Download This Bill in Microsoft Word format
Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
H. 3780
STATUS INFORMATION
General Bill
Sponsors: Reps. Rice, Owens, Hardwick, Hiott and Ott
Document Path: l:\council\bills\gjk\20334sd05.doc
Companion/Similar bill(s): 326
Introduced in the House on March 15, 2005
Currently residing in the House Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs
Summary: Aquatic Life Protection Act
HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS
Date Body Action Description with journal page number
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3/15/2005 House Introduced and read first time HJ-158
3/15/2005 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources
and Environmental Affairs HJ-159
View the latest legislative information at the LPITS web site
VERSIONS OF THIS BILL
TO AMEND SECTION 48-1-87, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE AQUATIC LIFE PROTECTION ACT, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH AND CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL MAY IMPOSE NPDES PERMIT LIMITATIONS FOR TOXICITY IF A DISCHARGE HAS THE REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO A VIOLATION OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, AND TO AMEND ACT 258 OF 2004, ALSO RELATING TO THE AQUATIC LIFE PROTECTION ACT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT DO NOT APPLY, AS STAYED, OR MAY BE ADMINISTRATIVELY MODIFIED.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION 1. Section 48-1-87 of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 258 of 2004, is amended to read:
"Section 48-1-87. (A) In order to provide for the survival and propagation of a balanced indigenous community of flora and fauna as set forth in Regulation 61-68 in a manner consistent with Section 48-1-20, the department may only impose NPDES permit limitations for whole effluent toxicity ("WET") expressed in terms of survival endpoints where, based on the mixing zone authorized in subsection (D), the department determines that a discharge has the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion of a water quality criterion in Regulation 61-68, other than numeric criteria for specific pollutants, that apply to the protection of indigenous aquatic organisms.
(B) The department shall promulgate regulations to implement WET tests that incorporate the findings of the study required by this subsection. The study must:
(1) develop a valid scientific correlation between sublethal WET test results and the biological integrity of representative lakes, streams, and estuaries in this State, wherein biological integrity includes the richness, abundance, and balanced community structure of indigenous aquatic organisms;
(2) calibrate EPA's standard toxicity testing species and methods to the natural water chemistry representative of the lakes, streams, groundwater, and natural stormwater runoff of this State; and
(3) as necessary, develop sublethal WET testing protocols in accordance with applicable EPA regulations and guidance using fish and invertebrate species native to this State, including sensitivity analyses to validate these native species for use in further sublethal WET tests, and to provide the correlations and calibrations set forth in items (1) and (2).
(C) Until such time as the department complies with subsection (B), the department may use sublethal WET test failures associated with a specific discharge only for the following purposes:
(1) to require additional WET testing;
(2) to require a Toxicity Identification Evaluation;
(3) to require an instream bioassessment;
(4) to impose a permit limit expressed in terms of lethality where the department can show reasonable potential pursuant to subsection (A); or
(5) to impose WET permit limits expressed in terms of sublethal endpoints where the department can show reasonable potential, in conformity with subsection (D)with respect to the specific discharge.
(D) For purposes of performing WET reasonable potential determinations for a specific discharge and, where justified, setting WET permit limitations for that discharge, the department shall:
(1) adjust for actual frequency, duration, and magnitude of exposure to potentially toxic discharges;
(2) evaluate acute and chronic instream exposure based on the complete mixing of the effluent with one hundred percent of that stream flow statistically calculated to represent the lowest average flow conditions that occur continuously for a seven-day period once every ten years (7Q10) or, for water bodies other than streams including, but not limited to, lakes and ponds, other reasonably equivalent conditions based on complete mixing with the 7Q10 flow of source waters feeding the water body;
(3) use stream flow conditions other than those described in item (2) where justified by hydrological controls that are capable of ensuring minimum flow conditions higher than the respective ten-year flows identified in item (2), to evaluate acute and chronic exposure, using the actual frequency, duration, and magnitude of that exposure;
(4) use, for stormwater discharges, stream flows higher than 7Q10 that are proportional to the rainfall event responsible for the stormwater discharge, with any resulting WET permit limitations comprising only those expressed in terms of acute survival endpoints;
(5) consider such mixing calculations as described in items (1), (2), (3), and (4) to be consistent with its policy set forth in Regulation 61-68 for minimizing mixing zones;
(6) provide for, at the request of an individual discharger, setting WET permit limitations based on actual flow conditions that may be present above the minimum flows defined in items (2), (3), and (4);
(7) show, based on scientifically established and statistically sound procedures and with results validated by independent peer review, that a statistically significant correlation exists between sublethal WET test results for the specific discharge and the extent of adverse impact on the indigenous biological community downstream of the discharge prior to imposing WET permit limits expressed in terms of sublethal endpoints;
(8) utilize a weight of evidence approach that gives primary consideration to compliance with numeric criteria and actual instream biological conditions;
(9) show that WET test results are at levels above which there is adequate confidence that test organism survival or reproductive rate in the effluent is statistically significantly different from test organism survival or reproductive rate in the control;
(10) allow, at the request of the permittee, the use of ambient receiving waters as control and diluent waters in WET tests used for compliance purposes; and
(11) exempt once-through, noncontact cooling water, to which no biocides have been added, from toxicity requirements.
(E) The department shall establish formal data quality objectives that define the level of accuracy and precision necessary to correctly evaluate WET test results and shall establish an enhanced laboratory certification program to implement those objectives.
(F) The department shall disclose, in the rationale for any NPDES permit in which a WET limit is imposed, the number of WET limit excursions that are statistically expected to arise during the permit term due to statistical error, analytical variability, or other factors unrelated to actual effluent quality.
(G) No later than one year after the effective date of this section, the department shall promulgate regulations, consistent with the use reclassification provisions of Regulation 61-68(E)(6) and conforming with applicable EPA regulations and guidance, to allow temporary variances from WET-based requirements or permit limits for a period of three years, subject to review and, as appropriate, subsequent renewals.
(H) Any provision in this section must not be construed to limit the department's authority to adopt water quality criteria or to impose permit limits for specific chemical pollutants, and any provision in this section must not be construed to obligate the department to revalidate existing water quality criteria or establish additional water quality criteria for specific chemical pollutants.
(I) For the purpose of implementing Section 48-1-20 and Regulation 61-68:
(1) "Propagation" means self-sustaining presence and dissemination of aquatic organisms native to this State within their natural environment.
(2) "Biological integrity" means a measure of the health of an aquatic or marine ecosystem using the richness and abundance of species as the primary indicator, and "biological integrity" is a key component of an "instream bioassessment".
(3) "Valid scientific correlation" means a statistically valid relationship allowing the prediction, to within a predetermined statistical confidence level of at least ninety-five percent, of the value of a second variable or parameter from the value of a first variable or parameter.
(4) "Sublethal toxicity tests" means laboratory experiments that measure the nonlethal biological effects including, but not limited to, growth or reproduction, of effluents or receiving waters on aquatic organisms.
(5) "Calibrate" means a process to establish the baseline control condition based on the normal range of biological responses likely to occur when standard test organisms are exposed to various nontoxic waters sampled from streams and lakes throughout the State.
(6) "Frequency, duration, and magnitude of exposure" means a measure of the potential for toxic effects to occur based on the amount of time that an organism is likely to be in contact with a given concentration of a potentially toxic substance and the probability that similar contact conditions will reoccur in waters of this State.
(A) In order to provide for the survival and propagation of a balanced community of aquatic flora and fauna as set forth in Regulation 61-68 in a manner consistent with Section 48-1-20, the department shall, where necessary to protect aquatic life, impose NPDES permit limitations for whole effluent toxicity (WET) based on the mixing zone authorized in subsection (C), where the department determines that a discharge causes or has the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion of a water quality criterion in Regulation 61-68, other than numeric criteria for specific pollutants, that apply to the protection of aquatic organisms.
(B) As directed by this section, the department may promulgate regulations to implement WET tests that calibrate EPA's standard toxicity testing species and methods to the natural water chemistry representative of the lakes, streams, groundwater, and stormwater runoff of this State. In developing these regulations the department may use the findings of any scientifically defensible study it may conduct and may use other pertinent peer reviewed studies or conclusions. In the interim, this section shall not be construed to limit the department's authority to impose WET limits.
(C) For purposes of performing WET reasonable potential determinations for a specific discharge and, where justified, setting WET permit limitations for that discharge, the department, notwithstanding any other provision of law shall:
(1) develop procedures to allow up to one hundred percent dilution in water bodies, based the 7Q10 flow as defined by Regulation 61-68, where justified by the permittee or permit applicant and approved by the department;
(2) use stream flow conditions other than those described in item (1) where justified by hydrological controls that are capable of ensuring critical flow conditions higher than the respective ten-year flows identified in item (1), to evaluate acute and chronic exposure;
(3) use, for storm water discharges, a representative flow greater than 7Q10 flow, as demonstrated on a site-specific basis, with any resulting WET permit limitations comprising only those expressed in terms of acute survival endpoints;
(4) consider such mixing calculations as described in items (1), (2), and (3) to be consistent with its policy set forth in Regulation 61-68 for minimizing mixing zones;
(5) give consideration to compliance with numeric criteria and actual instream biological conditions, in the absence of a valid scientific correlation between sublethal WET test results and the biological integrity of representative lakes, streams, and estuaries in this State, wherein biological integrity includes the richness, abundance, and balanced community structure of indigenous aquatic organisms;
(6) allow, at the request of the permittee, the use of ambient receiving waters as control and dilution waters in WET tests;
(7) exempt once-through, noncontact cooling water, which contains no additives, from toxicity requirements;
(8) allow dischargers to use WET testing protocols that utilize alternative species in accordance with applicable EPA regulations and guidance;
(9) provide, at the request of an individual discharger, tiered WET permit limitations based on flow conditions that are expected to be present during different quarters or other specific monitoring periods of the year. All tier periods and associated flows must be explained in the rationale document for a permit that contains tiered limitations; and
(10) provide at the permittee's request, a provision in all discharge permits with a WET limit or monitoring requirement mandating a retest as soon as practicable after toxicity is indicated in a WET test, but in no case shall the resampling be initiated more than ten business days following receipt of written notice from the laboratory of a WET test failure. The permit shall provide further that if the retest is either not timely performed or confirms the toxicity, the permittee is in violation of the WET limit but that if the retest does not confirm the toxicity, the permittee shall remain in compliance with the WET limit and shall resume the testing frequency as prescribed by the permit. This item does not preclude the department from imposing any retest requirement required by federal law.
(D) No part of this section shall be construed to limit the department's authority to adopt water quality criteria, to impose permit limits for specific chemical pollutants, to obligate the department to revalidate existing water quality criteria, or to establish additional water quality criteria for specific chemical pollutants. The department, whenever appropriate, shall utilize the flexibility of interpretation concerning WET testing and the use of WET test results provided by EPA.
(E) For the purpose of implementing Section 48-1-20 and Regulation 61-68:
(1) 'propagation' is defined in Regulation 61-68;
(2) 'biological integrity' means a measure of the health of an aquatic or marine ecosystem using the richness and abundance of species as the primary indicator, and 'biological integrity' is a key component of an 'instream bioassessment';
(3) 'sublethal toxicity tests' means laboratory experiments that measure the nonlethal biological effects, including, but not limited to, growth or reproduction, of effluents or receiving waters on aquatic organisms;
(4) 'calibrate' means a process to establish the baseline control condition based on the normal range of biological responses likely to occur when standard test organisms are exposed to various nontoxic waters sampled from streams and lakes throughout the State.
(F) For any NPDES permit that was taken over by EPA due to provisions of Act 258 of 2004 from July 1, 2004 through the effective date of this subsection as revised by the provisions of this 2005 act, the department shall convey to EPA, through the certification process (40 C.F.R. Part 124.53), any additional requirements mandated under state law. Moreover, notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, the requirement for a counterpart state permit for any such discharge is waived. Alternatively, at the request of the permittee, the department may waive the certification process and issue a state permit. However, affected permittees shall submit applications for reissuance to the department in accordance with Regulation 61-9, at least one hundred eighty days in advance of the expiration of the federal permits. At the discretion of the department, the annual fees for NPDES permits in Regulation 61-30 may continue to be charged, when certifying a federal permit, if the department waives the certification fee.
(G) The department shall reduce or eliminate WET monitoring requirements, as appropriate, in accordance with permit modification processes contained in Regulation 61-9, where dischargers demonstrate that their effluents do not demonstrate reasonable potential."
SECTION 2. Section 3 of Act 258 of 2004 is amended to read:
Section 3. If at any time after the effective date of this act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency publishes a Notice of Intent in the Federal Register to commence withdrawal of the South Carolina NPDES program as a direct result of this act, the application and enforcement of this act is suspended.
(A) The provisions of this act do not apply to any permit applicant or existing permittee so long as the permittee or permit applicant notifies the Department of Health and Environmental Control in writing that it is opting out of this act. Upon receipt by the department of the notification, the provisions of this act do not govern any regulatory actions taken by the department on the proposed or existing permit.
(B) If the United States Environmental Protection Agency disapproves any change effected to the state's delegated NPDES program or water quality standards regulated by this act, the objectionable requirements in this act must be stayed until EPA's disapproval is overturned through a final federal judicial ruling. In that case, the department promptly shall process permit modifications for a permittee requesting the modification to implement the affected provisions of this act. If EPA objects to provisions mandated by this act in state discharge permits, the department, upon the concurrence of the permittee, may modify the permit to address EPA's objection."
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
This web page was last updated on Friday, December 4, 2009 at 3:44 P.M.