Chapter 4. Standards

Air Quality Standards

4.1SETTING STANDARDS Introduction

Section 109, 1970 CAA Amend-ments

Section 112, Hazardous Air Pollut-ants

Title III, 1990 CAA Amendments Ambient Concentration Limits

Derivation of Ambient ConcentrationLimits

Use of the RD Use of Occupational Exposure

Limits Use of Other Approaches

Compliance with ACLs Source and Ambient Sampling Air Dispersion Modeling Current Uses of ACLs

4.2TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS Standards Development Process Elements of an Emission Standard

Applicability Emission Limits Compliance Requirements Monitoring, Reporting, and Record

Keeping Ambient Air Quality Standards

Hazardous Air Pollution Standards NESHAP MACT/GACT

Other Technology Standards New Source Performance Stand-

ards BACT/LAER T-BACT RACT/CTG

4.3OTHER AIR STANDARDS State and Local Air Toxics Programs Air Toxics Control in Japan Air Toxics Control in Some European

Countries

Noise Standards

4.4NOISE STANDARDS Human Response to Noise Wildlife Response to Noise Occupational Noise Standards Land Use and Average Noise Level

Compatibility Traffic Noise Abatement Community Exposure to Airport

Noise Railroad Noise Abatement

4StandardsWilliam C. Zegel

©1999 CRC Press LLC

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM 85

Water Standards

4.5WATER QUALITY STANDARDS Legislative Activity ACLs Technology Standards Water Quality Goals Effluent Standards

Municipal Effluent Limits Industrial Effluents Storm Water Discharge

Toxic Pollutants

4.6DRINKING WATER STANDARDS Drinking Water Regulation

Maximum Contaminant LevelGoals

EPA Process for Setting Standards Public Participation

EPA Drinking Water and Raw WaterStandards

Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines European Economic Community Drinking

Water Directives Home Wells Bottled Water

4.7GROUNDWATER STANDARDS Groundwater Classifications Groundwater Standards Wellhead Protection

International Standards

4.8ISO 14000 ENVIRONMENTALSTANDARDS


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 186

IntroductionToday’s air quality standards have emerged from sections109 and 112 of the 1970 Clean Air Act (CAA)Amendments and Title III of the 1990 CAA Amendments.

SECTION 109, 1970 CAAAMENDMENTS

The 1970 CAA Amendments define two primary types ofair pollutants for regulation: criteria air pollutants and haz-ardous air pollutants. Under section 108, criteria pollu-tants are defined as those that “cause or contribute to airpollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endangerpublic health or welfare . . . the presence of which in theambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile orstationary sources.” Under section 109, the EPA identifiespollutants that meet this definition and prescribes nationalprimary air quality standards, “the attainment and main-tenance of which . . . allowing an adequate margin ofsafety, are requisite to protect the public health.”

National secondary air quality standards are also pre-scribed, “the attainment and maintenance of which . . . isrequisite to protect the public welfare from any known oranticipated effects associated with the presence of the airpollutant.” Welfare effects include injury to agriculturalcrops and livestock, damage to and the deterioration ofproperty, and hazards to air and ground transportation.The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)are to be attained and maintained by regulating station-ary and mobile sources of the pollutants or their precur-sors.

SECTION 112, HAZARDOUS AIRPOLLUTANTS

Under section 112, the 1970 amendments also require reg-ulation of hazardous air pollutants. A hazardous air pol-lutant is defined as one “to which no ambient air standardis applicable and that . . . causes, or contributes to, air pol-lution which may reasonably be anticipated to result in anincrease in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible,

illness.” The EPA must list substances that meet the defi-nition of hazardous air pollutants and publish nationalemission standards for these pollutants providing “an am-ple margin of safety to protect the public health from suchhazardous air pollutant[s].” Congress has provided littleadditional guidance, but identified mercury, beryllium, andasbestos as pollutants of concern.

TITLE III, 1990 CAA AMENDMENTS

Although the control of criteria air pollutants is generallyconsidered a success, the program for hazardous air pol-lutants was not. By 1990, the EPA regulated only sevenof the hundreds of compounds believed to meet the defi-nition of hazardous air pollutants.

Title III of the 1990 CAA Amendments completely re-structured section 112 to establish an aggressive new pro-gram to regulate hazardous air pollution. Specific pro-grams have been established to control major-source andarea-source emissions. Title III establishes a statutory listof 189 substances that are designated as hazardous air pol-lutants. The EPA must list all categories of major sourcesand area sources for each listed pollutant, promulgate stan-dards requiring installation of the maximum achievablecontrol technology (MACT) at all new and existing ma-jor sources in accordance with a statutory schedule, andestablish standards to protect the public health with anample margin of safety from any residual risks remainingafter MACT technology is applied.

Ambient Concentration LimitsAir pollution control strategies for toxic air pollutants arefrequently based on ambient concentration limits (ACLs).ACLs are also referred to as acceptable ambient limits(AALs) and acceptable ambient concentrations (AACs). Aregulatory agency sets an ACL as the maximum allowableambient air concentration to which people can be exposed.ACLs generally are derived from criteria developed fromhuman and animal studies and usually are presented asweight-based concentrations in air, possibly associatedwith an averaging time.


Air Quality Standards

4.1SETTING STANDARDS

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 187

The EPA uses this approach for criteria air pollutantsbut not for toxic air pollutants. The CAA Amendments of1970 require the EPA to regulate toxic air pollutantsthrough the use of national emission standards. The 1990amendments continue and strengthen this requirement.However, state and local agencies make extensive use ofACLs for regulatory purposes. This extensive use is be-cause, for most air pollutants, ACLs can be derived easilyand economically from readily available health effects in-formation. Also, the maximum emission rate for a sourcethat corresponds to the selected ACL can be determinedeasily through mathematical modeling. Thus, the regula-tor can determine compliance or noncompliance. Lastly,the use of ACLs relieves regulators from identifying andspecifying acceptable process or control technologies.

ACLs are frequently derived from occupational healthcriteria. However, ACLs are susceptible to challenge be-cause no technique is widely accepted for translating stan-dards for healthy workers exposed for forty hours a weekto apply to the general population exposed for twenty-fourhours a day. Another disadvantage of ACLs is that bothanimal and occupational exposures, from which health cri-teria are developed, are typically at concentrations greaterthan normal community exposures. This difference re-quires extrapolation from higher to lower dosages and of-ten from animals to humans.

DERIVATION OF AMBIENTCONCENTRATION LIMITS

ACLs are typically derived from health criteria for the sub-stance in question. They are usually expressed as concen-trations such as micrograms per cubic meter (mg/cu m).Health criteria are generally expressed in terms of dose—the weight of the pollutant taken into the body divided bythe weight of the body. To convert a dose into a concen-tration, assumptions must be made about average breath-ing rates, average consumption of food and water, and theamount of each that is available to the body (adsorptionfactors). The EPA has a generally accepted procedure forthis process (U.S. EPA 1988, 1989).

Other methods of deriving ACLs are based upon an ab-solute threshold (CMA 1988). These methods set ACLs atsome fraction of an observed threshold or establishedguideline. A margin of safety is generally added depend-ing on the type and severity of the effect on the body, thequality of the data, and other factors. Still other methodsdepend upon extrapolation from higher limits establishedfor other similar purposes.

The health criteria felt most appropriate for derivingACLs is the risk reference dose (RfD) established by theEPA (Patrick 1994). The EPA has developed RfDs for bothinhalation and ingestion pathways (U.S. EPA 1986). Theyrequire much effort to establish and are generally designedfor long-term health effects.

USE OF THE RfD

RfDs are developed for ingestion and inhalation exposureroutes. If a relevant inhalation RfD is available, regulatoryagencies should use it as the basis for deriving an ACL foran air pollutant. The EPA is currently deriving referencevalues for inhalation health effects in terms of microgramsper cubic meter. These risk reference concentrations (RfCs)provide a direct link with ACLs. Without more specific in-formation on inhalation rates for the target population,regulators frequently assume the volume of air breathedby an average member of a typical population to be 20cubic meters per day, which is considered a conservativevalue.

When an inhalation RfD is not available, regulatorsmust derive an ACL from another source. One approachis to use an ingestion RfD to estimate an RfC. However,this technique can be inaccurate because absorptionthrough the digestive system is different from absorptionthrough the respiratory system.

RfDs and RfCs are available through the EPA’sIntegrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Many state andlocal regulatory agencies use the EPA-derived RfDs andRfCs to establish ACLs. These reference values are avail-able through the EPA’s National Air Toxics InformationClearing House (NATICH). Because of the large numberof state and local agencies, NATICH does not always havethe latest information. Therefore, the practicing engineershould get the latest information directly from the localagency.

USE OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURELIMITS

In some cases, neither RfDs nor RfCs are available, andregulators must use another source of information to de-rive ACLs. Occupational limits, usually in the form ofthreshold limit values (TLVs) and permissible exposurelimits (PELs), are often used to establish ACLs. Both es-tablish allowable concentrations and times that a workercan be exposed to a pollutant in the work place. TLVs andPELs are particularly useful in establishing acute exposureACLs.

The American Conference of Governmental IndustrialHygienists (ACGIH) develops TLVs. Three types of TLVsare the time-weighted average (TLV-TWA), the short-termexposure limit (TLV-STEL), and the ceiling limit (TLV-C).The TLV-TWA is the time-weighted average concentra-tion for a normal eight-hour work day and forty-hourwork week to which almost all workers can be repeatedlyexposed without adverse effects. TLV-STELs are fifteen-minute time-weighted average concentrations that shouldnot be exceeded during the normal eight-hour work day,even if the TLV-TWA is met. TLV-Cs are concentrationsthat should never be exceeded.

PELs are established by the U.S. Occupational Safetyand Health Administration (OSHA) and are defined in


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 188

much the same way as the TLVs. OSHA adopted theACGIH’s TLVs when federal occupational standards wereoriginally published in 1974. Since that time, many of thevalues have been revised and published as PELs.

These occupational levels were developed for relativelyhealthy workers exposed only eight hours a day, fortyhours a week. They do not apply to the general popula-tion, which includes the young, the old, and the sick andwhich is exposed twenty-four hours a day, seven days aweek. However, using safety factors, regulators can useoccupational levels as a basis for extrapolation to com-munity levels. Different regulatory agencies use differentsafety factors.

USE OF OTHER APPROACHES

When no RfD has been derived, regulators can use thelevel at which no observed adverse effects have been found(NOAEL) or the lowest level at which adverse effects havebeen observed (LOAEL), with appropriate safety factors.These levels are similar in nature and use to the RfDs.Related levels are the no observed effect level (NOEL) andthe lowest observed effect level (LOEL), respectively. Othersources of information are the minimal risk level (MRL),the level that is immediately dangerous to life and health(IDLH), emergency response planning guidelines (ERPG),and emergency exposure guideline levels (EEGL) for spe-cific pollutants. These last four levels are for special situ-ations; for these levels to be useful in assessing danger tothe general public, regulators must severely attenuate themby safety factors. However, in the absence of other data,these levels can be useful in establishing an ACL or stan-dard.

A pollutant’s NOAEL is the highest tested experimen-tal exposure level at which no adverse effects are observed.The NOEL is the highest exposure level at which no ef-

fects, adverse or other, are observed. The NOEL is gener-ally less useful since factors other than toxicity can pro-duce effects.

A pollutant’s LOAEL is the lowest tested experimentalexposure level at which an adverse health effect is ob-served. Since the LOAEL does not convey information onthe no-effect level, it is less useful than the NOAEL, butit can still be useful. The LOEL is the lowest level at whichany effect is observed, adverse or not. As a result, it is gen-erally less useful than the NOEL.

MRLs are derived by the Agency for the ToxicSubstances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), which wasformed under the Comprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of1980. The CERCLA requires ATSDR to prepare and up-date toxicological profiles for the hazardous substancescommonly found at superfund sites (those sites on theNational Priority List) that pose the greatest potential riskto human health. As part of the profiles, ATSDR derivesMRLs for both inhalation and ingestion exposures.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety andHealth (NIOSH) developed IDLHs primarily to select themost effective respirators to use in the work place. IDLHsare the maximum pollutant concentration in the air fromwhich healthy male workers can escape without loss of lifeor suffering irreversible health effects during a maximumthirty-minute exposure. Another way of thinking of IDLHsis that if levels are above these standards, respirators mustbe used to escape the area of contamination.

The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA)has derived ERPGs at three levels for several substances.Level 1 is the lowest level; it represents the maximum pol-lutant concentration in the air at which exposure for onehour results in mild, transient, adverse health effects. Level2 is the concentration below which one hour of exposuredoes not result in irreversible or serious health effects or


TABLE 4.1.1 SUMMARY OF NAAQSs

Standard (@ 25°C and 760 mm Hg)

Pollutant Averaging Time Primary Secondary

Particulate matter, Annual arithmetic mean 50 mg/m3 Same as primary10 micrometers (PM10) 24-hour 150 mg/m3 Same as primarySulfur dioxide (SO2) Annual arithmetic mean 0.03 ppm (80 mg/m3) Same as primary

24-hour 0.14 ppm (365 mg/m3) Same as primary3-hour None 0.5 ppm (1300 mg/m3)

Carbon monoxide (CO) 8-hour 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) Same as primary1-hour 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) Same as primary

Ozone (O3) 1-hour per day 0.12 ppm (235 mg/m3) Same as primaryNitrogen dioxide (NO2) Annual arithmetic mean 0.053 ppm (100 mg/m3) Same as primaryLead (Pb) Quarterly arithmetic 1.5 mg/m3 Same as primary

mean

Source: CFR Title 40, Part 50. Environmental Protection Agency. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1993.Notes: All standards with averaging times of 24 hours or less, and all gaseous fluoride standards, are not to have more than one actual or expected exceedance per

year.mg/m3 or mg/m3 5 microgram or milligram per cubic meter

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 189


in symptoms that could impair the ability to take protec-tive action. Level 3 is the concentration below which mostindividuals could be exposed for one hour without expe-riencing or developing life-threatening health effects.

The National Research Council for the Department ofDefense has developed EEGLs. These levels may be un-healthy, but the effects are not serious enough to preventproper response to emergency conditions to prevent greaterrisks, such as fire or explosion. These peak levels of ex-posure are considered acceptable in rare situations, butthey are not acceptable for constant exposure.

Compliance with ACLsACLs are useful tools for reducing pollution levels. Theyalso establish a framework to prioritize actions in reduc-ing pollution. Generally, ACLs require sources to reduce

their pollutant emissions to a level that assures that theACL is not exceeded at the property boundary or othernearby public point. If a monitoring method is establishedfor a pollutant, a regulator can demonstrate complianceusing mathematical dispersion modeling techniques ofmeasured emissions or ambient monitoring.

SOURCE AND AMBIENT SAMPLING

Regulators can sample emissions at the source by with-drawing a sample of gases being released into the atmos-phere. The sample can be analyzed by direct measurementor by extraction and analysis in the field or in a labora-tory. Flow rate measurements also are needed to establishthe rate of a pollutant’s release by the source. In a similarmanner, the ambient air can be sampled and analyzed byextraction and analysis or by direct measurement.

Alabama TLV/40 (one-hour), TLV/420 (annual)Alaska Case-by-case analysisArizona 0.0075 3 Lower of TLV or TWAArkansas TLV/100 (twenty-four-hour), LD50/10,000California Risk assessment usedColorado Generally uses risk assessmentConnecticut TLV/50 low toxicity

TLV/100 medium toxicityTLV/200 high toxicity

Delaware TLV/100Florida Ranges from TLV/50 to TLV/420

depending upon the situationGeorgia TLV/100 (eight-hour), noncarcinogens

TLV/300 (eight-hour), carcinogensHawaii TLV/200Idaho Case-by-case analysis

BACT can be requiredIllinois Case-by-case analysisIndiana Case-by-case analysisIowa Case-by-case analysisKansas TLV/100 (twenty-four-hour), irritants

TLV/420 (annual), serious effectsKentucky Case-by-case analysisLouisiana TLV/42 (one-hour) screening levelMaine Case-by-case analysisMaryland Varies, TLV/100 (eight-hour)Massachusetts Health-based programMichigan TLV/100 (eight-hour)Minnesota TLV/100 (eight-hour)Mississippi TLV/100 (ten-minute)Missouri TLV/75 to TLV/7500 (eight-hour)Montana TLV/42Nebraska Case-by-case analysisNevada TLV/42 (eight-hour) and case-by-case

analysis

New Hampshire TLV/100 (twenty-four-hour) low toxicityTLV/300 (twenty-four-hour) medium

toxicityTLV/420 (twenty-four-hour) high

toxicityNew Jersey Case-by-case analysisNew Mexico TLV/100 (eight-hour)New York TLV/50 (eight-hour) low toxicity

TLV/300 (eight-hour) high toxicityNorth Carolina TLV/10 (one-hour) acute toxicity

TLV/20 (one-hour) systemic toxicityTLV/160 (twenty-four-hour) chronic

toxicityNorth Dakota TLV/100 (eight-hour)Ohio TLV/42Oklahoma TLV/10, TLV/50, TLV/100Oregon TLV/50, TLV/300Pennsylvania TLV/42, TLV/420, TLV/4200 (one-week)Rhode Island Case-by-case analysisSouth Carolina TLV/40 (eight-hour) low toxicity

TLV/100 (eight-hour) medium toxicityTLV/200 (eight-hour) high toxicity

South Dakota Case-by-case analysisTennessee TLV/25, screeningTexas TLV/100 (thirty-minute)

TLV/1000 (annual)Utah TLV/100 (twenty-four-hour)Vermont TLV/420 (eight-hour)Virginia TLV/60 (eight-hour), TLV/100Washington TLV/420West Virginia Case-by-case analysisWisconsin TLV/42 (twenty-four-hour), screeningWyoming TLV/4

TABLE 4.1.2 STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY USE OF AMBIENT CONCENTRATION LIMITS

State Derivation of ACL State Derivation of ACL

Source: David R. Patrick, ed, 1994, Toxic air pollution handbook (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 190


used an array of ACLs for regulating toxic air pollutants.Examples are shown in Table 4.1.2.

—William C. Zegel

ReferencesChemical Manufacturers Association (CMA). 1988. Chemicals in the

community: Methods to evaluate airborne chemical levels.Washington, D.C.

Patrick, D. R. ed. 1994. Toxic air pollution handbook. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1986. Integrated RiskInformation System (IRIS) database. Appendix A, Reference dose(RfD): Description and use in health risk assessments. Washington,D.C.: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment.

———. 1989. Exposure factors handbook. EPA 600/8-89-043.Washington, D.C.: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment.

———. 1988. Superfund exposure assessment manual. EPA 540/1-88-001, OSWER Directive 9285.5-1. Washington, D.C.: Office ofEmergency and Remedial Response.

AIR DISPERSION MODELING

The regulating agency can estimate the concentrations ofpollutants from a source to which a community is exposedby performing mathematical dispersion modeling if theyknow the rate at which the pollutants are being released.They can also model the ACL backwards to establish themaximum allowable rate of release at the pollutant source.

The EPA has guidelines for using the most popular mod-els (U.S. EPA 1986). Models are available for various me-teorological conditions, terrains, and sources. Meteorolo-gical data are often difficult to obtain but crucial foraccurate results from mathematical models.

CURRENT USE OF ACLs

The NAAQSs in Table 4.1.1 are ACLs derived from thebest available data. State and local regulators have also

4.2TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS

Technology standards, used to control point and areasources of air pollutants, are based upon knowledge of theprocesses generating the pollutants, the equipment avail-able to control pollutant emissions, and the costs of ap-plying the control techniques. Technology standards arenot related to ACLs but rather to the technology that isavailable to reduce pollution emissions. In the extreme, atechnology standard could be to ban a process, product,or raw material.

Standards Development ProcessIn response to the requirements of the 1970 CAAAmendments, the EPA established a model process to de-velop technology standards. Because of their strong tech-nological basis, technology standards are based on rigor-ous engineering and economic investigations. The EPAprocess consisted of three phases:

• Screening and evaluating information availability• Gathering and analyzing data• Making decisions

In the first phase, the regulating agency reviews the af-fected source category or subcategory, gathers available in-formation, and plans the next phase. In the second phase,the processes, pollutants, and emission control systemsused by facilities in this category are evaluated. This phase

includes measuring the performance of emission controlsystems; developing costs of the control systems; and eval-uating the environmental, energy, and economic effects as-sociated with the control systems. Several regulatory al-ternatives are also selected and evaluated. In the thirdphase, regulators select one of the regulatory alternativesas the basis for the standard and initiate the proceduresfor rule making.

Elements of an Emission StandardEmission standards must clearly define what sources aresubject to it and what it requires. Standards should con-tain four main elements: applicability; emission limits;compliance procedures and requirements; and monitoring,reporting, and record-keeping requirements.

APPLICABILITY

The applicability provision defines who and what are sub-ject to the emission standard requirements. This provisionincludes a definition of the affected source category or sub-category, the process or equipment included, and any sizelimitations or exemptions. Any distinction among classes,types, and sizes of equipment within the affected sourcecategory is part of the applicability.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 191

EMISSION LIMITS

Emission limits specify the pollutant being regulated andthe maximum permissible emission of that pollutant. Indeveloping emission limits, regulators evaluate the perfor-mance, cost, energy, and environmental effects of alternatecontrol systems. As a result of this evaluation, a controlsystem is selected as the basis for the standard.

COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

This part of the standard specifies the conditions underwhich the facility is operated for the duration of the com-pliance test. Generally, a facility is required to operate un-der normal conditions. Operation under conditions greaterthan or much less than design levels is avoided unless itrepresents normal operation.

This part of the standard also specifies the test meth-ods to be used and the averaging time for the test. The testmethod is usually either reference, equivalent, or alterna-tive. The reference method is widely known and is usuallypublished as part of the regulations. An equivalent methodis one that has been demonstrated to have a known, con-sistent relationship with a reference method. An alterna-tive method is needed when the characteristics of individ-ual sources do not lend themselves to the use of a referenceor equivalent method. An alternative method must bedemonstrated to produce consistent and useable results.Averaging time for an emission standard is important ifthe source is variable in its emissions. A short averagingtime is more variable and more likely to exceed a standardthan a long averaging time.

MONITORING, REPORTING, ANDRECORD KEEPING

Monitoring, reporting, and record-keeping requirementsensure that the facility is operating within normal limitsand that control equipment is being properly operated andmaintained. Data are generally kept at the facility for re-view at any time, but regular reporting of critical data tothe regulatory agency may be required.

Ambient Air Quality StandardsIn accordance with the CAA, as amended, the EPA has es-tablished the NAAQS for criteria pollutants. The NAAQSis based on background studies, including information onhealth effects, control technology, costs, energy require-ments, emission benefits, and environmental impacts.

The pollutants selected as criteria pollutants are sulfurdioxide, particulate matter (now PM10 and previously TSPor total suspended particulates), nitrogen oxides, carbonmonoxide, photochemical oxidants (ozone), volatile or-ganic compounds, and lead. The NAAQS represents themaximum allowable concentration of pollutants allowed

in the ambient air at reference conditions of 25°C and 760mm Hg. Table 4.1.1 shows the pollutant levels of the na-tional primary and secondary ambient air quality stan-dards.

States are responsible for ensuring that the NAAQS ismet. They can establish statewide or regional ambient airquality standards that are more stringent than the nationalstandards. To achieve and maintain the NAAQS, statesdevelop state implementation plans (SIPs) containing emis-sion standards for specific sources. When an area fails tomeet an NAAQS, it is considered a nonattainment area.More stringent control requirements, designed to achieveattainment, must be applied to nonattainment areas.

The 1990 amendments to the CAA (1) require states tosubmit revised SIPs for nonattainment areas, (2) acceler-ate attainment timetables, and (3) require federally im-posed controls if state nonattainment plans fail to achieveattainment. In addition, the amendments expand the num-ber and types of facilities that are regulated under SIPs.

Hazardous Air Pollution StandardsThe 1990 amendments to the CAA totally revise section112 with regard to hazardous air pollutants, including na-tional emission standards for hazardous air pollutants(NESHAP). They also direct the EPA administrator to es-tablish standards that require the installation of MACT.

NESHAP

Although section 112 of the 1970 CAA granted the EPAbroad authority to adopt stringent emission standards forhazardous air pollutants, as of this writing only seven pol-lutants are listed as hazardous air pollutants. These pol-lutants are beryllium, mercury, vinyl chloride, asbestos,benzene, radionuclides, and arsenic. Table 4.2.1 shows theNESHAP. Almost all these standards are technology stan-dards.

MACT/GACT

A hazardous air pollutant is now defined as “any air pol-lutant listed pursuant to” section 112(b). In section 112(b),Congress established an initial list of 189 hazardous airpollutants. These listed chemicals are initial candidates forregulation under section 112, and the EPA can add otherchemicals to the list.

The control of these substances is to be achievedthrough the initial promulgation of technology-based emis-sion standards. These standards require major sources toinstall MACT and area sources to install generally avail-able control technologies (GACT). Major sources are de-fined as those emitting more than 10 tons per year of anyone hazardous air pollutant or more than 25 tons per yearof all hazardous air pollutants. MACT/GACT standards


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 192


TABLE 4.2.1 NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

Affected Facility Emission Level Monitoring

AsbestosAsbestos mills No visible emissions or meet No requirement

equipment standardsRoadway surfacing Contain no asbestos, except No requirement

temporary useManufacturing No visible emissions or meet No requirement

equipment standardsDemolition/renovation Wet friable asbestos or No requirement

equipment standards andno visible emissions

Spraying friable asbestosEquipment and No visible emissions or meet No requirement

machinery equipment standardsBuildings, structures, etc. ,1 percent asbestos dry weight No requirement

Fabricating products No visible emissions or meet No requirementequipment standards

Friable insulation No asbestos No requirementWaste disposal No visible emissions or meet No requirement

equipment and workpractice requirements

Waste disposal sites No visible emissions; design and No requirementwork practice requirements

BerylliumExtraction plants 1. 10 g/hour, or 1. Source testCeramic plants 2. 0.01 m/m3 (thirty-day) 2. Three years CEMa

FoundriesIncineratorsPropellant plantsMachine shops (Alloy .5

percent by weight beryllium)Rocket motor test sites

Closed tank collection 75 mg min/m3 of air within Ambient concentrationof combustion products 10 to 60 minutes during during and after test

two consecutive weeks2 g/hour, maximum 10 g/day Continuous sampling

during release

MercuryOre processing 2300 g/24 hour Source testChlor-alkali plants 2300 g/24 hour Source test or use

approved design, maintenanceand housekeeping

Sludge dryers and 3200 g/24 hour Source test or sludge testincinerators

Vinyl Chloride (VC)Ethylene dichloride 1. EDC purification: Source test/CEMa

(EDC) manufacturing 10 ppmb

2. Oxychlorination: Source test0.2 g/kg of EDC product

VC manufacturing 10 ppmb Source test/CEMa

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)manufacturingEquipment 10 ppmb Source test/CEMa

Reactor opening loss 0.02 g/kg Source testReactor manual vent valve No emission except emergency

Continued on next page

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 193


Sources after stripper Each calendar day: Source test1. Strippers—2000 ppm

(PVC disposal resinsexcluding latex);400 ppm other

2. Others—2 g/kg (PVC Source testdisposal resins excludinglatex); 0.4 g/kgother

EDC/VC/PVCmanufacturingRelief valve discharge None, except emergencyLoading/unloading 0.0038 m3 after load/unload Source test

or 10 ppm when controlledSlip gauge Emission to controlEquipment seals Dual seals requiredRelief valve leaks Rupture disc requiredManual venting Emissions to controlEquipment opening Reduce to 2.0 percent VC or

25 gallonSampling (.10 percent Return to process

by weight VC)LDARd Approved program required Approved programIn-process wastewater 10 ppm VC before discharge Source test

Inorganic ArsenicGlass melting furnace Existing: ,2.5 Mg/yearc or Method 108

85 percent control Continuous opacityNew or modified: ,0.4 Mg/ and temperature monitor

year or 85 percent control for controlCopper converter Secondary hooding system Methods 5 and 108A

Particle limit 11.6 mg/dscmd Continuous opacity forcontrol

Approved operating plan Airflow monitor forsecondary hood

Arsenic trioxide and Approved plan for control of Opacity monitor formetallic arsenic plants emissions controlusing roasting/ Ambient air monitoringcondensation process

BenzeneEquipment leaks Leak is 10,000 ppm using(Serving liquid or gas Method 21; no detectable

10 percent by weight emissions (NDE) is 500 ppmbenzene; facilities using Method 21handling 1000 Mg/year and coke ovenby-product exempt)

Pumps Monthly LDAR,e dual seals, Test of NDEf

95 percent control or NDEf

Compressors Seal with barrier fluid, 95 Test for NDEf

percent control or NDEf

Pressure relief valves NDEf or 95 percent control Test for NDEf

Sampling connection systems Closed purge or closed ventOpen-end valves/lines Cap, plug, or second valve


TABLE 4.2.1 Continued


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 194


Valves Monthly LDARe (quarterly if Test for NDEg

not leaking for twoconsecutive months) or NDEf

Pressure relief equipment LDARe

Product accumulators 95 percent controlClosed-vent systems NDE or 95 percent control Monitor annually

and control devicesCoke by-product plants

Equipment and tanks Enclose source, recover, or Semiannual LDAR,e

destroy. Carbon adsorber or annual maintenanceincinerator alternate

Light-oil sumps Cover, no venting to sump Semiannual LDARe

Napthalene equipment Zero emissionsEquipment leaks See 40 CFR 61, subpart J.

(serving 10 percentby weight)

Exhauster ( 1 percent Quarterly LDARe or 95 Test for NDEf

by weight) percent control or NDEf

Benzene storage vesselsVessels with capacity Equipped with:.10,000 gallon 1. Fixed roof with internal Periodic inspection

floating roof-seals, or2. External floating roof with Periodic inspection

seals, or3. Closed vent and 95 percent Maintenance plant and

control monitoringBenzene transfer

Producers and terminals Vapor collection and 95 percent Annual recertification(loading .1 300 000/year) control

Loading racks (marine Load vapor-tight vessels only Yesrail, truck)

Exemptions:Facilities loading ,70

percent benzeneFacilities loading less

than required of .70percent benzene

Both of above subjectto record-keeping

Waste Operations 1. Facilities $10 Mg/year in Monitor control andChemical manufacturing aqueous wastes must treatment. Also,

plants control streams $10 ppm. periodically monitorPetroleum refineries Control to 99 percent or certain equipmentCoke by-product plants ,10 ppm for emissionsTSDFg treating wastes 2. If .10 ppm in wastewater .500 ppm and

from the three treatment system: inspect equipmentpreceding Wastes in ,10 ppm

Total in ,1 Mg/year3. .1 Mg/year to ,10 Mg/year Report annually4. ,1 Mg facilities One-time report

RadionuclidesDOE facilities (radon not 10 mrem/yearh radionuclides Approved EPA

included) (any member of the public) computer model andMethod 114 or directmonitoring(ANSIN13.1-1969)




CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 195

are developed to control hazardous air pollutant emissionsfrom both new and existing sources.

The 1990 amendments establish priorities for promul-gating standards. The EPA, in prioritizing its efforts, is toconsider the following:

The known or anticipated adverse effects of pollutants onpublic health and the environment

The quality and location of emissions or anticipated emis-sions of hazardous air pollutants that each category orsubcategory emits

The efficiency of grouping categories or subcategories ac-cording to the pollutants emitted or the processes ortechnologies used

The EPA is to promulgate standards as expeditiouslyas practicable, but the 1990 amendments also establisheda minimum number of sources that must be regulated pur-suant to a schedule. At this writing, standards for fortycategories and subcategories are to be promulgated. Thefollowing standards are among those that have been pro-mulgated:

On September 22, 1993, the EPA issued national emissionstandards for perchloroethylene (PCE) dry cleaning fa-cilities

On October 27, 1993, coke oven battery standards werepromulgated

On April 22, 1994, the EPA announced its final decisionson the hazardous organic NESHAP rule (HON), whichrequires sources to achieve emission limits reflecting theapplication of the MACT

By November 15, 1994, emission standards for 25 per-cent of the listed categories and subcategories were pro-mulgated. Another 25 percent must be promulgated byNovember 15, 1997. All emission standards must be pro-mulgated by November 15, 2000. Generally, existingsources must meet promulgated standards as expeditiouslyas practicable, but no later than three years after promul-gation.

Other Technology StandardsOther technology standards include new source perfor-mance standards, best available control technology(BACT) and lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) stan-dards, best available control technology for toxics(T-BACT) standards, and reasonably available controltechnology (RACT) standards. These standards are dis-cussed next.


NRC licensed facilities 10 mrem/yearh radionuclides Approved EPAand facilities not (any member of the public) computer model orcovered by subpart H Appendix E

3 mrem/year iodine (any Emissions determinedmember of the public) by Method 114 or

direct monitoring(ANSIN13.1-1969)

Calciners and nodulizing 2 curies per year (polonium-210) Method 111kilns at elementalphosphorus plants

Storage and disposal 20 pCi/m2 per secondi None specifiedfacilities for radium- (radon-222)containing material,owned/operated by DOE

Phosphogypsum stacks 20 pCi/m2 per secondi Method 115(waste from phosphorus (radon-222)fertilizer production)

Disposal of uranium mill 20 pCi/m2 per secondi Method 115tailings (operational) (radon-222)

Source: Adapted from David R. Patrick, ed, 1994, Toxic air pollution handbook (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).aCEM 5 continuous emission monitor.bBefore opening equipment, VC must be reduced to 2.0 percent (volume) or 25 gallons, whichever is larger.cMg/year 5 megagrams per year.dmg/dscm 5 milligrams per dry standard cubic meter.eLDAR 5 leak detection and repair.fNDE 5 no detectable emissions.gTSDF 5 treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.hmrem/year 5 millirems per year (the rem is the unit of effective dose equivalent for radiation exposure).ipCi/m2 per second 5 picocuries per square meter per second.



CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 196


TABLE 4.2.2 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR SOME SOURCES POTENTIALLY EMITTINGTOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS

Source Category Citationa Pollutants Regulatedb

Incinerators (.50 tons/day) Subpart E PMMunicipal waste combusters (.250 tons/day) Subpart Ea PM, organics, NOx, acid gasesPortland cement Subpart F PMAsphalt plants Subpart I PMPetroleum refineries Subpart J PM, CO, SO2, VOCPetroleum storage vessels (.40,000 gallon) Subpart K, Ka VOCSecondary lead smelters Subpart L PMSecondary brass/bronze Subpart M PMBasic oxygen furnaces Subpart N, Na PMSewage treatment plants Subpart O PMPrimary copper smelters Subpart P PM, SO2

Primary zinc smelters Subpart Q PM, SO2

Primary lead smelters Subpart R PM, SO2

Primary aluminum reduction Subpart S FluoridesPhosphoric acid plants Subpart T FluoridesSuperphosphate acid plants Subpart U FluoridesDiammonium phosphate plants Subpart V FluoridesTriple superphosphate plants Subpart W FluoridesTriple superphosphate storage Subpart X FluoridesCoal preparation plants Subpart Y PMFerroalloy production Subpart Z PMElectric arc furnaces Subpart AA, AAa PMKraft pulp mills Subpart BB PM, TRSGlass manufacturing Subpart CC PMSurface coating—metal furniture Subpart EE VOCLime manufacturing Subpart HH PMLead-acid battery manufacturing Subpart KK LeadMetallic minerals Subpart LL PMSurface coating—automobiles and light-duty trucks Subpart MM VOCPhosphate rock plants Subpart NN PMAmmonium sulfate manufacture Subpart PP PMGraphic arts and printing Subpart QQ VOCSurface coating—tapes and labels Subpart RR VOCSurface coating—large appliances Subpart SS VOCSurface coating—metal coils Subpart TT VOCAsphalt processing/roofing Subpart UU PMEquipment leaks—organic chemical manufacturing industry Subpart VV VOCSurface coating—beverage cans Subpart WW VOCBulk gasoline terminals Subpart XX VOCResidential wood heaters Subpart AAA PMRubber tire manufacturing Subpart BBB VOCPolymer manufacturing Subpart DDD VOCFlexible vinyl and urethane coating and printing Subpart FFF VOCEquipment leaks in petroleum refineries Subpart GGG VOCSynthetic fiber production Subpart HHH VOCAir oxidation processes—organic chemical manufacturing Subpart III VOCPetroleum dry cleaners (dryer capacity 38 kg) Subpart JJJ VOCOnshore natural gas processing

Equipment leaks Subpart KKK VOCSO2 emissions Subpart LLL SO2

Distillation processes—organic chemical manufacturing Subpart NNN VOCNonmetallic minerals Subpart OOO PMWool fiberglass insulation manufacturing Subpart PPP PMPetroleum refinery wastewater Subpart QQQ VOCMagnetic tape manufacturing Subpart SSS VOCSurface coating—plastic parts for business machines Subpart TTT VOC

Source: David R. Patrick, ed, 1994, Toxic air pollution handbook (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).aAll citations are in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, part 60.bPM 5 particulate matter; CO 5 carbon monoxide; SO2 5 sulfur dioxide; NOx 5 nitrogen oxides; VOC 5 volatile organic compounds; TRS 5 total reduced sulfur.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 197

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCESTANDARDS

Section 111 of the 1990 CAA Amendments authorizes theEPA to establish new source performance standards forany new stationary air pollution source category thatcauses, or significantly contributes to, air pollution thatmay endanger public health or welfare. The new sourceperformance standards should reflect the degree of emis-sion limitation achieved by applying the best demonstratedsystem of emission reduction. In considering the best, theEPA must balance the level of reduction against cost, otherenvironmental and health impacts, and energy require-ments. Table 4.2.2 presents a list of new source perfor-mance standards.

BACT/LAER

The CAA, as amended, provides for the prevention of sig-nificant deterioration (PSD) program. This program en-sures that sources of air pollutants in relatively unpollutedareas do not cause an unacceptable decline in air quality.Under this program, no major source can be constructedor modified without meeting specific requirements, in-cluding demonstrating that the proposed facility is subjectto the BACT for each regulated pollutant. A major sourceis one that emits more than 100 tons per year of regulatedpollutants.

In nonattainment areas, proposed sources undergo anew source review. This review includes permits for theconstruction and operation of new or modified majorsources that require the LAER. In nonattainment areas forozone, a major source is one that emits as little as 10 tonsof pollutant per year. The precise definition of a majorsource varies with the severity of ozone exceedances in thearea.

Because BACT and LAER standards are determined ona case-by-case basis, no standards are published. The EPAhas established the BACT/LAER Clearinghouse to assistin the consistent selection of BACT and LAER standards.This clearinghouse is designed to assist local and state reg-ulatory agencies rather than industries.

T-BACT

Before enactment of the 1990 amendments to the CAA,many states developed programs for toxic air pollutants.Some states developed regulations that required new andmodified sources of toxic air pollutants to minimize emis-sions by using T-BACT. These programs can be modifiedwith EPA guidance from the 1990 amendments.

RACT/CTG

States with NAAQS exceedances have adopted and sub-mitted SIPs to the EPA detailing how they plan to meetthe NAAQS within a reasonable time. These SIPs requirethe installation of RACT for selected stationary sources.Regulating agencies determine RACT on a case-by-casebasis within each industry, considering the technologicaland economic circumstances of the individual source. TheEPA has issued a control techniques guideline (CTG) doc-ument to provide guidance on RACT for the control ofvolatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in nonat-tainment areas. The 1990 amendments require the EPA toissue CTGs within three years for eleven categories of sta-tionary sources for which CTGs have not been issued.

—William C. Zegel


4.3OTHER AIR STANDARDS

This section discusses other air standards including stateand local air toxic programs and air toxics control in Japanand some European countries.

State and Local Air Toxics ProgramsIn 1989, the State and Territorial Air Pollution ProgramAdministrators (STAPPA) and the Association of Local AirPollution Control Officials (ALAPCO) conducted a com-prehensive survey of state and local agency toxic air pol-

lution activities. This survey showed that every state hadan air toxics program. The approaches used by states var-ied but generally fell into three categories:

• Formal regulatory programs• Comprehensive policies• Informal programs

The approaches used by local agencies are as diverse asthe state programs, but they can be categorized similarly.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 198

State and local programs are growing as the federal airtoxics program, under Title III of the 1990 amendments,and the new federal and state operating permit program,established under Title V of the 1990 amendments, arefully implemented.

Air Toxics Control in JapanJapan has taken strong steps to control what are knownin the United States as criteria pollutants from both sta-tionary and mobile sources, with the exception of lead.Lead is included in a group of special particulate pollu-tants. These special particulates include lead and its com-pounds; cadmium and its compounds; chlorine and hy-drogen chloride; fluorine, hydrogen fluoride, and siliconfluoride. The emission standards for these four classes ofpollutants are associated with categories of sources andare shown in Table 4.3.1.

Investigations of emission rates and the environmentaleffects of potentially toxic air pollutants are ongoing. Somesubstances have been found to have a long-term impact

on the environment, although present levels are not con-sidered toxic. Japan has established regulations to controlreleases of asbestos and is examining other toxic materi-als for possible regulation, including various chlorinatedvolatile organics and formaldehyde.

Air Toxics Control in Some EuropeanCountriesMost western countries have some control program forU.S. criteria pollutants. Inter-country transport of air pol-lutants is a subject of study and concern. However, in mostEuropean countries, control of toxic air pollutants is notyet the subject of a regulatory program. Sweden has anaction program to reduce or ban the use of harmful chem-icals. The Swedes have identified thirteen compounds orcategories of compounds for this program, including meth-ylene chloride, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, leadand lead compounds, organotin compounds, chloroparaf-fins, phthalates, arsenic and its compounds, creosote, cad-


TABLE 4.3.1 HARMFUL SUBSTANCES IN JAPAN (JUNE 22, 1971)

StandardValue

Substance Facility (mg/Nm3)

Cadmium and its compounds Baking furnace and smelting furnace for manufacturing glass using 1.0cadmium sulfide or cadmium carbonate as raw materials.

Calcination furnace, sintering furnace, smelting furnace, converterand drying furnace for refining copper, lead, or cadmium.

Drying facility for manufacturing cadmium pigment or cadmiumcarbonate.

Chlorine and hydrogen Chlorine quick cooling facility for manufacturing chlorinated 30 (chlorine)chloride ethylene.

Dissolving tank for manufacturing ferric chloride. 80 (HCl)Reaction furnace for manufacturing activated carbon using zinc

chloride.Reaction facility and absorbing facility for manufacturing chemical

products.Waste incinerator (HCl) 700

Fluorine, hydrogen fluoride Electrolytic furnace for smelting aluminium (harmful substances 003.0and silicon fluoride are emitted from discharge outlet).

Electrolytic furnace for smelting aluminum (harmful substances are 001.0emitted from top).

Baking furnace and smelting furnace for manufacturing glass using 010fluorite or sodium silicofluoride as raw material.

Reaction facility, concentrating facility, and smelting furnace formanufacturing phosphoric acid.

Condensing facility, absorbing facility, and distilling facility formanufacturing phosphoric acid.

Reaction facility, drying facility, and baking furnace formanufacturing sodium triple-phosphate.

Reaction furnace for manufacturing superphosphate of lime. 015Baking furnace and open-hearth furnace for manufacturing 020

phosphoric acid fertilizer.

Source: David L. Patrick, ed, 1994, Toxic air pollution handbook (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 199


ronmental standards based on all relevant informationcompiled in a basic document and established a no-effectslevel for human and ecosystem exposure. Table 4.3.2shows the target value, which is generally below the no-effect level, and the limit value for the priority substancesselected by the Dutch.

Table 4.3.3 summarizes other toxic air pollutant regu-lations in European countries.

—William C. Zegel

TABLE 4.3.2 DUTCH TARGET AND LIMIT VALUESFOR PRIORITY SUBSTANCE(QUANTITIES IN mg/m3 FOR AIR ORmg/l FOR WATER)

Substances Target Value Limit Value

Trichloroethane 50 50Surface water 0.1Tetrachloroethane 25 2,000Surface water 0.1Benzene 1 10Phenol 1 100Styrene 8 100Acrylonitrile 0.1 10Toluene 3 mg/m(3)1,2-Dichlorethane 1Ethylene oxide 0.3Methylbromide 1 (year)

100 (hour)Vinyl chloride 1Propylene oxide 1Dichloromethane 20Trichloromethane 1Tetrachloroethane 1Epichlorohydrin 2

Source: David R. Patrick, ed, 1994, Toxic air pollution handbook (NewYork: Van Nostrand Reinhold).

TABLE 4.3.3 EXAMPLE TOXIC AIR POLLUTIONREGULATIONS IN SOME EUROPEANCOUNTRIES

Country Air Toxic Comments

France Carcinogens See Note 1

Germany Volatile halogenated Specific industrialhydro carbons; 20 metals; processes regulatedvarious inorganics; by Technical

organics Instructions on AirQuality Control

United Any pollutant See Note 2Kingdom

Metals; metalloids; Local control requiredasbestos; halogens;

phosphorous; and compounds

Source: Private communication, Water and Air Research, 1994.Note 1: Based on the 1982 Seveso Directive, a 28 December 1983 circular

defines use of risk assessment; over 300 installations are subject to risk assess-ment studies.

Note 2: Integrated national control of processes with a potential for pollu-tion to air, land, or water. Authorization is required; operator must install bestpractical means of control.

mium and its compounds, and mercury and its com-pounds.

The Netherlands has a national strategy to control toxicair pollutants. This strategy includes sustainable develop-ment through reducing to acceptable or negligible levelsthe risks posed to humans and the environment by one ormore toxic substances. The Netherlands developed envi-

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 200

Sound is transmitted through the air as a series of com-pression waves. The energy of the noise source causes airmolecules to oscillate radially away from the source. Thisoscillation results in a train of high-pressure regions fol-lowing one another, travelling at a speed of approximately760 miles per hour in sea-level air.

Noise can be described in terms of its loudness and itspitch, or frequency. Loudness is measured in decibels (dB).The dB scale, shown in Table 4.4.1, is a logarithmic scale—a 20 dB sound is ten times louder than a 10 dB sound.Pitch is a measure of how high or low a sound is. Pitch ismeasured in cycles per second (cps), or hertz (Hz). Thismeasurement is the number of compression waves passinga point each second. The human ear is sensitive to soundsin the range of 20 to 20,000 Hz, but the ear is not as sen-sitive to low- and high-frequency sounds as it is to medium-frequency sounds (Figure 4.4.1).

Human Response to NoiseThe ability of humans to hear decreases with age and ex-posure to noise. As we age, the organ that translates soundinto nerve impulses slowly degenerates. Continuous ex-posure to loud noises can result in a permanent loss ofhearing. Generally, the louder the noise, the less time ittakes to induce a permanent hearing loss. Lower-frequencynoise does less damage than higher-frequency sounds atthe same level of loudness. However, even a partial hear-ing loss can severely impact an individual’s ability to com-prehend speech, negatively impacting that person’s com-fort level at social gatherings or when interacting withstrangers. In children, hearing is important for learninglanguage, and hearing loss can limit development.

Noise also affects sleep and stress levels, albeit moresubtly than it affects hearing loss. Sleep disturbance cantake the form of preventing sleep, making it difficult to fallasleep, causing a person to wake after falling asleep, or al-tering the quality of sleep. A high level of backgroundnoise, particularly if it is of variable levels, can change thestress and comfort levels of entire neighborhoods.

Wildlife Response to NoiseThe effects of noise on wildlife are similar to its effects onhumans. Additionally, noise can affect a creature’s abilityto obtain food or to breed. Some species that depend ondetecting sounds and subtle differences in sound to locatefood, to avoid becoming food, or to locate a mate mayexperience difficulties in high-noise environments. Short,loud noises that do not permanently affect a creature’shearing seem to have much less impact than steady back-ground noise.

Occupational Noise StandardsThe 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act sets per-missible limits on noise exposure for most commercial andindustrial settings. Table 4.4.2 presents these limits.Exposure to impulsive or impact noise should not exceeda peak sound pressure of 140 dB. When a worker is ex-posed daily to more than one period of noise at differentlevels, these noise exposures can be compared to the stan-dards in Table 4.4.2 by adding the ratio of the time al-lowed at the noise level to the time of exposure at thatlevel for each period. If that sum is greater than one, thenthe mixed exposure exceeds the standards.

Land Use and Average Noise LevelCompatibilityNoise conditions are characterized in terms of A-weighteddecibels (dBA), using the following common descriptors:(1) equivalent sound level for twenty-four-hour periods,Leq(24), and (2) day–night sound level, Ldn. The former isa time-weighted average; the latter is weighted more heav-ily for noise during the night (for more detail, refer toChapter 6).

In general, local ordinances regulate noise outside theworkplace, usually as a nuisance, and normally do nothave applicable standards. Similarly in most situations, nofederal or state noise standards apply. Regulatory agencieshave developed guidelines to assist in land use planningand in situating major facilities that generate significant


Noise Standards

4.4NOISE STANDARDS

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 201


TABLE 4.4.1 A DECIBEL SCALE

EffectsSound CommunityLevel Perceived Damage to Reaction to

Sound Intensity Factor (dB) Sound Sources Loudness Hearing Outdoor Noise

1,000,000,000,000,000,000 180— • Rocket engine

100,000,000,000,000,000 170—

10,000,000,000,000,000 160—

1,000,000,000,000,000 150— • Jet plane at takeoff Painful Traumaticinjury

100,000,000,000,000 140— Injuriousrange;irreversible

10,000,000,000,000 130— • Maximum recorded rock music damage

1,000,000,000,000 120— • Thunderclap• Textile loom• Auto horn, 1 meter away Uncomfortably

100,000,000,000 110— • Riveter loud• Jet flying over at 300 meters

10,000,000,000 100— Danger zone;• Newspaper press progressive

loss of hearing

1,000,000,000 90— • Motorcycle, 8 meters away Vigorous• Food blender action• Diesel truck, 80 km/hr, at 15 Very loud Damage

meters away begins100,000,000 80— • Garbage disposal after long

exposureThreats

10,000,000 70— • Vacuum cleaner

• Ordinary conversation Moderately Widespreadloud complaints

1,000,000 60— • Air conditioning unit, 6 meters• Light traffic noise, 30 meters Occasional

complaints100,000 50—

• Average living room

10,000 40— • Bedroom Quiet No action

• Library

1,000 30—• Soft whisper

100 20— • Broadcasting studio Very quiet

10 10— • Rustling leafBarelyaudible

1 0— • Threshold of hearing

Source: Turk et al, 1978, Environmental Science (Philadelphia: Saunders), 523.

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

ýïï

üïïïïïïïïïïïïïïýïïþ

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 202


levels of noise. The EPA guidelines were developed to pro-tect public health and welfare (U.S. EPA 1974). Theseguidelines are summarized in Table 4.4.3.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) has established guidelines for noise levels in resi-dential areas. They define categories of acceptability as fol-lows: acceptable if the Ldn is less than 65 dBA, normallyunacceptable if the Ldn is greater than 65 dBA but less than75 dBA, and unacceptable if the Ldn is greater than 75 dBA(HUD 1979). According to EPA studies, the majority ofcomplaints occur when the Ldn exceeds 65 dBA (U.S. EPA1973).

When land uses are noise sensitive, as with hospitals,parks, outdoor recreation areas, music shells, nursinghomes, concert halls, schools, libraries, and churches, morerestrictive guidelines are used. Conversely, less restrictiveguidelines are used for commercial and agricultural landuses. For example, Table 4.4.4 shows a set of U.S. Navynoise guidelines for various land uses.

Traffic Noise AbatementIn America, a common source of community noise is au-tomobile and truck traffic; yet by their nature, roads mustbe continuous and connected. Therefore, noise abatementstrategies must be applied when the actual or projectednoise from a highway exceeds its guidelines. This strategycan be considered a technology standard in that barriers,traffic management, alignment modifications, and land-scaping have limited ability to reduce noise levels.

Community Exposure to Airport NoiseAircraft can directly affect the noise levels of wide areassince no natural or manmade barriers are present. Usually,aircraft noise is infrequent and, when averaged over atwenty-four-hour period, is below guideline levels.However, near airports some areas have high noise levels,measured as Leq(24) or Ldn. In these areas, regulators can

31 62 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frequency (Hz) of pure tones

Min

imum

det

ecta

ble

soun

d le

vel (

db)

FIG. 4.4.1 Sensitivity of the human ear to various frequencies.Reprinted by permission from Daniel D. Chiras, 1985, Environ-mental science, Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings PublishingCo.

TABLE 4.4.2 DAMAGE RISK CRITERIA FOR STEADYNOISE

Level (dB re 0.0002 dynes/cm2)

Durationa White Noise 1 Octave Bandwidth Pure ToneDaily Exposure (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

8 hr 90 85 804 hr 90 85 802 hr 92 87 821 hr 95 90 8530 min 98 93 8815 min 102 97 927 min 108 103 983 min 115 110 1051As min 125 120 115

Source: B.G. Liptak, ed, 1974, Environmental engineers’ handbook, Vol. 3(Radnor, Penna.: Chilton Book Company).

aIf ear protectors are not worn, even the shortest exposure is considered haz-ardous at levels above 135 dBA. If ear protectors are worn, no exposure to levelsabove 150 dB, however short, is considered safe. These criteria assume that hear-ing loss will be within acceptable limits if, after 10 years, it is no greater than 10dB below 1000 Hz, 15 dB up to 2000 Hz, or 20 dB up to 3000 Hz.

TABLE 4.4.3 SUMMARY OF NOISE LEVELS IDENTIFIED AS REQUISITE TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH ANDWELFARE WITH AN ADEQUATE MARGIN OF SAFETY

Effect Level Area

Hearing loss Leq(24) 5 70 dBA* All areas.Outdoor activity interference Ldn 5 55 dBA Outdoors in residential areas where

and annoyance people spend widely varying amounts of timeand other places in which quiet is a basis for use.

Leq(24) 5 55 dBA Outdoor areas where people spend limited amountsof time, such as school yards and playgrounds.

Indoor activity interference Ldn 5 45 dBA Indoor residential areas.and annoyance

Leq(24) 5 45 dBA Other indoor areas with human activities such asschools, etc.

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974, Information on levels of environmental noise requisite to protect public health and welfare with an adequatemargin of safety, EPA/550-9-74-004 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).

*Based on annual averages of the daily level over a period of 40 years.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 203

apply a type of technology standard by changing flight pat-terns and flight times to reduce noise impacts. New jet air-craft are required to use low-noise engines. The abatementstrategy of insulating impacted structures against the in-trusion of noise can also reduce the influence of aircraftnoise.

Railroad Noise AbatementRailroad traffic has noise characteristics that create specialabatement problems. Safety horns and whistles are loudand designed to be heard; further, they must be soundedat specific locations. Trains can be long and can maintaina noise level for ten to twenty minutes. Because trains movetwenty-four hours a day, night noise events are possible.The tracks are well established and cannot be easily moved.

All of these factors reduce abatement standards to the useof barriers, possibly with landscaping, and traffic man-agement.

—William C. Zegel

ReferencesDepartment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 1979.

Residential area noise level guidelines. Department of Housing andUrban Development.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1973. Public health andwelfare criteria for noise. EPA 550/9-73-002. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1974. Information on lev-els of environmental noise requisite to protect public health and wel-fare with an adequate margin of safety. EPA/550-9-74-004. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.


TABLE 4.4.4 LAND USE AND AVERAGE NOISE LEVEL COMPATIBILITY

Average Noise Level (CNEL or Ldn dBs)

Land Use 50–55 55–60 60–65 65–70 70–75 75–80 80–85

Residential, single family, 1 1 2 3 3 4 4duplex mobile homes

Residential—multiple family 1 1 1 2 3 4 4Transient lodging 1 1 1 2 3 3 4Schools, libraries, churches 1 1 2 3 3 4 4Hospitals, nursing homes 1 1 2 3 3 4 4Music shells 2 2 3 4 4 4 4Auditoriums, concert halls 1 2 3 3 4 4 4Sport arenas, outdoor 1 1 2 3 3 4 4

spectator sportsParks, playgrounds 1 2 2 3 3 4 4Natural recreation areas 1 1 2 2 2 4 4Golf courses, riding stables, 1 1 2 2 3 3 4

water recreation, cemeteriesOffice buildings, personal, 1 1 1 2 2 3 4

business and professionalCommercial, retail, movie 1 1 1 2 2 3 4

theaters, restaurantsCommercial—wholesale, some 1 1 1 1 2 2 3

retail, industrial,manufacturing

Livestock farming, animal 1 1 1 1 2 3 4breeding

Agriculture (except live- 1 1 1 1 2 3 4stock), mining, fishing

Source: U.S. Navy, 1979.

Key:1 5 Clearly Compatible—The average noise level is such that indoor and outdoor activities associated with the land use can be carried out with essentially no inter-

ference from noise.2 5 Normally Compatible—The average noise level is great enough to be of some concern, but common building construction should make the indoor environment

compatible with the usual indoor activities, including sleeping.3 5 Normally Incompatible—The average noise level is significantly severe so that unusual and costly building construction may be necessary to ensure an adequate

environment for indoor activities. Barriers must be erected between the site and prominent noise sources to make the outdoor environment tolerable.4 5 Clearly Incompatible—The average noise level is so severe that construction costs to make the indoor environment acceptable for activities would probably be

prohibitive. The outdoor environment would be intolerable for outdoor activities associated with the land use.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM 4

This section discusses the legislative activity, ACLs, tech-nology standards, water quality goals, and toxic pollutantsrelated to water quality standards.

Legislative ActivityThe first substantive water pollution legislation in theUnited States, the Water Pollution Control Act, was passedin 1948. In 1956, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,commonly called the Clean Water Act (CWA), providedthe first long-term control of water pollution. The act hasbeen amended several times. A key amendment in 1972establishes a national goal of zero discharge by 1985. Thisconcept refers to the complete elimination of all water pol-lutants from navigable waters of the United States. Thisamendment also called upon the EPA to establish effluentlimitations for industries and make money available toconstruct sewage treatment plants. The amendments in1977 direct the EPA to examine less common water pol-lutants, notably toxic organic compounds.

This legislation has resulted in the development of acomplex series of water quality standards. These standardsdefine the levels of specific pollutants in water that pro-tect the public health and welfare and define the levels oftreatment that must be achieved before contaminated wa-ter is released. The most notable of these standards are thewater quality criteria set by the EPA. These criteria de-scribe the levels of specific pollutants that ambient watercan contain and still be acceptable for one of the follow-ing categories:

• Class A—water contact recreation, includingswimming

• Class B—able to support fish and wildlife• Class C—public water supply• Class D—agricultural and industrial use

Water quality standards are set by the states and aresubject to approval by the EPA. These standards definethe conditions necessary to maintain the quality of waterfor its intended use. Per a provision of the CWA, existinguses of a body of water must be maintained (i.e., uses thatdowngrade water quality resulting in a downgraded usecategory are not allowed).

The primary enforcement mechanism established by theCWA, as amended in 1977, is the National PollutionDischarge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES isadministered by the states with EPA oversight. Facilitiesthat discharge directly into waters of the United States mustobtain NPDES permits.

Under NPDES, permits for constructing and operatingnew sources and existing sources are subject to differentstandards. Discharge permits are issued with limits on thequantity and quality of effluents. These limits are basedon a case-by-case evaluation of potential environmentalimpacts. Discharge permits are designed as an enforcementtool, with the ultimate goal of meeting ambient water qual-ity standards.

Most states have assumed primary authority for the en-forcement and permit activities regulated under the CWA.In those states that have not assumed primacy, dischargesto surface waters require two permits, one from the EPAunder CWA and one from the state under its regulations.In addition, such discharges are frequently regulated by lo-cal governments.

The EPA does not have permit responsibility under sec-tion 404 of the CWA, nor does it have responsibility fordischarges associated with marine interests. Consequently,other federal water programs affect water quality. Table4.5.1 summarizes selected regulations promulgated by theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Coast Guard, and theEPA.

Figure 4.5.1 shows the relationship of water quality cri-teria, water quality standards, effluent guidelines, effluentlimitations and permit conditions.

ACLsWater quality standards are frequently expressed in termsof ambient concentration. The regulatory agency deter-mines ACLs, which are the maximum concentration of acontaminant in water to which people are exposed. Thedegree of human exposure depends upon the use of thewater body. Thus, different ACLs apply to different wa-ter bodies. Generally, regulators derive ACLs from healtheffects information. Using ACLs, regulators can mathe-matically determine the maximum contribution that an ef-


Water Standards

4.5WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 205


fluent source makes to a water body without violating rel-evant ACL(s).

Technology StandardsPermits for discharges of pollutants into the waters of theUnited States are subject to the NPDES effluent limits andpermit requirements. Such source standards are generallybased upon the best available technology (BAT). Thesetechnology standards can be effluent guidelines, effluentlimits, and the definition of BAT.

Effluent guidelines define uniform national guidelinesfor specific pollutant discharges for each type of industryregulated. These are not, in fact, guidelines but are regu-latory requirements. Federal effluents guidelines and stan-dards cover more than fifty industrial categories, as shownin Table 4.5.2.

Effluent limits are specific control requirements that ap-ply to a specific point–source discharge. They are based

FIG. 4.5.1 Relationship of elements used in defining NPDESpermit conditions.

TABLE 4.5.1 CLEAN WATER REGULATIONS

Agency/Reference Topic

CG: 33CFR153–157 Oil Spills159 Marine Sanitation DevicesCOE: 33CFR209 Navigable Waters320–330 Permit ProgramsEPA: 40CFR109 Criteria for State, Local, and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans110 Discharge of Oil112 Oil Pollution Prevention113 Liability Limits for Small Onshore Oil Storage Facilities114 Civil Penalties for Violations of Oil Pollution Prevention Regulations116 Designation of Hazardous Substances117 Determination of Reportable Quantities for Hazardous Substances121 State Certification of Activities Requiring a Federal License or Permit122 NPDES Permit123 State NPDES Permit Program Requirements125 Criteria and Standards for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System130 Water Quality Planning and Management131 Approving State Water Quality Standards133 Secondary Treatment Information136 Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants140 Performance Standards for Marine Sanitation Devices141 National Primary Drinking Water Regulations142 Primary Drinking Water Implementation Regulations143 National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations220–225, 227–229 Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria230 Discharge of Dredge or Fill Material into Navigable Waters231 Disposal Site Determination Under the CWA233 State Dredge or Fill (404) Permit Program Requirements403 Pretreatment Standards

Source: Compiled from Code of Federal Regulations.Abbreviations: CG 5 Coast Guard; COE 5 Corps of Engineers; EPA 5 Environmental Protection Agency.

Federal

Used To Define

State

NPDESPermit Conditions

EffluentLimitations

EffluentGuidelines

Water QualityCriteria

Water QualityStandards

Used To Define

Used T

o Define

Used T

o Define

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 206


on both national effluent guidelines and state water qual-ity standards, as shown in Figure 4.5.1.

In some cases, a standard consists of a treatment tech-nology that the regulatory agency accepts as the BAT forthat type of source or a unique combination of source andreceiving water body.

Water Quality GoalsThe discharge standards under the NPDES refer to spe-cific potential contaminants. A series of water quality goalsare associated with each potential contaminant. Goals fora specific situation depend on the established use of thewater body. The regulated contaminants vary from stateto state. Schultz has classified more than fifty water qual-ity parameters into four groups based on the frequency oftheir use in state ACLs and associated NPDES water qual-ity standards (Schultz 1972).

All state water quality standards classify the followingnine parameters: dissolved oxygen (D), pH, coliform, tem-perature, floating solids (oil–grease), settleable solids, tur-bidity–color, taste–odors, and toxic substances. In 50 to99 percent of the state standards, three groups of para-meters are categorized. In most regions, these frequentlysampled parameter groups (radioactivity, total dissolvedsolids, and U.S. Public Health Service Drinking WaterStandards) are sampled less frequently than the first nine.Sixteen parameters, eleven of which are heavy metals andother toxic substances, are found in the 20 to 49 percentof the state standards. Eighteen parameters appear in lessthan 20 percent of the state standards.

Table 4.5.3 shows the optimum and maximum valuesof water quality characteristics related to type of use pub-lished by California as an example of water quality goals.

Effluent StandardsNPDES permits are issued to municipal and industrial dis-charge sources to ensure that they do not violate waterquality standards. In addition, state and federal monitor-ing, inspection, and enforcement ensures compliance withstandards and permits.

MUNICIPAL EFFLUENT LIMITS

Municipal effluent limits are less complex than industriallimits. All publicly owned treatment works must meet asecondary treatment level (Table 4.5.4). This treatmentlevel implies the following technologies: mechanical re-moval of solids by screening and settling, removal of ad-ditional organic wastes and solids by treating the wastewith air or oxygen and allowing bacteria to consume theorganic chemicals, and chlorination. Table 4.5.5 summa-rizes the requirements of this program.

TABLE 4.5.2 CATEGORICAL INDUSTRIALEFFLUENT GUIDELINES ANDSTANDARDS

40 CFR Part Source

405 Dairy Products406 Grain Mills407 Canned and Preserved Fruits and Vegetables408 Canned and Preserved Seafood409 Sugar Processing410 Textiles411 Cement Manufacturing412 Feedlots413 Electroplating414 Organic Chemicals415 Inorganic Chemicals417 Soaps and Detergents418 Fertilizer Manufacturing419 Petroleum Refining420 Iron and Steel Manufacturing421 Nonferrous Metals422 Phosphate Manufacturing423 Steam Electric Power Generating424 Ferroalloy Manufacturing425 Leather Tanning and Finishing426 Glass Manufacturing427 Asbestos Manufacturing428 Rubber Processing429 Timber Products430 Pulp, Paper, and Paper Board431 Builders Paper and Board Mills432 Meat Products433 Metal Finishing435 Offshore Oil and Gas Extraction436 Mineral Mining and Processing439 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing440 Ore Mining and Dressing443 Paving and Roofing Materials446 Paint Formulating447 Ink Formulating454 Gum and Wood Chemicals Manufacturing455 Pesticides Chemicals Manufacturing457 Explosives Manufacturing458 Carbon Black Manufacturing459 Photographic Processing460 Hospital461 Battery Manufacturing Point Source Category463 Plastics Molding and Forming464 Metal Molding and Casting465 Coil Coating466 Porcelain Enameling467 Aluminum Forming468 Copper Forming469 Electrical and Electronic Components471 Nonferrous Metals Forming and Metal Powders

Source: Compiled from the Code of Federal Regulations.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 207

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C

TABLE 4.5.3 OPTIMUM AND MAXIMUM VALUES OF WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS IN RELATION TO TYPE OF BENEFICIAL USE

Recreation Wildlife Propagation Irrigation Industrial

Bathing andTruck

Cooling and

DomesticSwimming

BoatingFish

GardenFood Processing Other

AestheticWater Fresh Salt and Fresh Salt Fowl Shellfish Vege- Citrus Other Fresh Salt Fresh Salt Enjoy-

Characteristics Supply Water Water Fishing Water Water Refuge Culture tables Fruits Crops Water Water Water Water ment

1. Bacterial—per ml.Coliform (opt.) 1.0 none 1.0 10 10 10 100 1.0 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 1.0 10Coliform (max.) 50 1.0 10 100 100 100 1,000 5 10 100 100 1.0 3.0 10 100

2. Organic—ppm.B.O.D. (opt.) none 5 5 10 10 10 10 5 none 1 5 5 20B.O.D. (max.) 0.5 10 10 30 30 30 50 20 5 10 10 20 100D.O. (opt.) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3.0 3.0 5.0D.O. (min.) 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0Oil (opt.) none none none none none none none none none none none none none 5 5 noneOil (max.) 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 2 5 10 10 10

3. ReactionpH (opt.) 6.8–7.2 6.8–7.2 6.8–7.2 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.8–7.2 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 4.0–10.0 4.0–10.0pH (critical) 6.6–8.0 6.5–8.6 6.5–8.6 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.5–8.5 6.6–8.0 6.0–9.0 6.0–9.0 6.0–9.0 6.0–9.0 6.0–9.0 4.0–10.0 4.0–10.0

4. Physical—ppm.Turbid. (opt.) 5 5 5 10 5 5 10 5 5 5 50Turbid. (max.) 20 20 30 50 10 20 100 50 20 50Color (opt.) 10 10 10 10 5 5 10 10 10 10 20Color (max.) 30 30 30 50 10 20 100 50 30 50 100Susp. solids (opt.) 10 50 50 10 10 50 10 10 10 50 50Susp. solids (max.) 100 100 100 20 50 250 100 50 100 150 150Float. solids (opt.) none none none none none none slight none none none none none slightFloat. solids (max.) gross gross gross gross gross gross gross slight slight slight slight gross

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 208

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C

5. Chemical—ppm.Total solids (opt.) 500 1000 500 500 500 500 1000Total solids (max.) 1500 5000 1500 1500 2000 1500 1500Cl (opt.) 250 1000 200 100 250 500Cl (max.) 750 2500 750 500 750 1000F (opt.) 0.5–1.0 0.5–1.0F (max.) 1.5 5Toxic metals (opt.) none 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 none noneToxic metals (max.) 0.05 5 10 10 10 0.1 2.5 0.1 0.5Phenol (opt.) 1* 5* 50* 1 0.1 0.5 5 1* 5* 1* 5*Phenol (max.) 5* 50* 1 10 1 5 25 10* 20* 10* 50*Boron (opt.) 0.5 1.0Boron (max.) 1.0 5Na ratio† (opt.) 35–50† 35–50† 35–50† 90†Na ratio† (max.) 80† 75† 80† 90†Hardness (opt.) 100 100Hardness (max.) 250 500

6. Temp.—°F. (max.) 60 65 65 60 60 707. Odor‡ (max.) N N N M M M M N O O O M M O O O8. Taste‡ (max.) N M D M M M N M M

Source: California State Water Pollution Control Board, 1952.*Parts per billion.†Percent.‡Key: D—disagreeable; M—marked; N—noticeable; O—obnoxious.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 209


INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENTS

Industrial effluents are subject to state and federal re-quirements (see Table 4.5.2). States must tailor effluentsdischarge programs to water quality goals. Regulatingagencies must monitor each segment of a water body atspecified intervals and evaluate the impact of each dis-charger. Based on the evaluation, each water body is putinto one of two groups:

Effluent limited—Water bodies for which the standardsare met or will be met if the nationwide limits are im-plemented

Water quality limited—Water bodies that cannot meet thequality standards even when nationwide limits are ap-

plied. Effluent requirements must be tailor-made foreach discharger along this group of water.

The NPDES requires all dischargers to file a standard-ized report with the EPA and their state agency. This re-port indicates the quality and quantity of their discharges.Where appropriate, the state and the EPA can respond tothe report with a set of effluent limits, an abatement sched-ule to meet the effluent limits, and a monitoring schedule.A permit is issued upon agreement by the discharger, in-terested citizens, the state regulatory agency, and the EPA.

STORM WATER DISCHARGE

Storm water is defined as storm water runoff, surfacerunoff, and drainage. The regulations apply only to point-source discharges. A permit is required for both direct dis-charges into U.S. waters and for indirect discharges into afacility’s drainage system or a separate city storm watersystem. However, an industry that separates its nonindus-trial storm water, such as drainage from office buildingsand parking lots, from the plant’s industrial storm waterdoes not have to include the nonindustrial areas in theirpermit.

These industrial discharges must meet effluent stan-dards under sections 301 and 402 of the CWA, includingthe use of BAT and best practicable control technology(PCT). Industrial discharges must apply best managementpractices (BMPs) to control and reduce storm water dis-charges. These standards are technological and are mea-sures and controls designed to eliminate or minimize pol-lutant loadings in storm water discharges.

General BMPs include good housekeeping, preventativemaintenance, visual inspection, spill prevention and re-sponse, sediment erosion prevention, management ofrunoff, employee training, and record keeping and re-

TABLE 4.5.4 NATIONAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS

1. General Prohibitions: A user may not introduce into a publicly owned treatment works, POTW, any pollutant(s) which cause“pass through” without a change in nature or “interference” with treatment processes, including sludge use or disposal.

2. Specific Prohibitions: The following pollutants shall not be introduced into a POTW:a. Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW;b. Pollutants which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW, but in no case discharges with pH lower than 5.0, un-

less the works is specifically designed to accommodate such discharges;c. Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which will cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW resulting in interference;d. Any pollutant, including oxygen, demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.) released in a discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant con-

centration which will cause interference with the POTW;e. Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in interference, but in no case heat in such quan-

tities that the temperature at the POTW exceeds 40° C (104° F) unless the approval authority, upon request of the POTW, ap-proves alternate temperature limits.

3. Categorical Requirements: Standards specifying quantities or concentrations of pollutants or pollutant properties which may bedischarged to a POTW by existing or new industrial users in specific industrial subcategories will be established as separateregulations under the appropriate subpart of 40 CFR Chapter 1, Subchapter N. These standards, unless specifically notedotherwise, shall be in addition to the general prohibitions established above (40 CFR 403.5).

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973–1985, Secondary treatment regulation, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, part 133 (Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office).

TABLE 4.5.5 SECONDARY TREATMENTREQUIREMENTS

Pollutant Effluent Limitations*

BOD5† 30 (45) mg/L Maximum 30-day average45 (65) mg/L Maximum 7-day average85% (65) removal Minimum 30-day average

Suspended 30 (45) mg/L Maximum 30-day averageSolids 45 (65) mg/L Maximum 7-day average

85% (65) removal Minimum 30-day averagepH 6.0–9.0 Range

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973–1985, Secondary treat-ment regulation, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, part 133 (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office).

*( ) denotes value applicable to treatment equivalent to secondary treatment.Adjustment available for effluents from trickling filter facilities and waste stabi-lization pond facilities.

†If CBOD5 is approved substitute for BOD5, the CBOD5 limitations are:40 mg/L Maximum 30-day average60 mg/L Maximum 7-day average65% removal Minimum 30-day average

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 210

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C

1 *Acenaphthene2 *Acrolein3 *Acrylonitrile4 *Benzene5 *Benzidine6 *Carbon tetrachloride (tetrachloromenthane) *chlo-

rinated benzenes (other than dichlorobenzenes)7 Chlorobenzene8 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene9 Hexachlorobenzene *chlorinated ethanes (including

1,2-dichloethane, 1,1,1-trichloroethane and hexa-chloroethane)

10 1,2-dichloroethane11 1,1,1-trichloroethane12 Hexachloroethane13 1,1-dichloroethane14 1,1,2-trichloroethane15 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane16 Chloroethane *chloroalkyl ethers (chloromethyl,

chloroethyl & mixed ethers)17 bis(chloromethyl) ether**18 Bis(2-choloroethyl) ether19 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed) *chlorinated naph-

thalene20 2-chloronaphthalene *chlorinated phenols (other

than those listed elsewhere; includes trichlorophe-nols and chlorinated cresols)

21 2,4,6-trichlorophenol22 Parachlorometa cresol23 *Chloroform (trichloromethane)24 *2-chlorophenol *dichlorobenzenes25 1,2-dichlorobenzene26 1,3-dichlorobenzene27 1,4-dichlorobenzene *dichlorobenzidine28 3,39-dichlorobenzidine *dichloroethylenes (1,1-

dichloroethylene and 1,2-dichloroethylene)29 1,1-dichloroethylene30 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene31 *2,4-dichlorophenol *dichloropropane and dichloro-

propene32 1,2-dichloropropane33 1,2-dichloropropylene (1,3-dichloropropene)34 *2,4-dimethylphenol *dinitrotoluene35 2,4-dinitrotoluene36 2,6-dinitrotoluene37 *1,2-diphenylhydrazine38 *Ethylbenzene39 *Fluoranthene *haloethers (other than those listed

elsewhere)

40 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether41 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether42 Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether43 Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane *halomethanes (other

than those listed elsewhere)44 Methylene chloride (dichloromethane)45 Methyl chloride (chloromethane)46 Methyl bromide (bromomethane)47 Bromoform (tribromomethane)48 Dichlorobromomethane49 Trichlorofluoromethane**50 Dichlorodifluoromethane**51 Chlorodibromomethane52 *Hexachlorobutadiene53 *Hexachlorocyclopentadiene54 *Isophorone55 *Naphthalene56 *Nitrobenzene *nitrophenols (including 2,4-dinitro-

phenol and dinitrocresol)57 2-Nitrophenol58 4-Nitrophenol59 *2,4-dinitrophenol60 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol *nitrosamines61 N-nitrosodimethylamine62 N-nitrosodiphenylamine63 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine64 *Pentachlorophenol65 *Phenol *phthalate esters66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate67 Butyl benzyl phthalate68 Di-n-butyl phthalate69 Di-n-octyl phthalate70 Diethyl phthalate71 Dimethyl phthalate *polynuclear aromatic hydro-

carbons72 Benzo(a)anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)73 Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)74 3,4-benzofluoranthene75 Benzo(k)fluoranthane (11,12-benzofluoranthene)76 Chrysene77 Acenaphthylene78 Anthracene79 Benzo(ghi)perylene (1,1-benzoperylene)80 Fluorene81 Phenanthrene82 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)83 Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene (2,3-o-phenylenepyrene)84 Pyrene

85 *Tetrachloroethylene86 *Toluene87 *Trichloroethylene88 *Vinyl chloride (chloro-ethylene) pesticides and

metabolites89 *Aldrin90 *Dieldrin91 *Chlordane (technical mixture and metabolite DDT

and metabolites)92 4,49-DDT93 4,49-DDE (p,p9-DDX)94 4,49-DDD (p,p9-TDE) *endosulfan & metabolite95 A-endosulfan-Alpha96 B-endosulfan-Beta97 Endosulfan sulfate *endrin and metabolites98 Endrin99 Endrin aldehyde *heptachlor and metabolites

100 Heptachlor101 Heptachlor epoxide *hexchlorocyclohexane (all iso-

mers)102 a-BHC-Alpha103 b-BHC-Beta104 r-BHC-(lindane)-Gamma105 g-BCH-Delta *polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s)106 PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)107 PCB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)108 PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)109 PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)110 PCB-1248 (Arochlor 1248)111 PCB-1260 (Arochlor 1260)112 PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)113 *Toxaphene114 *Antimony (total)115 *Arsenic (total)116 *Asbestos (fibrous)117 *Beryllium (total)118 *Cadmium (total)119 *Chromium (total)120 Copper (total)121 *Cyanide (total)122 *Lead (total)123 *Mercury (total)124 *Nickel (total)125 *Selenium (total)126 *Silver (total)127 *Thallium (total)128 *Zinc (total)129 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)

TABLE 4.5.6 PRIORITY POLLUTANTS*

Source: E.J. Shields, 1985, Pollution Control Engineers’ Handbook (Northbrook, Ill.: Pudvan).*The original list consisted of 65 specific compounds and chemical classes, indicated in bold type. When various forms of certain categories were broken out, the original list included 13 metals, 114 organic chemicals, as-

bestos, and cyanide. Three organic chemicals (**) were deleted in 1981.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 211


porting. These BMPs can be applied to a variety of in-dustrial facilities and are considered to be source reduc-tion practices. These BMPs eliminate or reduce the pollu-tant generation at the source.

The next best BMP options include reuse or recyclingof storm water in the industrial processes, followed byrunoff management controls, such as vegetative swales andinfiltration devices. Finally, if none of these applicationscontrol the storm water pollutants, regulators should ex-plore treatment options. Treatment options include engi-neered systems, such as oil–water separators, sedimenta-tion tanks, and metal precipitation systems, depending onthe pollutants to be removed.

Toxic PollutantsThe CWA regulates many toxic pollutants through NPDESpermits. Table 4.5.6 lists priority pollutants that the EPAhas designated as toxic. Effluent standards have been pro-mulgated for some of these pollutants, listed in Table 4.5.7.

The water environment can be monitored for toxic pol-lutants in the following three ways:

By biological and chemical analyses of the waterBy a bioassay in which organisms are placed in water sam-

ples and their reaction is compared with control. Thismethod is receiving attention for monitoring toxic dis-charges.

By plants and animals that are reactive to types and de-grees of pollution. The absence of organisms known tobe intolerant of pollution also serves as an indicationof pollution; the presence and expansion of pollution-tolerant organisms is a related index of pollution.

—William C. Zegel

ReferencesSchultz, S. 1972. Design of USAF water quality monitoring program.

AD-756-504, Springfield, Va.: National Technical InformationService.

TABLE 4.5.7 TOXIC POLLUTANT EFFLUENT STANDARDS

Toxic Pollutant Source Effluent Limitation

Aldrin/Dieldrin Manufacturer ProhibitedFormulator Prohibited

DDT Manufacturer ProhibitedFormulator Prohibited

Endrin Manufacturer Existing 1.5 mg/L (A)0.0006 kg/kkg (B)7.5 mg/L (C)

New 0.1 mg/L (A)0.00004 kg/kkg (B)0.5 mg/L (C)

Formulator ProhibitedToxaphene Manufacturer

Existing 1.5 mg/L (A)0.00003 kg/kkg (B)7.5 mg/L (C)

New 0.1 mg/L (A)0.000002 kg/kkg (B)0.5 mg/L (C)

Formulator ProhibitedBenzidine Manufacturer 10 mg/L (A)

0.130 kg/kkg (B)50 mg/L (C)

Applicator 10 mg/L (A)25 mg/L (C)

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1977, Toxic pollutant effluent standards, Code ofFederal Regulations, Title 40, part 129 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office).

(A) An average per working day, calculated over any calendar month.(B) Monthly average daily loading per quantity of pollutant produced.(C) A sample(s) representing any working day.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 212


4.6DRINKING WATER STANDARDS

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is designed toachieve uniform safety and quality of drinking water inthe United States. To achieve this goal, the SDWA identi-fies contaminants and establishes maximum acceptablelevels for those contaminants. The major provisions of theact with respect to establishing drinking water quality stan-dards are (1) the establishment of primary regulations toprotect public health and (2) the establishment of sec-ondary regulations that are related to the taste, odor, andappearance of drinking water.

Drinking Water RegulationThe EPA’s philosophy in setting drinking water regulationis to initially assess the potential for harm and determinethe feasibility of attainment (57 FR pt. 219 [13 November1985] 46936). Regulatory actions must be scientifically,legally, defensibly, technically, and economically feasible.This feasibility requires careful study and analysis and ex-tensive communication with those affected by the regula-tions (i.e., state agencies, public water supplies, and thescientific community), as well as other interested parties inthe public sector.

Terms such as regulations, standards, goals, guidelines,criteria, advisories, limits, levels, and objectives describenumerical or narrative qualities of drinking water that pro-tect public health. Distinctions between these terms gen-erally fall into either (1) legally enforceable concentrations(regulations or standards) or (2) concentrations that rep-resent desirable water quality but are not enforceable(goals or criteria). In addition, both regulations and goalsusually represent either (1) a health-related NOAEL or (2)a level representing a balance between health risks and thefeasibility of achieving these levels.

MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELGOALS

Maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) must be setat a level at which “no known or anticipated adverse ef-fects on the health of persons occur and which (sic) allowsan adequate margin of safety” (Cotruvo 1987, 1988). First,the highest NOAEL is based upon an assessment of hu-man or animal data (usually from animal experiments).To determine the RfD for regulatory purposes, theNOAEL is divided by an uncertainty factor (UF). Thisprocess corrects for the extrapolation of animal data tohuman data, the existence of weak or insufficient data,

and individual differences in human sensitivity to toxicagents, among other factors.

For MCLG purposes, the NOAEL must be measurablein terms of concentration in drinking water (e.g., mil-ligrams per liter). An adjustment of the RfD, which is re-ported in milligrams per kilograms (body weight) per dayto milligrams per liter, is necessary. This adjustment ismade by factoring in a reference amount of drinking wa-ter consumed per day and a reference weight for the con-sumer. The NOAEL, in milligrams per liter, is called thedrinking water equivalent level (DWEL).

DWELs are calculated as follows:

DWEL 5 4.6(1)

where:

NOAEL 5 no observed adverse effect level70 kg 5 assumed weight of an adult2 L/day 5 assumed amount of water consumed by an

adult per dayUF 5 uncertainty factor (usually 10, 100, or 1000)

(Note: An uncertainty factor of 10 is used when good acute or chronichuman exposure data are available and supported by acute and chronicdata in other species; an uncertainty factor of 1000 is used when acuteor chronic data in all species are limited or incomplete [National Academyof Science, 1977]).

To determine the MCLG, regulators account for thecontribution from other sources of exposure, including airand food. Comprehensive data are usually not availableon exposures from air and food. In this case, the MCLGis determined by

MCLG 5 DWEL3 (percentage of the drinking water contribution) 4.6(2)

When specific data are not available, regulators often usea 20 percent drinking water contribution.

Maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) are set “as closeto” the MCLGs “as is feasible.” The term feasible meansfeasible with the use of the BAT, which is a technologystandard rather than an ACL, taking costs into consider-ation (Cotruvo 1987, 1988). The general approach to set-ting MCLs is to determine the feasibility of controllingcontaminants. This approach requires (1) evaluating theavailability and cost of analytical methods, (2) evaluatingthe availability and performance of technologies and otherfactors related to feasibility and identifying those that arebest, and (3) assessing the costs of applying the technolo-gies to achieve various concentrations.

[NOAEL in mg/kg•day](70 kg)}}}}

(UF)(2 L/day)

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 213


EPA PROCESS FOR SETTINGSTANDARDS

EPA regulation development involves interpreting themandates and directives of the SDWA, performing tech-nical and scientific assessments to meet SDWA require-ments, preparing regulations that blend technical and sci-entific aspects with policy considerations, reviewing draftregulations within the agency, and facilitating public re-view of the draft and proposed regulations.

Figure 4.6.1 shows the development of draft EPA reg-ulations. The EPA presents analytical methods and moni-toring techniques in the methods and monitoring supportdocument. The following factors are among those theyconsider in specifying which analytical methods should beapproved:

• Reliability (precision and accuracy) of the analyt-ical results

• Specificity in the presence of interferences• Availability and performance of laboratories• Rapidity of analysis to permit routine use• Costs of analysis

Guidance to implement the monitoring requirements isalso in the document. States have an active role in deter-mining appropriate monitoring requirements. The EPAgenerally specifies a minimum frequency and providesguidance on factors to consider when assessing a system’svulnerability to contamination.

The treatment technologies and costs document sum-marizes the availability and performance of the treatmenttechnologies that can reduce contaminants in drinking wa-ter. Costs of treatment are determined for each technol-ogy for many sizes of water systems. The EPA determinesthe BAT based upon a number of factors, some of whichinclude technologies that

• Have the highest efficiency of removal• Are compatible with other types of water treat-

ment processes• Are available as manufactured items or compo-

nents• Are not limited to application in a particular ge-

ographic region• Have integrity for a reasonable service life as a

public work• Are reasonably affordable by large metropolitan

or regional systems• Can be mass-produced and put into operation in

time for implementation of the regulations

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Figure 4.6.2 shows the public participation part of theprocess. Public workshops, meetings, and hearings are con-ducted from early in the process until completion. Thesemeetings allow informal and formal discussions of issues

and the opportunity for the public to provide data and in-formation to the EPA. The advance notice of proposedrule making (ANPRM) is an optional step that providesan extra opportunity for public comment. Public commentperiods generally last from 30 to 45 days and up to 120days. The EPA reviews each submitted comment and usesit to prepare the proposed and final regulations. They alsoprepare a detailed document that presents each commentand the EPA’s responses.

EPA Drinking Water and Raw WaterStandardsTable 4.6.1 presents the national primary drinking waterstandards. These standards are enforceable MCLs untilthey are revised. Associated with these concentration stan-dards are the surface water treatment standards (filtration

Occurence/Human

Exposure

Draft

Regulations

HumanHealthEffects

SDWA

Directives

TreatmentTechnologies

and Costs

RegulatoryImpact

Analysis

AnalyticalMethods &MonitoringTechniques

FIG. 4.6.1 Development of draft U.S. EPA regulations(Adapted from the Federal Register).

Public Workshops

Public Comment PeriodPublic Workshops

Public Meeting

Public Comment PeriodPublic Workshops

Public Hearing

ANPRM

Proposed MCLG, MCLand Monitoring

Final MCLGs, MCLs,and Monitoring

Litigation

FIG. 4.6.2 Public participation in regulation development(Adapted from the Federal Register).

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 214

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C

TABLE 4.6.1 NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS

MCLG MCL Potential Health Effects fromContaminants (mg/L) (mg/L) Ingestion of Water Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water

Fluoride 4.0 4.0 Skeletal and dental fluorosis Natural deposits; fertilizer, aluminum industries; wateradditive

Volatile OrganicsBenzene zero 0.005 Cancer Some foods; gas, drugs, pesticide, paint, plastic industriesCarbon Tetrachloride zero 0.005 Cancer Solvents and their degradation productsp-Dichlorobenzene 0.075 0.075 Cancer Room and water deodorants, and mothballs1,2-Dichloroethane zero 0.005 Cancer Leaded gas, fumigants, paints1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.007 0.007 Cancer, liver and kidney effects Plastics, dyes, perfumes, paintsTrichloroethylene zero 0.005 Cancer Textiles, adhesives and metal degreasers1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.2 0.2 Liver, nervous system effects Adhesives, aerosols, textiles, paints, inks, metal degreasersVinyl Chloride zero 0.002 Cancer May leach from PVC pipe; formed by solvent breakdown

Coliform and Surface Water TreatmentGiardia lambia zero TT Gastroenteric disease Human and animal fecal wasteLegionella zero TT Legionnaire’s disease Indigenous to natural waters; can grow in water heating

systemsStandard Plate Count N/A TT Indicates water quality, effectiveness

of treatmentTotal Coliform* zero ,5%1 Indicates gastroenteric pathogens Human and animal fecal wasteTurbidity* N/A TT Interferes with disinfection, filtration Soil runoffViruses zero TT Gastroenteric disease Human and animal fecal waste

Phase II: InorganicsAsbestos (.10 mm) 7MFL 7MFL Cancer Natural deposits; asbestos cement in water systemsBarium* 2 2 Circulatory system effects Natural deposits; pigments, epoxy sealants, spent coalCadmium* 0.005 0.005 Kidney effects Galvanized pipe corrosion; natural deposits; batteries, paintsChromium* (total) 0.1 0.1 Liver, kidney, circulatory disorders Natural deposits; mining, electroplating, pigmentsMercury* (inorganic) 0.002 0.002 Kidney, nervous system disorders Crop runoff; natural deposits; batteries, electrical switchesNitrate* 10 10 Methemoglobulinemia Animal waste, fertilizer, natural deposits, septic tanks, sewageNitrite 1 1 Methemoglobulinemia Same as nitrate; rapidly converted to nitrateSelenium* 0.05 0.05 Liver damage Natural deposits; mining, smelting, coal/oil combustion

Phase II: OrganicsAcrylamide zero TT Cancer, nervous system effects Polymers used in sewage/wastewater treatmentAlachlor zero 0.002 Cancer Runoff from herbicide on corn, soybeans, other cropsAldicarb* 0.001 0.003 Nervous system effects Insecticide on cotton, potatoes, others; widely restrictedAldicarb sulfone* 0.001 0.002 Nervous system effects Biodegradation of aldicarbAldicarb sulfoxide* 0.001 0.004 Nervous system effects Biodegradation of aldicarbAtrazine 0.003 0.003 Mammary gland tumors Runoff from use as herbicide on corn and noncroplandCarbofuran 0.04 0.04 Nervous, reproductive system effects Soil fumigant on corn and cotton; restricted in some areasChlordane* zero 0.002 Cancer Leaching from soil treatment for termites


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 215

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C


MCLG MCL Potential Health Effects fromContaminants (mg/L) (mg/L) Ingestion of Water Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water

Chlorobenzene 0.1 0.1 Nervous system and liver effects Waste solvent from metal degreasing processes2,4-D* 0.07 0.07 Liver and kidney damage Runoff from herbicide on wheat, corn, rangelands, lawnso-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.6 Liver, kidney, blood cell damage Paints, engine cleaning compounds, dyes, chemical wastescis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.07 0.07 Liver, kidney, nervous, circulatory Waste industrial extraction solventstrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.1 0.1 Liver, kidney, nervous, circulatory Waste industrial extraction solventsDibromochloropropane zero 0.0002 Cancer Soil fumigant on soybeans, cotton, pineapple, orchards1,2-Dichloropropane zero 0.005 Liver, kidney effects; cancer Soil fumigant; waste industrial solventsEpichlorohydrin zero TT Cancer Water treatment chemicals; waste epoxy resins, coatingsEthylbenzene 0.7 0.7 Liver, kidney, nervous system Gasoline; insecticides; chemical manufacturing wastesEthylene dibromide zero 0.00005 Cancer Leaded gas additives; leaching of soil fumigantHeptachlor zero 0.0004 Cancer Leaching of insecticide for termites, very few cropsHeptachlor epoxide zero 0.0002 Cancer Biodegradation of heptachlorLindane 0.0002 0.0002 Liver, kidney, nerve, immune, Insecticide on cattle, lumber, gardens;

circulatory restricted 1983Methoxychlor 0.04 0.04 Growth, liver, kidney, nerve effects Insecticide for fruits, vegetables, alfalfa, livestock, petsPentachlorophenol zero 0.001 Cancer; liver and kidney effects Wood preservatives, herbicide, cooling tower wastesPCBs zero 0.0005 Cancer Coolant oils from electrical transformers; plasticizersStyrene 0.1 0.1 Liver, nervous system damage Plastics, rubber, resin, drug industries; leachate from city

landfillsTetrachloroethylene zero 0.005 Cancer Improper disposal of dry cleaning and other solventsToluene 1 1 Liver, kidney, nervous, circulatory Gasoline additive; manufacturing and solvent operationsToxaphene zero 0.003 Cancer Insecticide on cattle, cotton, soybeans; cancelled 19822,4,5-TP 0.05 0.05 Liver and kidney damage Herbicide on crops, right-of-way, golf courses;

cancelled 1983Xylenes (total) 10 10 Liver, kidney; nervous system By-product of gasoline refining; paints, inks, detergents

Lead and CopperLead* zero TT† Kidney, nervous system damage Natural/industrial deposits; plumbing, solder, brass

alloy faucetsCopper 1.3 TT‡ Gastrointestinal irritation Natural/industrial deposits; wood preservatives, plumbing

Phase V: InorganicsAntimony 0.006 0.006 Cancer Fire retardants, ceramics, electronics, fireworks, solderBeryllium 0.004 0.004 Bone, lung damage Electrical, aerospace, defense industriesCyanide 0.2 0.2 Thyroid, nervous system damage Electroplating, steel, plastics, mining, fertilizerNickel 0.1 0.1 Heart, liver damage Metal alloys, electroplating, batteries, chemical productionThallium 0.0005 0.002 Kidney, liver, brain, intestinal Electronics, drugs, alloys, glass

Phase V: OrganicsAdipate, (di(2-ethylhexyl)) 0.4 0.4 Decreased body weight; Synthetic rubber, food packaging, cosmetics

liver and testes damageDalapon 0.2 0.2 Liver, kidney Herbicide on orchards, beans, coffee, lawns, road/railwaysDichloromethane zero 0.005 Cancer Paint stripper, metal degreaser, propellant, extraction

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 216

©1999 C

RC

Press LL

C

Dinoseb 0.007 0.007 Thyroid, reproductive organ damage Runoff of herbicide from crop and noncrop applicationsDiquat 0.02 0.02 Liver, kidney, eye effects Runoff of herbicide onland & aquatic weedsDioxin zero 0.00000003 Cancer Chemical production by-product; impurity in herbicidesEndothall 0.1 0.1 Liver, kidney, gastrointestinal Herbicide on crops, land/aquatic weeds; rapidly degradedEndrin 0.002 0.002 Liver, kidney, heart damage Pesticide on insects, rodents, birds; restricted since 1980Glyphosate 0.7 0.7 Liver, kidney damage Herbicide on grasses, weeds, brushHexachlorobenzene zero 0.001 Cancer Pesticide production waste by-productHexachlorocyclopentadiene 0.05 0.05 Kidney, stomach damage Pesticide production intermediateOxamyl (Vydate) 0.2 0.2 Kidney damage Insecticide on apples, potatoes, tomatoesPAHs (benzo(a)pyrene) zero 0.0002 Cancer Coal tar coatings; burning organic matter; volcanoes,

fossil fuelsPhthalate, (di(2-ethylhexyl)) zero 0.006 Cancer PVC and other plasticsPicloram 0.5 0.5 Kidney, liver damage Herbicide on broadleaf and woody plantsSimazine 0.004 0.004 Cancer Herbicide on grass sod, some crops, aquatic algae1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.07 0.07 Liver, kidney damage Herbicide production; dye carrier1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.003 0.005 Kidney, liver, nervous system Solvent in rubber, other organic products; chemical

production wastes

Other Proposed (P) and Interim (I) StandardsBeta/photon emitters (I) and (P) zero 4 mrem/yr Cancer Decay of radionuclides in natural and manmade depositsAlpha emitters (I) and (P) zero 15 pCi/L Cancer Decay of radionuclides in natural depositsCombined Radium 226/228 (I) zero 5 pCi/L Bone cancer Natural depositsRadium 226* (P) zero 20 pCi/L Bone cancer Natural depositsRadium 228* (P) zero 20 pCi/L Bone cancer Natural depositsRadon (P) zero 300 pCi/L Cancer Decay of radionuclides in natural depositsUranium (P) zero 0.02 Cancer Natural depositsSulfate (P) 400/500 400/500 Diarrhea Natural depositsArsenic* (I) 0.05 0.05 Skin, nervous system toxicity Natural deposits; smelters, glass, electronics wastes; orchardsTotal Trihalomethanes (I) zero 0.10 Cancer Drinking water chlorination by-products

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994, EPA 810-F-94-001A (February) (Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA Office of Water).*Indicates original contaminants with interim standards which have been revised.†Action level 5 0.015 mg/L‡Action level 5 1.3 mg/LTT 5 Treatment technique requirementMFL 5 Million fibers per literpCi 5 picocurie—a measure of radioactivitymrem 5 millirems—a measure of radiation absorbed by the body

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 217


and disinfection) and total coliform standards promulgatedon June 29, 1989. (54 FR pt. 124 [29 June 1989]: 27486,27544; U.S. EPA 1989)

Table 4.6.2 provides the EPA’s secondary standardsthat set levels of drinking water contaminants that affectthe aesthetic value of drinking water, such as taste, odor,color, and appearance. These standards are not enforce-able by the federal government, but states are encouragedto adopt them. States can establish higher or lower levelsbased on local conditions, such as availability of alterna-tive source waters, provided that public health and wel-fare are not adversely affected.

In some areas of the country, raw surface water is useddirectly as a domestic water supply. California has issuedstandards for such water used as a source of drinking wa-ter. Table 4.6.3 presents these California standards as anexample.

Canadian Drinking Water GuidelinesIn Canada, drinking water is a shared federal–provincialresponsibility. In general, provincial governments are re-sponsible for an adequate, safe supply, whereas the FederalDepartment of National Health and Welfare develops

TABLE 4.6.2 NATIONAL SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS

SMCL SMCLConstituent Level (mg/L) Constituent Level (mg/L)

Chloride (Cl) 250 Manganese (Mn) 0.05Color, color units 15 Odor, threshold odor number 3Copper (Cu) 1 pH, pH units 6.5–8.5Corrosivity Noncorrosive Sulfate (SO4) 250Fluoride 2.0 Total dissolved solids (TDS) 500Surfactants (MBAS) 0.5 Zinc (Zn) 5.0Iron (Fe) 0.3

Health Advisory

LevelConstituent (mg/L)

Sodium 20

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register 54, part 124 (29 June 1989):27544.

TABLE 4.6.3 STANDARDS FOR RAW WATER USED AS SOURCES OF DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY

Excellent Source of Water Good Source of Water Poor Source of WaterSupply, Requiring Supply, Requiring Usual Supply, Requiring SpecialDisinfection Only, Treatment Such as Filtration or Auxiliary Treatment

Constituents as Treatment and Disinfection and Disinfection

B.O.D. (5-day) ppm Monthly Average: 0.75 1.5–2.5 2.0–5.5Maximum Day, or 1.0 3.0–3.5 4.0–7.5

sample:Coliform MPN per 100 ml Monthly Average: 50–100 240–5,000 10,000–20,000

Maximum Day, or •••• ,20%.5,000sample: ,5%.20,000

Dissolved oxygen ppm. average 4.0–7.5 2.5–7.0 2.5–6.5% saturation 50–75 25–75 ••••

pH Average 6.0–8.5 5.0–9.0 3.8–10.5Chlorides, max. ppm. 50 250 500Iron and manganese Max. ppm. 0.3 1.0 15

togetherFluorides ppm. 1.0 1.0 1.0Phenolic compounds Max. ppm. none .005 .025Color ppm. 0–20 20–70 150Turbidity ppm. 0–10 40–250 ••••

Source: California State Water Pollution Control Board, 1952.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 218


TABLE 4.6.4 CANADIAN GUIDELINES FOR DRINKING WATER QUALITY (1987)

Parameter Typea MACb IMACb AOb Notes

Alachlor P — — — 1Aldicarb P 0.009 — — 2(A)Aldrin and dieldrin P 0.0007 — — 1Antimony I c — — 1Arsenic I 0.05 — — 1Asbestos I d — — 3Atrazine P — 0.06 — 2(A)Azinphos-methyl P 0.02 — — 2(A)Barium I 1.0 — — 1Bendiocarb P 0.04 — — 2(A)Benzene O 0.005 — — 2(A)Benzo(a)pyrene O 0.00001 — — 2(A)Boron I 5.0 — — 1Bromoxynil P — 0.005 — 2(A)Cadmium I 0.005 — — 3Carbaryl P 0.09 — — 2(R)Carbofuran P 0.09 — — 2(A)Carbon tetrachloride O 0.005 — — 2(A)Cesium 137 R 50 Bq/LChlordane P 0.007 — — 1Chloride I — — ,250 5Chlorobenzene; 1,2-di- O 0.2 — 0.003 2(A)Chlorobenzene; 1,4-di- O 0.005 — 0.001 2(A)Chlorophenol; 2,4-di- O 0.9 — 0.0003 2(A)Chlorophenol; penta- O 0.06 — 0.03 2(A)Chlorophenol; 2,3,4,6-tetra- O 0.1 — 0.001 2(A)Chlorophenol; 2,4,6-tri- O 0.005 — 0.002 2(A)Chlorpyrifos P 0.09 — — 2(A)Chromium I 0.05 — — 3Coliform organisms — e

Color — — — ,15 TCU 5Copper I — — ,1.0 5Cyanazine P — 0.01 — 2(A)Cyanide I 0.2 — — 42,4-D P 0.1 — — 1DDT and metabolites P 0.03 — — 1Diazinon P 0.02 — — 4Dicamba P 0.12 — — 2(A)1,2-Dichloroethane O — — — 11,1-Dichloroethylene O — — — 1Dichloromethane O 0.05 — — 2(A)Diclofop-methyl P 0.009 — — 2(A)Dieldrin and aldrin P 0.0007 — — 1Dimethoate P — 0.02 — 2(A)Dinoseb P — — — 1Dioxins O — — — 1Diquat P 0.07 — — 2(A)Diuron P 0.15 — — 2(A)Endrin P — — — 2(D)Ethylbenzene O — — ,0.0024 2(A)Fluoride I 1.5f — — 4Furans O — — — 1Gasoline O g — — 2(A)Glyphosate P — 0.28 — 2(A)Hardness I — — h 4Heptachlor and heptachlor P 0.003 — — 1

epoxideIodine 131 R 10 Bq/LIron I — — ,0.3 5Lead I 0.05 — — 1Lindane P 0.004 — — 1Linuron P — — — 1Malathion P 0.19 — — 2(A)Manganese I — — ,0.05 5MCPAi P — — — 1Mercury I 0.001 — — 3Methoxychlor P 0.9 — — 2(R)Methyl-parathion P 0.007 — — 1Metolachlor P — 0.05 — 2(A)

Continued on nex page

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 219



Parameter Typea MACb IMACb AOb Notes

Metribuzin P 0.08 — — 2(A)Nitrate I 10.0j — — 1Nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) O 0.05 — — 4Nitrite I 1.0j — — 1Odor — — — Inoffensive 5Paraquat P — 0.01 — 2(A)Parathion P 0.05 — — 2(R)PCBs O — — — 1Pesticides (total) P 0.1 — — 1pH — — — 6.5–8.5k 5Phenols O — — — 2(D)Phorate P — 0.002 — 2(A)Picloram P — — — 1Radium 226 R 1 Bq/LSelenium I 0.01 — — 3Silver I — — — 2(D)Simazine P — 0.01 — 2(A)Sodium I l — — 3Strontium 90 R 10 Bq/LSulfate I 500 00 ,150 1Sulfide (as H2S) I — — ,0.05 52,4,5-T P 0.28 — ,0.02 2(A)2,4,5-TP P — — — 2(D)Taste — — — Inoffensive 5TCAm P — — — 1Temephos P — 0.28 — 2(A)Temperature — — — ,15°C 5Terbufos P — 0.001 — 2(A)Tetrachloroethylene O — — — 1Toluene O — — ,0.024 2(A)Total dissolved solids I — — ,500 5Toxaphene P — — — 2(D)Triallate P 0.23 — — 2(A)1,1,1-Trichloroethane O — — — 1Trichloroethylene O — — — 1Trifluralin P — — — 1Trihalomethanes O 0.35 — — 1Tritium R 40,000

Bq/LTurbidity — 1 NTUn — ,5 NTUo 1Uranium I 0.1 — — 2(R)Xylenes O — — ,0.3 2(A)Zinc I — — ,5.0 5

Source: Health and Welfare Canada, 1987, Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality.aI—Inorganic constituent; O—Organic constituent; P—Pesticide; R—Radionuclide.bUnless otherwise specified, units are mg/L; limits apply to the sum of all forms of each substance present. MAC 5 maximum acceptable concentration; IMAC 5

interim maximum acceptable concentration; AO 5 aesthetic objectives.cAn objective concentration only was set in 1978, based on health considerations.dAssessment of data indicates no need to set numerical guideline.eNo sample should contain more than 10 total coliform organisms per 100 mL; not more than 10 percent of the samples taken in a 30-day period should show the

presence of coliform organisms; not more than two consecutive samples from the same site should show the presence of coliform organisms; and none of the coliformorganisms detected should be fecal coliform.

fIt is recommended, however, that the concentration of fluoride be adjusted to 1.0 mg/L, which is the optimum level for the control of dental caries. Where the an-nual mean daily temperature is less than 10°C, a concentration of 1.2 mg/L should be maintained.

gAssessment of data indicates no need to set a numerical guideline.hPublic acceptance of hardness varies considerably. Generally hardness levels between 80 and 100 mg/L (as CaCO2) are considered acceptable; levels greater than

200 mg/L are considered poor but can be tolerated; those in excess of 500 mg/L are normally considered unacceptable. Where water is softened by sodium-ion ex-change, it is recommended that a separate unsoftened supply be retained for culinary and drinking purposes.

i2-Methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid.jAs nitrate- or nitrite-nitrogen concentration.kDimensionless.lIt is recommended that sodium be included in routine monitoring programs since levels may be of interest to authorities who wish to prescribe sodium-restricted di-

ets for their patients.mTrichloroacetic acid.nFor water entering a distribution system. A maximum of 5 NTU may be permitted if it can be demonstrated that disinfection is not compromised by the use of this

less stringent value.oAt the point of consumption.Notes:1. Under review for possible revision, deletion from, or addition to the guidelines.2. It is proposed that a guideline be added for this parameter for the first time (A); a change be made to the previous guideline (R); or the guideline be deleted (D).

If after 1 year, no evidence comes to light that questions the appropriateness of the proposal, it will be adopted as the guideline.3. Reassessment of data indicates no need to change 1978 recommendation.4. Adapted from Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: 1978; reassessment considered unnecessary at this time.5. Previously listed in Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: 1978 as a maximum acceptable concentration based on aesthetic considerations.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 220


TABLE 4.6.5 EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY STANDARDS

MaximumExpression of Admissible

Parameters the Results Guide Level Concentration

Arsenic As mg/L 50Beryllium Be mg/LCadmium Cd mg/L 5Cyanides CN mg/L 50Chromium Cr mg/L 50Mercury Hg mg/L 1Nickel Ni mg/L 50Lead* Pb mg/L 50 (in running

water)Antimony Sb mg/L 10Selenium Se mg/L 10Vanadium V mg/LPesticides and related mg/L

products* 0.1Substances consid-

ered separatelyTotal 0.5

PAHa mg/L 0.2

For Organoleptic ParametersColor mg/L Pt/Co scale 1 20Turbidity* mg/L SiO2 1 10

Jackson units 0.4 4Odor* Dilution number 0 2 at 12°C

3 at 25°CTaste* Dilution number 0 2 at 12°C

3 at 25°C

Temperature °C 12 25Hydrogen ion pH unit 6.5 # pH # 8.5

concentration*Conductivity* mS/cm at 20°C 400Chlorides* Cl mg/L 25Sulfates SO4 mg/L 25 500Silica* SiO2 mg/LCalcium Ca mg/L 100Magnesium Mg mg/L 30 50Sodium* Na mg/L 20 150–175Potassium K mg/L 10 12Aluminum Al mg/L 0.05 0.2Total hardness*Dry residues mg/L after 1500

drying at 180°CDissolved oxygen* % O2 saturationFree carbon CO2 mg/L

dioxide*

Nitrates NO3 mg/L 25 50Nitrites NO2 mg/L 0.1Ammonium NH4 mg/L 0.05 0.5Kjeldahl nitrogen* N mg/L 1KMnO4 O2 mg/L 2 5

oxidizability*

For Parameters Concerning Toxic Substances

For Physicochemical Parameters (in Relation to the Water’s Natural Structure)

For Parameters Concerning Substances Undesirable in Excessive Amounts


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 221



MaximumExpression of Admissible

Parameters the Results Guide Level Concentration

Total organic carbon C mg/L(TOC)*

Hydrogen sulfide S mg/L Undetectableorganoleptically

Substances extract- mg/L dry residue 0.1able in chloroform

Dissolved or emulsi- mg/L 10fied hydrocarbons*

Phenols (phenol C6H5OH mg/L 0.5index)*

Boron B mg/L 1000Surfactants mg/L (lauryl sul- 200

fate)Other mg/L 1

organochlorinecompounds*

Iron Fe mg/L 50 200Manganese Mn mg/L 20 50Copper* Cu mg/L 100, 3000Zinc* Zn mg/L 100, 5000Phosphorus P2O5 mg/L 400 5000Fluoride* F mg/L

8–12°C 150025–30°C 700

Cobalt Co mg/LSuspended solids NoneResidual chlorine* Cl mg/LBarium Ba mg/L 100Silver* Ag mg/L 10

Minimum RequiredConcentration

Parameters* Expression of the Results (Softened Water)

Total hardness Ca mg/L 60Hydrogen ion concentra- pH

tionAlkalinity HCO3 mg/L 30Dissolved oxygen

Source: Official Journal of the European Communities 23, Official Directive no. L229/11-L229/23 (30 August 1980).Note: Certain of these substances may even be toxic when present in very substantial quantities.*Refer to EEC standards for comments.

For Minimum Required Concentration for Softened Water Intended for Human Consumption

quality guidelines and conducts research. Guidelines forCanadian drinking water quality are developed through ajoint federal–provincial mechanism and are not legally en-forceable unless promulgated as regulations by the appro-priate provincial agency. Table 4.6.4 lists the current guide-lines for Canadian drinking water quality.

European Economic CommunityDrinking Water DirectivesThe European Economic Community (EEC), establishedby a treaty of the Council of the European Communities,issued a council directive relating to the quality of water

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 222


for human consumption. Specifically, the EEC standardsprovide for both setting standards for toxic chemicals andbacteria that present a health hazard and defining the phys-ical, chemical, and biological parameters for different wa-ter uses, specifically for human consumption. The mem-ber states are directed to bring laws, regulations, andadministrative provisions into force to comply with the di-rective on water standards (Table 4.6.5).

Home WellsState health agencies generally regulate the water qualityfrom home wells. As an example, Table 4.6.6 presents alist of recommended water tests for home wells in NewJersey. The list of tests is designed to ensure maximum wa-ter supply safety while keeping the cost of testing at a min-imum.

As an absolute minimum, testing should include the co-liform test for bacteriological safety. Additional chemicaltesting is warranted:

1. if the home is located in a heavily industrialized area;near service stations, machine shops, or dry cleaners

2. if the home is near a hazardous waste source or a land-fill

3. if the home is near houses that have reported problems4. if the water has an unusual chemical taste, odor, or

color

Testing for specific organic chemicals is usually expen-sive. For accurate and reliable results, tests should be per-formed in a state-certified laboratory.

Bottled WaterThe United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)regulates bottled water on a national level. Some stateshave promulgated their own standards for bottled water(Shelton 1994). The FDA has quality standards for bot-tled drinking water and Good Manufacturing PracticeRegulations for processing and bottling all bottled water.These standards and regulations outline in detail the san-itary conditions under which the water is to be obtained,processed, bottled, and tested. They require that water beobtained from sources free from pollution and be of goodsanitary quality when judged by the results of bacterio-logical and chemical analysis. Water bottlers must list theaddition of salt and carbon dioxide on their labels.

—William C. Zegel

ReferencesCotruvo, J.A. 1987. Risk assessment and control decisions for protect-

ing drinking water quality. In I.H. Suffet and M. Malaiyandi, eds.,Advances in Chemistry (Washington, D.C.: American ChemicalSociety).

———. 1988. Drinking water standards and risk assessment. RegulatoryToxicology and Pharmacology 8, no. 3 (September): 288.

Federal Register 50, part 219 (13 November 1985): 46936.———. 54, part 124 (29 June 1989): 27486.———: 27544.Shelton, T.B. 1994. Interpreting drinking water analysis. Cook College,

Rutgers University: Publication Distribution Center.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1989. Guidance man-

ual for compliance with filtration and disinfection requirements forpublic water supplies using surface waters. PB 90 148016/AS(October) National Technical Information Service.

TABLE 4.6.6 RECOMMENDED WATER TESTS FOREXISTING HOME WELLS (NONPUBLICWATER SYSTEMS)

Test Name MCL or SMCL

Recommended:Bacteria (Total Coliform)1 None detectedNitrate1 10 mg/l NO3

2

Lead1 0.05 mg/lConsider:

Volatile organic1 If positive retest forchemical scan specific chemicals

Hardness (Total) 150 mg/lIron 0.3 mg/lManganese 0.05 mg/lSodium 50 mg/lpH 6.5–8.5Corrosivity Langelier Index 121.0Radioactivity (Gross Alpha)2 5 pico curies/lMercury2 .002 mg/l

Source: S.D. Faust, 1974, Water from home wells—Problems and treatment,Circular 594-B (Cook College, Rutgers University: New Jersey ExperimentStation).

1Denotes an MCL-based on health standard. If these levels are exceeded con-sult with the local health department for interpretation and guidance.

2In wells between 50–150 feet deep in South Jersey, the Department ofEnvironmental Protection also recommends that the homeowner consider thesetests. Consult with your local health officer for the applicability of these tests toyour municipality.

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 223


Vast reserves of water are in the ground in many areas ofthe world. Little is known about the quality of this ground-water, except in areas where aquifers are being exploited.In Europe and the United States, where groundwater rep-resents a significant source of fresh water, between 5 and10 percent of all investigated wells have nitrate levelshigher than the maximum recommended value of 45mg/L(A). Many organic pollutants find their way intogroundwater as seepage from dumps, leakage from sew-ers and fuel tanks, and runoff from agricultural land orpaved surfaces.

Because groundwater is cut off from the atmosphere’soxygen supply, its capacity for self-purification is low. Themicrobes that perform this function in surface waters needoxygen to function. Microbes that do not use oxygen arein groundwater, but their destruction of pollutants is slow.Thus, although the pollution of rivers and lakes can berapidly reversed, pollution of groundwater is not easily re-versed. Generally, the only practical control for ground-water pollution is to eliminate sources of contamination,particularly in areas of rapid aquifer recharge from the sur-face.

For regulatory purposes, groundwaters are classified ac-cording to use, generally potable and nonpotable. In someareas, such as Florida, almost all drinking water comesfrom groundwater. They have four classes of groundwa-ter, with the additional discrimination based on levels ofdissolved solids. Because of Florida’s strong dependenceon groundwater, it has developed some of the most so-phisticated regulations and standards to manage the re-source. For this reason, this section focuses on the currentregulation of groundwater in Florida as a model that maybecome more common in the next century.

Groundwater ClassificationsFlorida’s groundwaters are classified as follows:

Class G-I: Potable groundwaters in single source aquifersthat have a total dissolved solids content less than 3,000mg/L

Class G-II: Potable groundwaters in single source aquifersthat have a total dissolved solids content less than10,000 mg/L

Class G-III: Nonpotable groundwaters in unconfinedaquifers that have a total dissolved solids content of10,000 mg/L or greater, or with a content of 3,000–10,000 mg/L that have been reclassified as having no

potential as a future drinking water source, or have beendesignated as an exempt aquifer

Class G-IV: Nonpotable groundwaters in confined aquifersthat have a total dissolved solids content of 10,000mg/L or greater

Other areas usually classify potable and nonpotablegroundwaters in some manner.

Groundwater StandardsIn Florida, any discharge into Class G-I and G-II ground-waters must comply with the water quality criteria of eachclassification and with minimum criteria. Discharges intoClass G-III groundwaters must comply only with mini-mum criteria, and discharges into Class G-IV groundwa-ters must comply with minimum criteria only when thestate regulatory agency determines a danger to publichealth, safety, or welfare.

Minimum criteria include all substances in concentra-tions that are harmful to plants, animals, or organisms na-tive to the soil and responsible for treatment or stabiliza-tion of the discharge. The minimum criteria also includesubstances in concentrations that:

• Are carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, or toxicto humans

• Are acutely toxic to indigenous species of signifi-cance to the aquative community

• Pose a serious danger to public health, safety, orwelfare

• Create or constitute a nuisance• Impair the reasonable and beneficial use of adja-

cent waters• Waters classified as Classes G-I and G-II must also

meet the primary and secondary drinking waterstandards

Wellhead ProtectionA developing area of regulation is the control of land usein the vicinity of drinking water wells or in the rechargearea(s) for wells. This control restricts uses that could re-lease contaminants and adversely affect the quality ofgroundwaters. It imposes standards upon the contem-plated use of land in such an area, called the wellhead pro-tection (WHP) area. The WHP area is the surface and sub-surface area surrounding a public water well or wellfield

4.7GROUNDWATER STANDARDS

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 224

through which contaminants could pass and eventuallyreach the groundwater supply.

Implementation of a WHP plan can cover a range ofactions. The minimum action is to develop plans for al-ternate sources of drinking water in the event of well con-tamination, to inventory potential sources of contamina-

tion in the area, and to educate the population of the areaas to the potential danger. Stronger actions include con-trol of nonpoint sources of pollution, banning certain landuses and facilities, and a strong enforcement agency.

—William C. Zegel


International Standards

4.8ISO 14000 Environmental Standards

ISO 14000 is a different kind of environmental standardthan others discussed in this chapter. It is a series of processstandards developed by the International Organization forStandardization (ISO). They consist of a family of volun-tary environmental management standards and guidelines.The purpose of the standards is to establish an organiza-tional environmental ethic and enhance an organization’sability to measure and attain standards of environmentalperformance. As such, it has the potential to help compa-nies act as responsible environmental citizens by provid-ing a commonly accepted basis for corporate commitmentto the environment and to provide a platform from whichenvironmental professionals may take their companies innew directions.

ISO 14000 is also an international system for the cer-tification of users. This extends the standards into the do-mains of international policy and trade, which is consis-tent with the mission of ISO to facilitate the internationalexchange of goods and services. The system consists of:

1. Environmental Management System Standard2. Environmental Auditing Standard3. Environmental Labeling Standard4. Environmental Performance Evaluation Standard5. Life Cycle Analysis Standard6. Product Standards7. Terms & Definitions

The standards deal with management systems, not withperformance; they are voluntary and require no public re-porting; and they are designed for organizations in the de-veloped world. As such, they will provide a company withinternal benefits, but will not fully address a company’sconcerns about international trade requirements, regula-tory compliance, or public image as environmentally re-

sponsible corporate citizens. It is up to the company im-plementing the environmental management system at theheart of ISO 14000 to integrate it into the business in amanner that will realize financial and environmental per-formance improvements.

The Environmental Management System Standard isthe centerpiece of ISO 14000. The essential elements ofthis standard are summarized below. Please refer to the fi-nal standards and their associated documents for furtherguidance and clarification.

1. Top management defines the organization’s environ-mental policy.

2. The organization establishes and maintains:a. a procedure or process to identify the environ-

mental issues pertaining to its activities, products,and services that it can control and over which ithas an influence, in order to determine those as-pects of operations that have or can have a signif-icant impact upon the environment;

b. a procedure or process to identify and have accessto legal and other requirements that are directly ap-plicable to the environmental aspects of its activi-ties, products, and services;

c. documented environmental objectives and targetsfor each relevant function and at each level withinthe organization;

d. a program for setting and achieving its objectivesand targets.

3. The plan is implemented by:a. management defining a structure and providing re-

sources to effectively manage environmental issues;b. identifying the training, education, and skills

needed for all personnel whose work may signifi-cantly affect the environment;

CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 225

c. establishing and maintaining internal and externalcommunication procedures regarding environmen-tal aspects of the organization’s activities and itsenvironmental management system;

d. identifying and maintaining information on opera-tions, plans, and procedures related to the envi-ronmental management system;

e. establishing and maintaining procedures for con-trolling all the documents required for effective im-plementation of the environmental managementsystem;

f. developing and maintaining documented proce-dures to facilitate implementation of the organiza-tion’s environmental policies, objectives, targets,and programs;

g. establishing and maintaining procedures for pre-vention of—and response to—accidents and emer-gency situations, and for prevention or mitigationof the environmental impacts that may be associ-ated with them.

4. The plan is monitored and corrective actions taken byestablishing and maintaining:a. documented procedures to monitor and measure

the key characteristics of those processes that canhave a significant impact on the environment;

b. documented procedures both for handling and in-vestigating non-conformance with the environ-mental management system and for initiating cor-rective and preventive action;

c. procedures for the identification, maintenance, anddisposition of the environmental records needed toimplement and operate the environmental man-agement system;

d. a program and procedures for periodically con-ducting environmental management system audits.

5. To ensure the continuing suitability and effectivenessof the environmental management system, a processmust be established and maintained—and implementedat defined intervals—for management to review andevaluate the efficacy of the environmental managementsystem.

—William C. Zegel

BibliographySchumacher, A. 1988. A Guide to Hazardous Materials Management.

62–69. Quorum Books.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1977. Toxic pollutant ef-

fluent standards. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40, part 129.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.


CHAP4.QXD 1/20/99 8:46 AM Page 226

Chapter 4. Standards

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 4. Standards