental fate scientists and modelers to the user.
                           - 41 -

-------
VIII.  METHODS STANDARDIZATION
A.   -Field Methods
     One of the more difficult endpoints to define  is the
effect of a  toxicant on ecosystems.   Though difficult to
obtain,  ecological scientists  have tested  several  measures
that  offer  some hope  of assessing ecosystem effects.
Research is needed, however, to quantify these effects and
identify additional measures.
     Ecosystem attributes can be  categorized into three
groups:   1)  state variables which  encompass such structural
attributes as standing  biomass, species richness, species
diversity,  species  importance and trophic level's; 2) process
variables which  include such attributes as rates of  uptake
from  one  trophic  level  to another,  and rates of
photosynthesis,  respiration, and metabolism;  and 3)  control
variables which  control  the rates at which processes proceed.
A keystone species controls the structure of the ecosystem
and in so doing controls the processes.
     The Subcommittee encourages the Agency to continue to
develop field methods to assess the impacts of toxic
chemicals on  aquatic life.
     The reemphasis on measuring and alleviating impacts to
biological systems further demonstrates the need to develop
methods to characterize and measure  impacts.  It also
focuses,  as has  EPA's  acid deposition  program,  attention on
the need for  long-term monitoring of ecosystems. The value
of documented historical, data bases  cannot be overemphasized.
                           - 42 -

-------
B.   Basic Biology of Test Grgansisms
     The  role of  methods standardization, quality assurance,
and technology transfer  in  the  water  quality based approach
to toxics control should not be underestimated.   The
development  of the Ceriodaphnia dubia seven  day toxicity test
should have  reinforced the  necessity to develop programs to
produce information on the basic biology (e.g., physiology,
pathology,  nutrition and ecology) of test organisms, the
methods to culture and test the organisms, and to transfer
the methodology to potential users.  It is also important to
continue  to  seek  new species,  or modify methods for existing
species,  as a means to add to the collection  of organisms
satisfactory  for use in evaluations of aquatic ecosystems.
c.   Publication of Standardized Methods
     The  research  and development activities  at the
Environmental Monitoring Support Laboratory at Cincinnati
have provided valuable data germane to the water quality
program.  One important contribution has been the development
and publication of standardized methodologies  for  effluent
biomonitoring.  Activities at EMSL Cincinnati that warrant
continued support  include additional  evaluation and
            *.
standardization of short-term effluent toxicity tests with
other saltwater and  freshwater organisms; the development  of
new and rapid  toxicity test methods;  the  establishment  of
additional  reference  toxicants for determining  toxicity test
precision? and the  completion of new toxicity testing method
manuals.   Because  of  EPA's increased emphasis on the
                        - 43 -

-------
environmental  and regulatory importance of sediment-
associated  toxicants,  the development and standardization of
test methods for evaluating sludges, leachates, sediments,
and hazardous wastes appear to be especially relevant.
                          - 44 -

-------
IX,   AREAS RELATED TO THE WATER QUALITY BASED APPROACH TO
     TOXIC CONTROLS NEEDING ATTENTION
A.  "Nonpoint Sources
     In many parts of the country, pollution  from nonpoint
sources is  a more serious problem than pollution from point
sources.  Programs  to monitor,  assess,  and control  point
source pollution are well established,  but many states are
only beginning  to develop nonpoint source pollution control
strategies.  Most of the research programs at the  EPA
research laboratories have been  directed toward the control
of point source related problems.
     The Subcommittee recognizes the importance of  dealing
with the nonpoint source  pollution problem if the nation is
to achieve  the national goal of fishable-swimmable water
wherever attainable.  The Subcommittee also is  aware  that, in
may  respects,  the  control  of  nonpoint source  pollution
represents  a greater challenge than  controlling  point
sources.  The Subcommittee recommends that SPA  expand its
research effort in  nonpoint source pollution and  has
identified  the following  issues as needing research priority:
     *   What  are the impacts to aquatic communities fron
         the runoff of pesticides, herbicides,  and other
         toxics   from nonpoint  sources , considering  the
         intensity, duration,  and frequency of exposure?
     *   What  are the loading dynamics of nonpoint source
         toxics  to  streams in a  given watershed?
                         - 45 -

-------
     •   What water quality characteristics are the best for
         monitoring nonpoint source pollution over the long-
         term?
     •   What are the appropriate water quality criteria for
         toxics and conventional  pollutants for assessing
         nonpoint source pollution?
     *   Will  the implementation  of  best management
         practices  in a watershed  to protect surface waters
         from  nonpoint sources have  a negative impact on
         area ground water?
B.   Technology  Transfer
     The Subcommittee  realizes that the water  quality based
approach requires a higher degree of technical expertise than
previous efforts.   Therefore, a need exists for the EPA to
inform, educate and provide technical assistance to state
regulators  and  industries  to incorporate this  approach into
their pollution control programs.  Specific assistance is
needed ins  1) calculating water quality criteria following
the EPA prescribed  method? 2) incorporating the two number
criteria into usable programs; 3) developing guidance on how
to use the water quality  advisory concept; 4) determining
use-attainability?  5)  calculating  wasteload allocations; 6)
establishing  routine use of computer models in wasteload
allocations;  7) identifying  sources of  toxicityi  and 8)
implementing  of the Technical Support Document for Water
Quality Based  Toxics Control.
     Successful  attainment of the national goals contained in
the Clean Water Act  depend greatly  upon implementing this new
technology. Therefore, a  commitment needs  to be  made to
                            _ 46 _

-------
transfer this  technology.   Because this  activity is  so
important, 1PA should consider constituting  a  dedicated team
of technology transfer experts to prepare and present the
approach in a comprehensive program to the user community.
The  format  could take  the form of guidance manuals,
workshops,  and seminars.  Representatives from  industry and
state regulatory agencies should participate.  The program
goal  should be the  education  of all parties concerned,
especially  individuals at the state level  who would not
ordinarily be given the opportunity to participate because of
financial constraints,
C.   Sediments
     Based  on a  review of materials  supplied to  the
Subcommittee and the presentations at the  Duluth meeting, it
is evident  that EPA needs to direct more  attention toward
coordinating the  water quality based approach for toxics
control  with efforts  to develop sediment criteria  for
chemicals.   Water  and sediments  in aquatic ecosystems
interact via abiotic and biotic mechanisms.   While often
viewed  as  separate  environmental  compartments  from an
environmental  fate and modeling perspective,  it  is  well
documented  that  the concentration of chemicals in water
affects the  concentration of chemicals in the sediments. The
reverse is also true.
     The degree of interaction depends on the chemical, water
quality  and physical/chemical characteristics of  the
sediments.   Since  the objective of the water quality  based
approach is  to establish discharge limits and/or determine
                       - 47  -

-------
allowable  instream contaminant concentrations,  it is
essential  to  incorporate as part of  the approach an
assessment  of  the potential  effects  of an effluent on
sediment  quality and associated  benthic organisms.   The
present efforts are totally directed to assessing exposure
and effects  in  water.   An assumption  is  made that protection
of water column associated organisms will protect benthic
organisms.  The scientific basis for this assumption is not
well developed.
     The Agency needs to better coordinate and integrate its
efforts between those staff developing sediment criteria for
chemicals and the scientists at the environmental research
laboratories that participated in the development of water
quality criteria.  Finally, EPA should consider factoring
into the  water  quality based approach sediment interactions
with effluents,  and the role of sediments  in influencing the
fate and effects of chemicals.
     If EPA  does not factor sediments  into the water  quality
based  approach,  it faces  a real  danger of misjudging an
effluent as having no effect on the  aquatic ecosystem  based
on  water column focused assessment  methods.  It could
subsequently discover that, because of  the nature of the
chemical constituents and the nature  of  the sediments in the
receiving  system, toxicants build  up  to harmful  levels that
adversely impact benthic organisms and  organisms associated
with the water sediment interface.   The  Subcommittee
recommends that EPA explore this issue more seriously.
                          - 48 -

-------
D,    Biotechnology
     The Subcommittee notes that the program contains nothing
related to  the  important issue of biotechnology and  its
environmental impact.   With  the excellent water quality-
expertise available at  the Duluth laboratory  it would be
prudent for EPA to have some of its  staff  involved in
biotechnology  environmental impact analyses.    The
Subcommittee recommends  that EPA consider what role  the
Duluth laboratory personnel  could play in this important
national  issue.  Likewise,  scientists  at  the Gulf Breeze  ERL
should be  involved in  the  water quality  based approach
research activities.
E.    Saltwater
     During  the subcommittee's  review,  it  was very clear that
the  Agency has  not  incorporated marine and estuarine
ecosystems into its research  and development efforts.  The
reasons  for this omission are not clear.  However,  from a
conceptual perspective the Subcommittee sees no reason why
the water quality based  approach should not be applied to
marine and  estuarine ecosystems.  It is apparent  from the
Sixth  Draft of  Strategic Five Year Plan  for Freshwater
Ecological  Processes and Effects Research that the Athens,
Corvallis  and  Duluth  laboratories  have  effectively
incorporated research and development  activities related to
the  water quality based approach into their future plans.
The  Subcommittee  cojnnends this effort, but  it  is essential
to coordinate research  efforts on the water quality based
approach with marine and estuarine ecosystems.  Methods for
                        - 49 -

-------
rapidly assessing the  fate  and effects of  effluents
discharged into saltwater environments applicable to the
water  quality  based approach,  and  models to estimate
exposures and wasteload allocations,  need  to be developed
along with freshwater approaches.
F.   Monitoring
     It is important to know that  any effort once applied  is
effective.  The attenpts  to do this in the water quality
criteria area  has  been at best superficial.  The  President's
Council on Environmental Quality  has traditionally produced
an annual state of the environment  nsessage.  During those
administrations  when the Council  carried a  higher priority,
this environmental message was designed to give a general
impression of environmental quality  and  did not provide
specific  analysis to  the  point where one could gauge the
degree  of impact of  a  specific  regulatory  action.   The
Environmental  Protection Agency  was also charged  in the 1972
Clean Water Act Amendments to produce a biennial National
Water Quality  Inventory.  This effort relies heavily on  the
states to provide  the information which is often  incomplete.
     EPA should  test its strategies in water  quality criteria
formulation with  a monitoring program based on a set  of
randomly selected streams  in the United states with a view
for following  guideline and criteria  formulation  application
and their effects  on water quality.
                         - 50 -

-------
X.   Literature Cited
Bergman,  H.L»,  R.A.  Kimerle,   and A.W.  Maki,  1986,
     En v i ronmenta1 Hazard Assessment of Effluents,  Pergamon
     Press, New fork, 366 p.
Cairns,  John Jr.,  K.L.   Dickson  and A.M.  Maki,  1978.
     Estimating  the Hazard  of Chemical  Substances to Aquatic
     Life,  STP 657.   American  Society  for Testing  and
     Materials,  Philadelphia, PA  278 p.
Dickson, K.L., A.W. Maki and J. Cairns,  Jr*, 1979.  Analyzing
     the Hazard  Evaluation  Process,   American  Fisheries
     Society, Washington,  D.C.  1S9 p.
Dickson,  K.L.  and J.H. Rodgers,  Jr.,  1986.   Assessing the
     Hazards of Effluents in the Aquatic Environment, in
     525[il£!121£S^*A M51^I§ £sjse_ssinent of EfflHES^l*  H-L*
     Bergman et al«, eds,   Pergamon Press,  New York,  336  p.
Gilford,  J.H,  3.9S5.  Environmental Effects Assessment  of New
     Chemicals  ,Under  the Toxic  Substances  Control  Act.
     Summer National Meeting, American Institute of  Chemical
     Engineers,  Seattle, WA,
Jaworski,  N.A.  and D.I.  Mount, 1985.  Use  of Statistical
     Information to Improve Compatibility Between the Various
     Components  of the Water  Quality-based  Approach,  in
     Aguatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment, R*D.  cardwell,
     R. t»urdy and R.C. Bahner, eds.  Seventh Symposium, ASTM
                             - 51 -

-------
     STP 854, American Society for Testing and  Materials,
     Philadelphia,  PA,  pp. 565-573.
Kimerle, R,A.f  1986,  Has the Water Quality Criteria Concept
     Outlived Its  Usefulness.   Environ. Toxico. and. chem.,
     5:113-115,
Mount,  D.I.,  A.E.  Steen  and T.J.  Norberg-King,  1985.
     Validation of Effluent and Ambient Toxicity  Testing for
     Predicting Biological  Impact  on Five  Mile CreeK,
     Birmingham,  Alabama.  EPA/600/8-5/015.
National Academy of Sciences,  1972.  Water Quality  Criteria.
     EPA R3-73-033,
U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, 1976.  Qua1ity Criteria
     for Water. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,  Science Advisory Board,
     1980.  Report on Water Quality Criteria for Protection
     Of Aquatic Life and Human  Health.  Washington,  D.C,
U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency,  1984a.  Water Quality
     Standards Handbook.   Office of Water Regulations and
     Standards (WH-585),  Washington, D.C.
U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency, 19S4b.  Report on site
     Specific Water Quality Criteria*   Washington,  D.C.
U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, 19S5a.  Technical
     Support Document for Water Quality Based Toxics Control.
     Office of Water, Washington,  D.C.
                             - 52 -

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board,
     198Sb,  Report on Water QMlIltY Criteria.  Washington
     D.C.
U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,  1985c.  Guidelines for
     Deriving National Water Quality Criteria.   Washington,
     D.C.
                          - 53 -

-------