Voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy Prepared by: Chesapeake Bay Program's Pollution Prevention and Point Source Workgroup Of the Toxics Subcommittee To Address: The Zero Release Objective in the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement and The Mixing Zone Phase Out Goal in the Toxics 2000 Strategy Draft Date: August 10, 2001 ------- The following text is quoted from the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement and the Toxics 2000 Strategy to provide the reader with the origin of the decision to seek the voluntary elimination of mixing zones by point sources discharging persistent or bioaccumulative toxics in permitted concentrations greater than the applicable water quality standard at "end of pipe". These are final and approved commitments by the Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. Chesapeake 2000 Agreement Commitment: "Through continual improvement of pollution prevention measures and other voluntary means, strive for zero release of chemical contaminants from point sources, including air sources. Particular emphasis shall be placed on achieving, by 2010, elimination of mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics" Toxics 2000 Strategy Commitment: To accomplish this objective, the signatories commit to: Mixing Zone Phase Out ^Strive to meet water quality standards for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants at the point of discharge through continual improvement of pollution prevention measures and other voluntary means. • By 2001, establish a baseline for the facilities not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants and by 2003 and 2007 report on their progress in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge in order to eliminate mixing zones. • An initial emphasis shall be placed on phasing out mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants in the following areas: - Regions of Concern, - Areas of Emphasis, - 303(d) listed waters for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants, - Areas under finfish or shellfish advisories caused by persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants.1 1- Where field monitoring exists to support an advisory. ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 Background: A voluntary mixing zone phase out is one action of many needed to achieve the "zero release" goal that industries and Chesapeake Bay stakeholders have agreed to in the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement. Addressing mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics will result in the reduced potential for acute and chronic impacts to aquatic resources and human health. The advantage of using voluntary means gives point source dischargers the opportunity to choose how and when to phase out their mixing zones. Who created this strategy? The Pollution Prevention and Point Source workgroup of the Toxics Subcommittee has been charged with developing this draft Voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy to achieve a voluntary elimination of point source mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics. A targeted approach for implementation: Persistent or bioaccumulative toxics: The Strategy defines persistent or bioaccumulative toxics as toxic contaminants that persist, contaminants that bioaccumulate, and contaminants that both persist and bioaccumulate. The workgroup is currently developing and selecting an initial list of contaminants for addressing this phase out. The list will be reviewed and updated on a periodic basis. Each jurisdiction or watershed will also prioritize efforts based on local water quality issues and risk. (See page 3 for the persistent or bioaccumulative list) Geographic Priorities: This strategy places an initial emphasis on phasing out mixing zones for persistent bioaccumulative toxics following the geographic focus of the Toxics 2000 Strategy. • Regions of Concern, • Areas of Emphasis • 303(d) listed waters for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants and • Areas under finfish or shellfish advisories caused by persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants. This effort will expand to the rest of the Chesapeake Bay watershed after the focus areas have been assessed. Facilities outside of these focus areas identified in the mixing zone baseline as not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminant will be evaluated in 2003 on their progress in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge. Based on that evaluation, each jurisdiction or watershed will also prioritize efforts based on local water quality issues and risk. In 2007, all 1 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 facilities will again be evaluated for progress in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge and further action plans developed as necessary. Mixing Zone Phase Out Priority: Recognition will be given to any facility that voluntarily phases out its mixing zone for any pollutant. In addition to the geographic priorities noted above and due to limited resources, the following list represents an additional prioritization component base on the mixing zone itself. 1. Mixing zones in compliance with permit limits based on the size of the mixing zone and the concentration or loading of contaminant 2. Mixing zones already attaining the water quality standard at end of pipe 3. Other releases above water quality standards (variances that exceed end of pipe water quality standards). For example, mixing zones in PA are prohibited instead they are called effluent compliance time areas. Variants of mixing zones will also be evaluated in this process. The impact of mixing to determine reasonable potential in the NPDES permitting process (e.g., the cause and effect of reasonable potential decision that results in no permit limit for a pollutant, the decision based on the high cost to make a marginal decrease in pollutant loading), administrative mixing assignments in reasonable potential determination and outfall relocation (all in relation to persistent or bioaccumulative toxics) will be reported on in 2003 and 2007. Any new mixing zone for persistent or bioaccumulative pollutants initiated after December 2000 will be evaluated and reported in 2003 and 2007. Implementing the Strategy: The strategy focuses on six main areas. An expanded explanation of each bullet point is provided in the following sections, which make up the steps for tracking strategy implementation success: 1. Profile the mixing zone situation in the Bay watershed and establish a baseline from which to measure progress. 2. Conduct outreach and education of point sources and the general public within the Bay watershed. 3. Provide technical assistance, identify technology needs and identify incentives as mixing zone elimination projects are initiated by point sources. 4. Provide recognition for point sources voluntarily phasing out mixing zones. 5. Close the deal- A step by step example of how to educate, encourage, secure, and complete a voluntary mixing zone phase out. 6. Tracking progress towards meeting the commitment 2 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 I. Profile the Mixing Zone Situation in the Bay and Establish a Baseline from which to Measure Progress A). Select a discrete list of chemicals to be used in the initial mixing zone Profiling and Baseline Determination: The following list of chemicals will be used in a baseline analysis to identify mixing zones that exist in the Chesapeake Watershed for these contaminants. This list is to be dynamic and represents a first cut for analysis purposes. Chemicals will be added as new data becomes availability to justify their inclusion on the list. The following list of contaminants were selected based on the following criteria that was applied to the EPA's PBT list and the Chesapeake Bay Program's Chemicals of Concern list (appendix A): A. Appearance on EPA's PBT list or Appendix A of the Toxics 2000 Strategy's Appendix A- Chemicals of Concern list. B. Must be discharged by a point source and have a water quality standard. C. The eight metals have been selected based on the Mixing Zone Task Force, work group expertise, and the Toxics Subcommittee input. D. Must be either a persistent contaminant or bioaccumulative contaminant, or both E. This list is only for data analysis purposes. 1. Mercury and its 4. Copper 9. PAHs 1 compounds 5. Arsenic 10. PCBs 2 2. Lead and its 6. Cadmium 11. Hexachlorobenzene compounds 7. Nickel 12. dioxins and furans 3. Chromium 8. Zinc 13. Octachlorostyrene By 2003, expand the analysis to a) facilities outside the initial focus area (throughout the Bay Watershed), and b) any new chemicals responsible in the areas of initial focus (see the four bullets under the mixing zone commitment) the initial focus areas and c) "non- limited" mixing zones. Final analysis will include all facilities "not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants" While the following banned substances are recognized as persistent or bioaccumulative toxics, they are not expected to have a mixing zone. Thus they will not be included in this analysis: Aldrin/Dieldrin Chlordane Toxaphene Mirex DDT, DDD, DDE Kepone 1- Polyaromatic hydrocarbons- a group of specific chemical contaminants 2- Polychlorinated Biphenyls- another group of chemical contaminants 3 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 B) The protocol to identify mixing zones that involves the selected list of chemicals includes the following: 1) The CBPO will construct a list of the point source facilities in the Bay watershed that are in our Toxics Point Source database that are major facilities. The State and District Jurisdictions will be responsible for conducting the analysis and tracking progress. Data will be shared with the Bay Program for tracking purposes. 2) Initially focus the analysis on the Regions of Concern (ROC) and the Areas of Emphasis (AOE) to determine a protocol. Apply protocol to 303(d) listed waters for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants and Areas under finfish or shellfish advisories caused by persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants. Finish this analysis by 2001. 3) By 2003, expand the analysis to a) facilities outside the initial focus area (throughout the Bay Watershed), and b) any new chemicals listed as being responsible for impairments in the areas of initial focus (see the four bullets under the mixing zone commitment) and c) "non-limited" mixing zones. Final analysis will include all facilities "not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants". 4 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 II. Conduct outreach and education of point sources and the general public within the Bay watershed. ACTION: Organize a series of topic specific Industry and POTW Roundtables to get buy-in from environmental managers and corporate senior level management on the voluntary mixing zone phase out and Chesapeake Bay Program goals. Topics to be addressed include: • Environmental benefits for the phase out • Industry benefits to phasing out mixing zones • Recognition • Incentives- (e.g., Can regulatory flexibility be explored?) • Barriers to pursuing a voluntary phase out • Funding opportunities • Industry Compliance policies • Pollution Prevention and treatment technologies Progress: Plan state specific roundtables to introduce the concept, initially. As follow up, explore other relevant topics. Invite all pertinent stakeholders to meetings. Schedule: Once facility lists are developed, roundtables can be organized by February of 2002 Funding: Businesses for the Bay, EPA/State Pollution Prevention Programs. Partners: Businesses for the Bay, EPA/State Pollution Prevention Programs. ACTION: Develop and provide presentations (i.e., industry-to-industry and Bay Program-to-industry) to Industry and Treatment Works about the voluntary mixing zone phase out in order to inform them of the Strategy, generate buy-in, and publicity. Presentations will include environmental need and benefits, industry benefits, barriers, technologies, and solutions to achieving the voluntary phase out as identified in the Industry Roundtables. Presentations will be tested first on the Pollution Prevention and Point Source Workgroup for accuracy and consistency of message and then tested on a focus group of industry trade associations or water federations for feedback before presenting the final product to industry. Presentations will take place throughout the duration of the Strategy and will include updates to keep industry informed of the progress on the mixing zone phase out effort. In addition, presentations will include information on how to obtain technical assistance from voluntary programs for mixing zone phase out as well as other pollution prevention areas (e.g., Businesses for the Bay, state assistance programs, etc.). 5 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 Progress: Development and trial testing in progress. Schedule: Complete by end of 2001. Funding: N/A. Partners: Point Source and Pollution Prevention Workgroup. ACTION: Create a fact sheet to distribute as an outreach/education tool to inform businesses and the public on the context of this targeted pollution prevention effort; include information on technical assistance opportunities. Draft follow up fact sheets/newsletters that target specific topic areas (e.g., incentives, regulatory flexibility, and contaminants ) Progress: Draft of initial fact sheet is completed. Waiting on Bay Program communications review Schedule: Develop mailing lists or e-mailing lists for distribution: utilize existing organizations such as AMSA, VAMWA, or others to disseminate. Send out after completion of strategy to begin the outreach efforts. Distribute as needed bi-annually and post on Chesapeake Bay Program web site. Funding: N/A Partners: Businesses for the Bay, Elizabeth River Project, Anacostia River Business Coalition, VAMWA, AMSA, and other community and industry organizations. Utilize listserv and other publication means. ACTION: Publish mixing zone articles in technical journals and highlight case studies for national recognition. Target group: consultants and other engineers. Progress: Once baseline and facility lists are established. Seek Bay watershed facilities or national case studies. Schedule: Submit an introductory article on the voluntary phase out. Submit follow up articles based on survey of facilities. Funding: N/A Partners: Point Source and Pollution Prevention Workgroup, Facilities with mixing zone phase out success. Watershed Outreach: ACTION: Submit articles periodically to newspapers, the Bay Journal and other Bay publications to educate citizens, communities, local governments and other partners about the voluntary mixing zones phase out. Articles will vary beginning with a background article talking about the baseline and overall concept. 6 ------- Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 An article has been produced in the June 2000 Bay Journal, which introduces the commitment and provides background on the origin of the commitment. Publish background/update article in Fall 2001 Bay Journal. Publish follow up articles to highlight accomplishments and progress. Promote first voluntary phase out in local/national media. N/A Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, Bay Program's Communication Office, State Communication Offices, and other journalists (e.g., Tom Horton, Baltimore Sun). ACTION: Create a webpage on the Bay Program's website that explains the mixing zone concept to citizens, businesses, and decision-makers. Site will cover the scope of this initiative, timeline, and other important information. Progress: Draft will be available soon for review Schedule: Completion date: Summer 2001 Funding: N/A. Partners: Pollution Prevention and Point Source Workgroup and the Toxics Subcommittee ACTION: Get air time on television to highlight the voluntary phase outs or other progress made by industry and the partners involved. Progress: Schedule: Determine appropriate case study to highlight and time to approach news stations. Funding: N/A Partners: Public television, major news stations, technical stations (e.g., Discovery), and the Bay Program Communications Team. 7 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 III. Provide technical assistance, identify technology needs and identify incentives as mixing zone elimination projects are initiated by point sources. ACTION: EPA/States will sponsor workshops to identify technology needs and areas for further pollution prevention (e.g. pretreatment programs and consumer product contamination) that would aid in implementation of pollution reduction activities and mixing zone elimination for contaminants identified in this Strategy. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: Schedule at least one per state to begin this initiative, could be part of initial roundtable discussions. A special session during the 2002 Zero Release Conference will contain a session on technology needs. 2002 Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Innovative Technologies Matrix Task Force, National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, State P2 Programs, and Businesses for the Bay. ACTION: CBPO will evaluate and synthesize the results of a EPA headquarters mixing zone phaseout cost analysis and industry and POTW case studies to provide examples of potential cost benefits and costs to voluntarily phase out a mixing zone. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: EPA HQ has conducted an economic analysis. We are working on getting that analysis to see what information can be utilized in our outreach/marketing/education efforts. Chesapeake Bay as well as national case studies will be sought. Workgroup needs to evaluate usability of this analysis by 2001 to judge whether it is usable for outreach and education of Bay Watershed industries. N/A EPA HQ and others ACTION: EPA/States will provide targeted technical assistance to interested facilities through existing programs to aid in the phase out of mixing zones. Progress: Existing programs need to be evaluated for applicability. Schedule: Funding: Partners: Businesses for the Bay Mentoring program, States non- regulatory pollution prevention assistance, and the Innovative Technologies Matrix. 8 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 ACTION: Utilize mentor programs and other peer to peer technical assistance programs to transfer technical assistance to those needing help Progress: Mixing zone mentors are being currently sought. Schedule: Mentors will help on an as needed basis. Funding: N/A Partners: Businesses for the Bay mentor network, Pennsylvania Pretreatment information exchange (PIX), and other mentor networks. ACTION: Establish and identify mixing zone phase out projects that demonstrate success and highlight economics, technology, pollution prevention action and transferability to other facilities. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: Need to locate national or Bay businesses/municipalities that have eliminated their mixing zones. ACTION: Explore regulatory flexibility and other incentives programs to determine what incentives can be offered to encourage the voluntary phase out of the contaminants identified in this Strategy. Determine whether trading, regulatory flexibility and other incentives can be explored in a voluntary system or be linked to this initiative. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: Evaluate existing voluntary and regulatory flexibility options for facilities from national and regional case studies. Schedule a forum to explore these with program managers, states, and facilities To be determined. To be determined. EPA Project XL, States Environmental Council, and State Agencies, etc. 9 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 IV. Provide Recognition for Facilities Phasing out MZ ACTION: Develop a process to recognize facilities committing to phase out mixing zones. Encourage facilities committed to mixing zone phase out to develop long term plans and milestones for press recognition and tracking of progress. Encourage P2 options before treatment technologies. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: States and Bay Program will explore various voluntary agreement options. States/District/EPA/CBPO ACTION: Recognize pollution prevention based voluntary phase outs of mixing zones through the Businesses for the Bay Awards program or through other pollution prevention programs awards systems. Progress: Schedule: Funding: Partners: Evaluate other award programs to recognize facilities completing a phase out. Businesses for the Bay workgroup will need to approve the award. Businesses for the Bay and other pollution prevention programs. 10 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 V Closing the Deal 1. How is contact initiated with a point source complying with water quality standards with a mixing zone? • Utilize the tools in the education and outreach section. States will utilize their own individual approach for contacting each facility. Options include: • Director of Chesapeake Bay Program/Governor/Industry member sends a letter to the facility manager discussing voluntary initiative and inviting facilities for personal meeting and some background information. At the meeting, State regulators, CBPO staff, non-regulatory pollution prevention experts and mentors discuss initiative. • Organize large statewide forums with all key players above to introduce the concept. 2. Who follows - up? • Probably a non-regulatory entity. Peer mentors or pollution prevention experts. • At some point, state permiters will evaluate the permit for the facility. 3. How does a voluntary project proposal to eliminate a mixing zone become an "agreement"? Is a project proposal "approved"? • States/CBPO can choose a variety of options: • Voluntary agreements to phase out mixing zone with goals and progress measuring points. • Voluntary agreements in a permit case-by-case basis. • Agreements in a Project XL or other regulatory flexibility option. VI Tracking Progress Towards Meeting the Commitment 1. How / who will track progress of the project proposal? • States will submit data and reports on progress on the voluntary phaseout initiative. The jurisdictions will explore a variety of ways to track and share data with CBPO. • CBPO will develop indicators and ways to recognize facilities based on outreach and education strategies/tools listed in previous sections. 2. How / who will initiate the system of recognizing project in - progress or complete (partially or completely successful)? • Partial success will be documented when a point source commits to phaseout out the mixing zone for a contaminant in this strategy. Progress will be measured by documentation of their actions taken and through monitoring data showing consistent reduced concentrations of the contaminant at end of pipe. Partial success will be determined when a facility is meeting the water quality standard. Other progress can be demonstrated through monitoring data. • Complete success for a facility occurs when the permit is renewed without a mixing zone. 11 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 Timeline for Measuring Progress and Achieving Goals: • August 23, 2001: Implementation Committee review of voluntary mixing zone phase out strategy. • September 31,2001: States identify facilities with mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics in the Regions of Concern and Areas of Emphasis. • December 31, 2001: Toxics Subcommittee establishes a baseline for the facilities not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants and selects performance measures to be tracked. • December 31, 2001 States complete identification of facilities with mixing zones in all priority geographic areas. • December 31, 2001 begin outreach with B4B roundtables in MD/VA/DC. 2002 • March 31, 2002: Contact established with 25% of facilities in the priority geographic regions identified in the baseline following implementation steps identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. • June 30, 2002: Contact established with 50% of facilities in the priority geographic regions identified in the baseline following implementation steps identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. • September 30, 2002: Contact established with 75% of facilities in the priority geographic regions identified in the baseline following implementation steps identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. • December 31, 2002: Contact established with 100% of facilities in the priority geographic regions identified in the baseline following implementation steps identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. 2003 • January 1 - December 31, 2003: continue implementation steps and measure progress. • December 31, 2003: Toxics Subcommittee reports on the progress of facilities not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge in order to eliminate mixing zones. 2004 • June 30, 2004: Contact established with 25% of facilities in the non-priority geographic areas identified in the baseline (refined in 2003) following implementation steps (as may be modified) identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. • December 31, 2004: Contact established with 50% of facilities in the non-priority geographic areas identified in the baseline (refined in 2003) following 12 ------- Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy IC Draft - September 18, 2001 implementation steps (as may be modified) identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. 2005 • June 30, 2005: Contact established with 75% of facilities in the non-priority geographic areas identified in the baseline (refined in 2003) following implementation steps (as may be modified) identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. • December 31, 2005: Contact established with 100% of facilities in the non-priority geographic areas identified in the baseline (refined in 2003) following implementation steps (as may be modified) identified in the voluntary Mixing Zone Phase Out Strategy. 2006-2007 • January 1 2006 - December 31, 2007: continue implementation steps and measure progress. • December 31, 2007: Toxics Subcommittee reports on the progress of facilities not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge in order to eliminate mixing zones. 2008-2009 • January 1 2008 - December 31, 2009: continue implementation steps and measure progress. 2010 Toxics Subcommittee reports on progress to achieve elimination of mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics. 13 ------- Append ix-A Back ground information on mixing zones What did we commit to? The Governors of MD, VA, and PA, the EPA Administrator, the Administrator of the Chesapeake Bay Commission and the Mayor of District of Columbia endorse voluntary phaseout of mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics in Chesapeake Bay Watershed. By signing both the Chesapeake Bay Agreement and the Toxics 2000 Strategy, the signatories are asking that point sources in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed commit to the following commitments: Zero Release Objective: To achieve the following Chesapeake 2000 Bay Agreement commitment "Through continual improvement of pollution prevention measures and other voluntary means, strive for zero release of chemical contaminants from point sources, including air sources. Particular emphasis shall be placed on achieving, by 2010, elimination of mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics. What are mixing zones? A mixing zone is an area where pollutants from a point source's discharge pipe are mixed with receiving waters to dilute the pollutants concentration. Inside a mixing zone, discharges of the pollutant are allowed to exceed the water quality limits set by a state. It is assumed that the brief exceedance of the water quality standard will not significantly impact aquatic organisms. At the boundary of the mixing zone, the concentration of the chemical must meet the water quality standard set for that particular body of water. The size of mixing zones is site specific and may vary. How a mixing zone is determined? Mixing zones are a legal regulatory option a point source can choose to comply with water quality standards. Mixing zones are site specific, scientifically based, developed according to applicable rules, regulations and policies and undergo rigorous regulatory review prior to issuance of a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by the states and EPA. In order to issue a NPDES permit with a mixing zone, the permitting authority has determined that 1) the mixing zone would not cause impairment of the receiving water, 2) There is no lethality to organisms passing through the mixing zone and 3) there are no significant health risks, considering likely pathways of exposure. A NPDES permit is issued in accordance with the administrative process act (APA) of the NPDES authority. How will we do it? To accomplish this objective, the signatories commit to: Mixing Zone Phase Out ^Strive to meet water quality standards for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants at the point of discharge through continual improvement of pollution prevention measures and other voluntary means. • By 2001, establish a baseline for the facilities not meeting water quality standards at the point of discharge for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants and by 2003 and 2007 report on their progress in reducing concentrations at the point of discharge in order to eliminate mixing zones. • An initial emphasis shall be placed on phasing out mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants in the following areas: Regions of Concern, Areas of Emphasis, - 303(d) listed waters for persistent or bioaccumulative chemical contaminants, - Areas under finfish or shellfish advisories caused by persistent or bioaccumulative chemical - contaminants. Emphasis is placed on voluntary pollution prevention Measures to achieve this goal. Point source facility What is a mixing zone? Concentration of contaminant briefly exceeds water quality standard within the mixing zone At the Edge of mixing zone the concentration of the contaminant meets the water quality standard 14 ------- Why would a point source have a mixing zone? Regulatory agencies have long recognized that the potential toxicity of an effluent will tend to decrease as it mixes with the receiving water body, simply due to dilution. Certain regulatory procedures have evolved to account for this tendency. These procedures result in less stringent permit effluent limitations compared to the limits that would be applied if dilution were ignored. In theory these procedures can be used to develop less stringent limits without compromising environmental protection. Concerns have arisen that this practice of recognizing a "mixing zone" may not be sufficiently protective in all cases, e.g. where sediment contamination may be an issue. While there are often significant costs that a discharger must bear when mixing zones are eliminated, it may be difficult to directly identify a specific environmental improvement that would be associated with the elimination of a particular mixing zone. Nonetheless, the Chesapeake Bay Program has determined that the concerns about the reduced level of protection associated with applying mixing zones are sufficiently high that dischargers should be encouraged to eliminate them whenever feasible, on a voluntary basis. Why phaseout mixing zones? A voluntary mixing zone phase out is one step toward achieving the "zero release" goal that industries have agreed to in the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement. By 2010, we are asking point sources to voluntarily eliminate all mixing zones for these contaminants throughout the watershed. In addition there are other benefits and reasons: Reduced acute and chronic water quality impacts Eliminating mixing zones will result in the reduced potential for acute and chronic impacts to aquatic resources from persistent or bioaccumulative toxics briefly exceeding water quality standards in the actual mixing zone. An elimination of mixing zones will also result in a reduction of mass loading to the ecosystem, especially to the sediment habitat, and a reduced potential long term bioaccumulative impacts from that facility. Bioaccumulative impacts from mercury and PCBs can be seen in the fish advisories which exist in many parts of the Bay for these substances, and in EPA's issuance of a nationwide advisory for freshwater fish containing mercury. Cont'd on column 2 Continued from column 1 Reduced loadings to sediment The 1999 Chesapeake Bay Basinwide Toxics Loading Inventory indicates that anywhere from 60-90% of metals such as copper and mercury are trapped in the tidal river sediments and not flushed out of the tidal rivers. The 1999 Toxics Characterization report indicates that in some Chesapeake Bay tidal rivers the concentrations of metals, pesticides, PAHs, and PCBs are elevated to levels that indicate probable adverse effects to aquatic resources. At these levels, these chemical contaminants may be bioavailable and impacting living resources. A voluntary phaseout of mixing zones is one step to reduce net loadings to the Chesapeake Bay sediments of metals and other persistent chemical contaminants. Limitations of the Mixing Zone designation There are also examples of shortcomings in the design of a mixing zone. One, mixing zones that have been established in State's permitting policies have still resulted in unintended benthic degradation in the mixing zone. Second, the design may not consider the cumulative load and effect from multiple sources of different contaminants within a mixing zone. Another, mixing zones may be subjected to extreme tide or environmental conditions, when these events occur violations of the water quality standard outside of the mixing zone edge may occur at no fault to the facility, but rather due to a limitation in the design for normal flow conditions. For these and other reasons, the Bay Program urges a voluntary phaseout of mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics. Benefits to the Facility Recognition for committing to voluntary phaseout: - Press for committing to voluntary phaseout - Potential pollution prevention awards and public exposure for environmental stewardship - Potential regulatory incentives What chemicals will we focus on? EPA's Great Lakes regulatory Mixing Zone phase out focuses on bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCC). The Chesapeake Bay Program will focus on some of the chemicals on the BCC list, but not others because these contaminants are not being released by point sources in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, although some of these "legacy contaminants" appear to be impacting living resources from other sources. Due to the State impaired water reports and the Toxics Characterization report this phaseout will also focus on metals. Data indicate these persistent toxics are potentially impacting aquatic living resources in the Chesapeake Bay tidal waters. Cont'd on next page column 1 15 ------- Cont'd from previous page, column 2 The final consensus based list for the voluntary phaseout of persistent or bioaccumulative toxics is under development. Additionally, an effort is underway to prioritise the chemicals to focus the phaseout. A preliminary very draft list of focus chemicals is: mercury and its compounds, lead and its compounds, chromium, copper, arsenic, cadmium, nickel, zinc, PAHs, PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, dioxins and furans, and octachlorostyrene. Where we will focus efforts? The Chesapeake Bay Agreement goal commits the Bay Program to voluntarily phase out mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. In the Toxics 2000 Strategy, it is further clarified by the Chesapeake Executive Council to initially focus on point sources with mixing zones for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics located in the watersheds of the Regions of Concern, the Areas of Emphasis, watersheds with a fish consumption advisory or watersheds listed as being impaired (on the 303 (d) list for each state). What is our early implementation strategy? A voluntary strategy to guide progress... The Bay Program, (EPA, state agencies, pollution prevention programs, environmental groups, publicly owned treatment works operators, and industry representatives), is working to identify areas to focus collective efforts of the Bay Program to achieve this commitment over the next ten years. The strategy contains the following focus areas: - Establishing a baseline of facilities - Education and outreach - Identify technological needs - Recognition and incentives - One on one targeting - Tracking progress What is EPA's Policy Stance on the National Mixing Zone Regulation? Currently, the Administration is not proposing a regulatory phaseout of mixing zones. They are currently evaluating standards and criteria and it appears that mixing zones will not be an issue or area for regulatory change. Other EPA initiatives related to the voluntary phaseout: EPA's PBT (persistent bioaccumulative toxics) initiative outlines a strategy to help reduce these contaminants from the environment as well as monitoring initiatives. Our effort should seek to coordinate with these initiatives. How do TMDLs affect this voluntary initiative? Total Maximum Daily Loads may require point source facilities to comply with stricter than water quality standards. The voluntary mixing zone phaseout may be one step for industries to get ahead of a proposed TMDL. However, this will be evaluated on a case by case basis. How will the State/Bay Program permitting offices handle new and renewal applications for mixing zones? It will be the jurisdictions policy to actively explore and encourage non-mixing zone options to new and renewal permit applications to mixing zones. For More Information Contact: Bob Steidel Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility 804-541-2210 bsteidel@hrwtf.org Bob Dunn DuPont 804-383-3895 Robert.L.Dunn@USA.dupont.com Allison Wiedeman US EPA- Chesapeake Bay Program Office 410-267-5733 wiedema n.a 11 i so \\d coa. gov Darin Crew Chesapeake Research Consortium 410-267-9860 crew.darin@epa.qov 16 ------- Appendix B Definitions for the Mixing Zone Voluntary Phaseout Strategy 303 (d) listed waters: The 1972 Clean Water Act requires the listing of streams, rivers, lakes and estuaries that do not meet water quality standards. States must submit a list of these "water quality limited" waters to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) every two years. For the mixing zone strategy, waters targeted for the phaseout will focus on those waters listed as impaired for chemical contaminants or PoBTs. Areas of Emphasis: These are tidal rivers of the Chesapeake Bay where available ambient data indicate that there is a significant potential for a chemical contaminant related problem within the river segment. This designation is based on the report: Targeting Toxics: A Characterization Report - A Tool forDirecting Management & Monitoring Actions in the Chesapeake Bay's Tidal Rivers. The report can be read at http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/792.pdf Areas under finfish or shellfish advisories: Waterbodies established by States where the analysis of fish, crab and shellfish data has identified where contaminants pose a health concern to humans consuming them. The state then establishes consumption advisories for those contaminants to protect human health. For the mixing zone strategy, only areas under advisories for chemical contaminants will be considered in the priority area designation. Businesses for the Bay: A voluntary team of forward-looking businesses, industries, government facilities and other organizations within the Chesapeake Bay watershed committed to implementing pollution prevention in daily operations and reducing the releases of chemical contaminants, nutrients, and other wastes. Chesapeake 2000 Agreement: A voluntary agreement that will guide the next decade of restoration in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Signed by the Executive Council - Maryland Governor Parris N. Glendening; Pennsylvania Governor Thomas J. Ridge; Virginia Governor James S. Gilmore, III; District of Columbia Mayor Anthony A. Williams; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol M. Browner; and Chesapeake Bay Commission, Bill Boiling. Chesapeake Bay Program: The Chesapeake Bay Program is the unique regional partnership that's been directing and conducting the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay since the signing of the historic 1983 Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The Chesapeake Bay Program partners include the states of Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia; the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative body; the Environmental Protection Agency, representing the federal government; and participating advisory groups. 17 ------- Chesapeake Bay Watershed: The 64,000 square miles of land drained by the hundreds of thousands of rivers, creeks and streams crisscrossing parts of New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia and the entire District of Columbia. End of the pipe: The point where the effluent from a point source enters the receiving water body. This is normally defined in a NPDES permit. Fact sheet: A document which explains the background of a subject. Industry compliance policies: A policy set by the company, facility, or point source which outlines the philosophical attitude towards meeting environmental regulations. Compliance policies determine what actions are taken when environmental violations occur. Mixing zone: A mixing zone is an area where pollutants from a point source's discharge pipe are mixed with receiving waters to dilute the pollutant's concentration. Inside a mixing zone, discharges of the pollutant are allowed to exceed the water quality limits set by a state. It is assumed that the brief exceedance of the water quality standard will not significantly impact aquatic organisms. At the boundary of the mixing zone, the concentration of the chemical must meet the water quality standard set for that particular body of water. Non-limited mixing zones: A non-regulatory use, mainly for permitting decisions, when mixing of the point source discharge with the receiving water is evaluated to either establish effluent limits or determine the reasonable potential for effluent limits for persistent or bioaccumulative toxics. Persistent or bioaccumulative toxics: A specific list of chemical contaminants which exhibit the properties of 1) being persistent in the aquatic environment and having the potential to cause toxic impacts (certain metals), 2) being bioaccumulative to organisms in the aquatic environment and having the potential to cause toxic impacts, or 3) being bioaccumulative and persistent in the aquatic environment while having the potential to cause toxic impacts to living resources (e.g. mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls). For this strategy this list of chemical contaminants will be dynamic depending on available data and science and will be the focus of the voluntary mixing zone phaseout. 18 ------- Point sources: A source of pollution that can be attributed to a specific physical location; an identifiable, end of pipe "point". For this strategy, a point source shall be considered a publicly owned treatment work, an industrial/commercial facility, or federal facility having an NPDES discharge permit to waters within the Chesapeake Bay. Pollution prevention: An activity that reduces or eliminates pollution at the source rather than through control or treatment technologies at the end of the pipe or stack. Pollution prevention (P2) promotes a whole facility, multimedia (air, waste, and water) perspective in order to avoid the transfer of pollutants from one waste stream to another. Pollution Prevention and Point Source Workgroup: A workgroup under the Toxics Subcommittee charged with implementing and coordinating the point source commitments of the Toxics 2000 Strategy, including implementing the mixing zone strategy. Regions of Concern: In these tidal rivers, available ambient data indicate that there are probable chemical contaminant related problems. This designation is based on the report: Targeting Toxics: A Characterization Report - A Tool forDirecting Management & Monitoring Actions in the Chesapeake Bay's Tidal Rivers. The report can be read at http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/792.pdf Risk: The probability of injury, disease, or death from exposure to a chemical agent or a mixture of chemicals. Toxics 2000 Strategy: A Chesapeake Bay watershed strategy for chemical contaminant reduction, prevention and assessment. The strategy outlines more specific actions to meet the Chesapeake 2000 Bay Agreement Commitments. Toxics Subcommittee: The Subcommittee is charged with implementing the Toxics 2000 strategy signed by the Chesapeake Executive Council in December 2000. The Subcommittee is responsible for the interjurisdictional design, coordination, and implementation of ongoing and future efforts to identify, assess and control existing sources of chemical contaminants, better understand their impacts on the Bay's living resources and human health, and prevent future sources of chemical contaminants from causing impacts on the Chesapeake Bay system. The Toxics Subcommittee reports to the Implementation Committee of the Bay Program. 19 ------- Voluntary means: Actions not required by law, but go above and beyond the law. For the mixing zones strategy, all pollution prevention/treatment technologies implemented or voluntary agreements signed to meet this goal constitute a voluntary mean. Water quality standard: Guidelines developed to protect the most sensitive designated "beneficial use" of a waterbody, this can be a numeric concentration of a pollutant in the water column. The Clean Water Act requires each state to designate "beneficial uses" and develop water quality standards to protect them. These beneficial uses include fisheries, aquatic life, wildlife, recreation, drinking water supplies, agriculture, irrigation, hydroelectric power and aesthetics. Examples of water quality characteristics for which standards have been set to protect beneficial uses include pH, dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, bacteria and toxics. Federal law requires protection of the most sensitive beneficial use in any river, stream or lake. Zero release of chemical contaminants: The concept of striving to achieve a no net release of chemical contaminants to the environment through pollution prevention. 20 ------- |