Provided by

Texas Water Conservation Association

and

Water Environment Association of Texas

Revising Water Quality Standards forRevising Water Quality Standards forWater-Based RecreationWater-Based Recreation

May 16, 2007

TopicsTopics

Review of current standards Areas of concern with current standards Possibilities for improvement Process considerations – how to move

forward?

Current StandardsCurrent Standards

EPA 1986 criteria based on limited lake studies Keystone Lake Lake Erie

Uses limited to only two: Contact recreation = “swimming” Noncontact recreation = “boating or bank use”

(rarely used, ship channels) Criteria

CR: 126 colonies E. Coli per 100 mL NCR: 605 col/100 mL

Swimming Use Applicable to All Streams?Swimming Use Applicable to All Streams?

Impacts to Water Quality Management ProcessImpacts to Water Quality Management Process

Distorts 303(d) list Forces restoration activities on streams that

may not be suitable for swimming use Mandates load reductions on non-wastewater

sources (storm water, wildlife, etc.) May cause public expenditures to address non-

human bacteria sources May result in TPDES permit modifications

Areas of ConcernAreas of Concern

Not all uses addressed in current designations Swimming - CR Wading – NCR, limited CR Fishing - NCR Boating - NCR

Swimming Use/Criteria not appropriate for all waters

Exposure assumptions not considered Water (pathogen) ingestion rates (mL/day) Eye, ear, skin contact

Areas of ConcernAreas of Concern Frequency of use of water body not considered Limited epidemiological data for national

criteria Seasonal variations not considered Swimming suitability not considered

Flow Depth Visibility Temperature

Actual pathogens not considered

Possibilities for ImprovementPossibilities for Improvement

Define tiered uses Swimming, Wading, Fishing, and Boating

Define associated criteria using Exposure rates from literature or studies:

reflective of recreational activities Exposure frequency and duration

i.e., designated beaches vs. urban streams In-state epidemiological studies

if resources available

Support with Use Attainability Analyses (UAAs)

Possibilities for ImprovementPossibilities for Improvement

Include consideration of swimming suitability Physical limitations (depth, flow, visibility) Water not treated for ingestion Commercial navigation conflicts Discharges over international border Access, alligators and nature preserve protection

Include seasonal use variations Include high flow use cut-off

There’s HopeThere’s Hope Kansas Approach

Primary Contact (depth > 18”) A: Designated Swimming Beach, E coli 160 cfu/dL B: Open access, 262 cfu/dL C: Not open to public, 427 cfu/dL

Secondary Contact (depth<18”) A: Open access, 2,358 cfu/dL B: Not open to public, 3,843 cfu/dL

19 states have seasonal criteria Other states have tiered uses Chicago is conducting epidemiology work on boating

and fishing uses

Process ConsiderationsProcess Considerations

Involve Clean Rivers Program to help Establish regional stakeholder groups to

refine uses and to conduct required UAA’s

Include local input and watershed knowledge

Support TCEQ/HGAC epidemiological study

Get EPA Region 6 involved upfront

TopicsTopics

Review of current standards Areas of concern with current standards Possibilities for improvement Process considerations – how to move

forward?