(Amendment)
DAR File No.: 33233
Filed: 12/01/2009 04:33:11 PMRULE ANALYSIS
Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:
The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Office approve or deny any changes to water quality standards that are adopted by the states. The approval of a water quality standard indicates that EPA considers the standard adequate and that promulgation of a federal standard is not required. On 09/30/2009, EPA submitted a formal action on the changes to Rule R317-2 that were adopted by the Water Quality Board (WQB) on 11/10/2008. EPA disapproved portions of the state's antidegradation policy, Subsection R317-2-3.5(b)(5), that defines losses of assimilative capacity considered de minimis and not requiring a Level II review. Federal regulations require that any disapproval of a water quality standard be accompanied with options to solve the problem (CWA section 303(b)(2)) and provides states with 90 days to incorporate changes into their standards; otherwise, the Regional Administrator is required to promulgate a federal standard. These changes are in response to the EPAs actions. Changes to other sections of Rule R317-2 are made to provide clarifying language, correct editorial errors, and address other housekeeping items.
Summary of the rule or change:
The sections disapproved by the EPA that defined losses of assimilative capacity considered de minimis and not requiring a Level II review were deleted in Subsection R317-2-3(3.5)(b)(5). Subsection R317-2-3(3.5)(b)(1) was modified to read: Water quality will not be lowered by the proposed activity. For example, a Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) permit is being renewed and the proposed effluent concentration value and pollutant loading is equal to or less than the existing permitted concentration and corresponding pollutant loading. If waste loads are not defined in an existing permit the design capacity of the facility, of both concentrations and loads, will be used to determine whether a proposed project lowers water quality. Subsection R317-2-3(3.5)(f) is new. Implementation Procedures - The Executive Secretary shall establish reasonable protocols and guidelines: 1) for completing technical, social, and economic need demonstrations; 2) for review and determination of adequacy of Level II ADRs; and 3) for determination of additional treatment requirements. Protocols and guidelines will consider federal guidance and will include input from local governments, the regulated community, and the general public. The footnote to pH and dissolved oxygen (DO) numeric criteria (Section R317-2-3.5) specifies that numeric criteria are not applicable, but narrative criteria are, to Great Salt Lake's impounded wetlands. Editorial Corrections and Clarifications: In Subsection R317-2-6(6.5)(a), changed Union Pacific Causeway to Antelope Island Causeway for Gilbert Bay delineation. In Section R317-2-12, moved Weber River reference from Subsection R317-2-12(12.1) to R317-2-12(12.2). In Subsection R317-2-13(13.2)(a), added "Virgin River except as listed below". In Subsection R317-2-13(13.2)(a), corrected the beneficial use class to 2A (primary contact) from 2B for the North Fork of the Virgin River. In Subsection R317-2-13(13.5), two different reaches for beneficial use for Mill Race were listed but beneficial uses were identical. The two reaches were combined. No changes to beneficial use classes. In Subsection R317-2-14(2.14.1), added "dissolved for inorganics analyses for clarification. Also corrected geographic reference from Quitchupah Creek to Ivie Creek in Site Specific Standards for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). Also corrected geographic reference Soldier Creek to Coal Creek to include inadvertently omitted reach. Redundant description of Green River to Coal Creek deleted at Subsection R317-2-14(2.14.2). Added carriage return to put footnote 11 on a new line and Subsection R317-2-14(2.14.2) Footnote 9a, corrected formula for ammonia by adding missing parentheses. In Subsections R317-2-14(2.14.3a) and R317-2-14(2.14.3b), corrected cadmium and lead log function in formulas in Tables 2.14.3a and 2.14.3b.
State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:
- Section 19-5-105
Anticipated cost or savings to:
the state budget:
No additional costs or savings to state budget are anticipated. The proposed amendments will be addressed using existing resources.
local governments:
Potential costs for local governments will be limited to entities holding or seeking permits to discharge to the waters of the state such as publicly-owned treatment works. The proposed amendments to the state's antidegradation policy at Section R317-2-3 will likely require more Level II Antidegradation Reviews to be completed by entities seeking new discharge permits or by existing permit holders desiring to expand their facilities. The cost increases associated with the changes are uncertain because: 1) no data exists on how many facilities were or would have been eligible for exemptions under the previous antidegradation language; and 2) the resources required to conduct antidegradation reviews are site-specific.
small businesses:
Potential costs for small businesses will be limited to entities holding or seeking permits to discharge to the waters of the state. The proposed amendments to the state's antidegradation policy at Section R317-2-3 will likely require more Level II Antidegradation Reviews to be completed by entities seeking new discharge permits or by existing permit holders desiring to expand their facilities. The cost increases associated with the changes are uncertain because: 1) no data exists on how many facilities were or would have been eligible for exemptions under the previous antidegradation language; and 2) the resources required to conduct antidegradation reviews are site-specific.
persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:
Potential costs for persons will be limited to entities holding or seeking permits to discharge to the waters of the state. The proposed amendments to the state's antidegradation policy at Section R317-2-3 will likely require more Level II Antidegradation Reviews to be completed by entities seeking new discharge permits or by existing permit holders desiring to expand their facilities. The cost increases associated with the changes are uncertain because: 1) no data exists on how many facilities were or would have been eligible for exemptions under the previous antidegradation language; and 2) the resources required to conduct antidegradation reviews are site-specific.
Compliance costs for affected persons:
Compliance costs to entities holding or seeking permits to discharge to the waters of the state. The proposed amendments to the state's antidegradation policy at Section R317-2-3 will likely require more Level II Antidegradation Reviews to be completed by entities seeking new discharge permits or by existing permit holders desiring to expand their facilities. The cost increases associated with the changes are uncertain because: 1) no data exists on how many facilities were or would have been eligible for exemptions under the previous antidegradation language; and 2) the resources required to conduct antidegradation reviews are site-specific.
Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:
Compliance costs to entities holding or seeking permits to discharge to the waters of the state. The proposed amendments to the state's antidegradation policy at Section R317-2-3 will likely require more Level II Antidegradation Reviews to be completed by entities seeking new discharge permits or by existing permit holders desiring to expand their facilities. The cost increases associated with the changes are uncertain because: 1) no data exists on how many facilities were or would have been eligible for exemptions under the previous antidegradation language; and 2) the resources required to conduct antidegradation reviews are site-specific.
Amanda Smith, Executive Director
The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:
Environmental Quality
Water Quality
288 N 1460 W
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116-3231Direct questions regarding this rule to:
- Dave Wham at the above address, by phone at 801-538-6052, by FAX at 801-538-6016, or by Internet E-mail at dwham@utah.gov
Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:
01/14/2010
Interested persons may attend a public hearing regarding this rule:
- 01/11/2010 06:00 PM, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, 168 N 1950 W, Room 101, Salt Lake City, UT
This rule may become effective on:
01/27/2010
Authorized by:
Walter Baker, Director
RULE TEXT
R317. Environmental Quality, Water Quality.
R317-2. Standards of Quality for Waters of the State.
R317-2-3. Antidegradation Policy.
3.1 Maintenance of Water Quality
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards for the designated uses will be maintained at high quality unless it is determined by the Board, after appropriate intergovernmental coordination and public participation in concert with the Utah continuing planning process, allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located. However, existing instream water uses shall be maintained and protected. No water quality degradation is allowable which would interfere with or become injurious to existing instream water uses.
In those cases where potential water quality impairment associated with a thermal discharge is involved, the antidegradation policy and implementing method shall be consistent with Section 316 of the Federal Clean Water Act.
3.2 Category 1 Waters
Waters which have been determined by the Board to be of exceptional recreational or ecological significance or have been determined to be a State or National resource requiring protection, shall be maintained at existing high quality through designation, by the Board after public hearing, as Category 1 Waters. New point source discharges of wastewater, treated or otherwise, are prohibited in such segments after the effective date of designation. Protection of such segments from pathogens in diffuse, underground sources is covered in R317-5 and R317-7 and the Regulations for Individual Wastewater Disposal Systems (R317-501 through R317-515). Other diffuse sources (nonpoint sources) of wastes shall be controlled to the extent feasible through implementation of best management practices or regulatory programs.
Projects such as, but not limited to, construction of dams or roads will be considered where pollution will result only during the actual construction activity, and where best management practices will be employed to minimize pollution effects.
Waters of the state designated as Category 1 Waters are listed in R317-2-12.1.
3.3 Category 2 Waters
Category 2 Waters are designated surface water segments which are treated as Category 1 Waters except that a point source discharge may be permitted provided that the discharge does not degrade existing water quality. Waters of the state designated as Category 2 Waters are listed in R317-2-12.2.
3.4 Category 3 Waters
For all other waters of the state, point source discharges are allowed and degradation may occur, pursuant to the conditions and review procedures outlined in Section 3.5.
3.5 Antidegradation Review (ADR)
An antidegradation review will determine whether the proposed activity complies with the applicable antidegradation requirements for receiving waters that may be affected.
An antidegradation review (ADR) may consist of two parts or levels. A Level I review is conducted to insure that existing uses will be maintained and protected. In addition, a Level I review evaluates the criteria in Section 3.5b to determine if any degradation is de minimis in nature and therefore does not require a Level II review. A Level II review as described in Section 3.5c is needed when the impacts are not de minimus.
Both Level I and Level II reviews will be conducted on a parameter-by-parameter basis. A decision to move to a Level II review for one parameter does not require a Level II review for other parameters. Discussion of parameters of concern is those expected to be affected by the proposed activity.
Antidegradation reviews shall include opportunities for public participation, as described in Section 3.5e.
a. Activities Subject to Antidegradation Review (ADR)
1. For all State waters, antidegradation reviews will be conducted for proposed federally regulated activities, such as those under Clean Water Act Sections 401 (FERC and other Federal actions), 402 (UPDES permits), and 404 (Army Corps of Engineers permits). The Executive Secretary may conduct an ADR on other projects with the potential for major impact on the quality of waters of the state. The review will determine whether the proposed activity complies with the applicable antidegradation requirements for the particular receiving waters that may be affected.
2. For Category 1 Waters and Category 2 Waters, reviews shall be consistent with the requirement established in Sections 3.2 and 3.3, respectively.
3. For Category 3 Waters, reviews shall be consistent with the requirements established in this section
b. An Anti-degradation Level II review is not required where any of the following conditions apply:
1. Water quality will not be lowered by the proposed activity . [
(e.g.,]For example,a UPDES permit is being renewed and the proposed effluent concentration value and pollutant loading is equal to or less than the existing [effluent concentrations value and pollutant loading).]permitted concentrations and corresponding pollutant loading. If waste loads are not defined in an existing permit, the design capacity of the facility, of both concentrations and loads, will be used to determine whether a proposed project lowers water quality.2. Assimilative capacity (based upon concentration) is not available or has previously been allocated, as indicated by water quality monitoring or modeling information. This includes situations where:
(a) the water body is included on the current 303(d) list for the parameter of concern; or
(b) existing water quality for the parameter of concern does not satisfy applicable numeric or narrative water quality criteria; or
(c) discharge limits are established in an approved TMDL that is consistent with the current water quality standards for the receiving water (i.e., where TMDLs are established, and changes in effluent limits that are consistent with the existing load allocation would not trigger an antidegradation review).
Under conditions (a) or (b) the effluent limit in an UPDES permit may be equal to the water quality numeric criterion for the parameter of concern.
3. Water quality impacts will be temporary and related only to sediment or turbidity and fish spawning will not be impaired,
4. The water quality effects of the proposed activity are expected to be temporary and limited. As general guidance, CWA Section 402 general permits, CWA Section 404 nationwide and general permits, or activities of short duration, will be deemed to have a temporary and limited effect on water quality where there is a reasonable factual basis to support such a conclusion. The 404 nationwide permits decision will be made at the time of permit issuance, as part of the Division's water quality certification under CWA Section 401. Where it is determined that the category of activities will result in temporary and limited effects, subsequent individual activities authorized under such permits will not be subject to further antidegradation review. Factors to be considered in determining whether water quality effects will be temporary and limited may include the following:
(a) Length of time during which water quality will be lowered.
(b) Percent change in ambient concentrations of pollutants of concern
(c) Pollutants affected
(d) Likelihood for long-term water quality benefits to the segment (e.g., dredging of contaminated sediments)
(e) Potential for any residual long-term influences on existing uses.
(f) Impairment of the fish spawning, survival and development of aquatic fauna excluding fish removal efforts.
[
5. The proposed concentration downstream of the mixing zone:(a) would be equal to or less than 50% of the applicable criterion, and the project would consume less than 20% of remaining assimilative capacity; or(b) is greater than 50% and less than 75% of the criterion, and the project would consume less than 10% of the remaining assimilative capacity.Exception: Level II reviews are required if the proposed concentration below the mixing zone is equal to or greater than 75% of the criterion.]c. Anti-degradation Review Process
For all activities requiring a Level II review, the Division will notify affected agencies and the public with regards to the requested proposed activity and discussions with stakeholders may be held. In the case of Section 402 discharge permits, if it is determined that a discharge will be allowed, the Division of Water Quality will develop any needed UPDES permits for public notice following the normal permit issuance process.
The ADR will cover the following requirements or determinations:
1. Will all Statutory and regulatory requirements be met?
The Executive Secretary will review to determine that there will be achieved all statutory and regulatory requirements for all new and existing point sources and all required cost-effective and reasonable best management practices for nonpoint source control in the area of the discharge. If point sources exist in the area that have not achieved all statutory and regulatory requirements, the Executive Secretary will consider whether schedules of compliance or other plans have been established when evaluating whether compliance has been assured. Generally, the "area of the discharge" will be determined based on the parameters of concern associated with the proposed activity and the portion of the receiving water that would be affected.
2. Are there any reasonable less-degrading alternatives?
There will be an evaluation of whether there are any reasonable non-degrading or less degrading alternatives for the proposed activity. This question will be addressed by the Division based on information provided by the project proponent. Control alternatives for a proposed activity will be evaluated in an effort to avoid or minimize degradation of the receiving water. Alternatives to be considered, evaluated, and implemented to the extent feasible, could include pollutant trading, water conservation, water recycling and reuse, land application, total containment, etc.
For proposed UPDES permitted discharges, the following list of alternatives should be considered, evaluated and implemented to the extent feasible:
(a) innovative or alternative treatment options
(b) more effective treatment options or higher treatment levels
(c) connection to other wastewater treatment facilities
(d) process changes or product or raw material substitution
(e) seasonal or controlled discharge options to minimize discharging during critical water quality periods
(f) pollutant trading
(g) water conservation
(h) water recycle and reuse
(i) alternative discharge locations or alternative receiving waters
(j) land application
(k) total containment
(l) improved operation and maintenance of existing treatment systems
(m) other appropriate alternatives
An option more costly than the cheapest alternative may have to be implemented if a substantial benefit to the stream can be realized. Alternatives would generally be considered feasible where costs are no more than 20% higher than the cost of the discharging alternative, and (for POTWs) where the projected per connection service fees are not greater than 1.4% of MAGHI (median adjusted gross household income), the current affordability criterion now being used by the Water Quality Board in the wastewater revolving loan program. Alternatives within these cost ranges should be carefully considered by the discharger. Where State financing is appropriate, a financial assistance package may be influenced by this evaluation, i.e., a less polluting alternative may receive a more favorable funding arrangement in order to make it a more financially attractive alternative.
It must also be recognized in relationship to evaluating options that would avoid or reduce discharges to the stream, that in some situations it may be more beneficial to leave the water in the stream for instream flow purposes than to remove the discharge to the stream.
3. Special Procedures for 404 Permits.
For 404 permitted activities, all appropriate alternatives to avoid and minimize degradation should be evaluated. Activities involving a discharge of dredged or fill materials that are considered to have more than minor adverse affects on the aquatic environment are regulated by individual CWA Section 404 permits. The decision-making process relative to the 404 permitting program is contained in the 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 CFR Part 230). Prior to issuing a permit under the 404(b)(1) guidelines, the Corps of Engineers:
(a) makes a determination that the proposed activity discharges are unavoidable (i.e., necessary):
(b) examines alternatives to the proposed activity and authorize only the least damaging practicable alternative; and
(c) requires mitigation for all impacts associated with the activity. A 404(b)(1) finding document is produced as a result of this procedure and is the basis for the permit decision. Public participation is provided for in the process. Because the 404(b)(1) guidelines contains an alternatives analysis, the executive secretary will not require development of a separate alternatives analysis for the anti-degradation review. The division will use the analysis in the 404(b)(1) finding document in completing its anti-degradation review and 401 certification.
4. Does the proposed activity have economic and social importance?
Although it is recognized that any activity resulting in a discharge to surface waters will have positive and negative aspects, information must be submitted by the applicant that any discharge or increased discharge will be of economic or social importance in the area.
The factors addressed in such a demonstration may include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) employment (i.e., increasing, maintaining, or avoiding a reduction in employment);
(b) increased production;
(c) improved community tax base;
(d) housing;
(e) correction of an environmental or public health problem; and
(f) other information that may be necessary to determine the social and economic importance of the proposed surface water discharge.
5. The applicant may submit a proposal to mitigate any adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity (e.g., instream habitat improvement, bank stabilization). Such mitigation plans should describe the proposed mitigation measures and the costs of such mitigation. Mitigation plans will not have any effect on effluent limits or conditions included in a permit (except possibly where a previously completed mitigation project has resulted in an improvement in background water quality that affects a water quality-based limit). Such mitigation plans will be developed and implemented by the applicant as a means to further minimize the environmental effects of the proposed activity and to increase its socio-economic importance. An effective mitigation plan may, in some cases, allow the Executive Secretary to authorize proposed activities that would otherwise not be authorized.
6. Will water quality standards be violated by the discharge?
Proposed activities that will affect the quality of waters of the state will be allowed only where the proposed activity will not violate water quality standards.
7. Will existing uses be maintained and protected?
Proposed activities can only be allowed if "existing uses" will be maintained and protected. No UPDES permit will be allowed which will permit numeric water quality standards to be exceeded in a receiving water outside the mixing zone. In the case of nonpoint pollution sources, the non-regulatory Section 319 program now in place will address these sources through application of best management practices to ensure that numeric water quality standards are not exceeded.
8. If a situation is found where there is an existing use which is a higher use (i.e., more stringent protection requirements) than that current designated use, the Division will apply the water quality standards and anti-degradation policy to protect the existing use. Narrative criteria may be used as a basis to protect existing uses for parameters where numeric criteria have not been adopted. Procedures to change the stream use designation to recognize the existing use as the designated use would be initiated.
d. Special Procedures for Drinking Water Sources
An Antidegradation Level II Review will be required by the Executive Secretary for discharges to waters with a Class 1C drinking water use assigned.
Depending upon the locations of the discharge and its proximity to downstream drinking water diversions, additional treatment or more stringent effluent limits or additional monitoring, beyond that which may otherwise be required to meet minimum technology standards or in stream water quality standards, may be required by the Executive Secretary in order to adequately protect public health and the environment. Such additional treatment may include additional disinfection, suspended solids removal to make the disinfection process more effective, removal of any specific contaminants for which drinking water maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) exists, and/or nutrient removal to reduce the organic content of raw water used as a source for domestic water systems.
Additional monitoring may include analyses for viruses, Giardia, Cryptosporidium, other pathogenic organisms, and/or any contaminant for which drinking water MCLs exist. Depending on the results of such monitoring, more stringent treatment may then be required.
The additional treatment/effluent limits/monitoring which may be required will be determined by the Executive Secretary after consultation with the Division of Drinking Water and the downstream drinking water users.
e. Public Notice
The public will be provided notice and an opportunity to comment on the conclusions of all completed antidegradation reviews. Where possible, public notice on the antidegradation review conclusions will be combined with the public notice on the proposed permitting action. In the case of UPDES permits, public notice will be provided through the normal permitting process, as all draft permits are public noticed for 30 days, and public comment solicited, before being issued as a final permit. The Statement of Basis for the draft UPDES permit will contain information on how the ADR was addressed including results of the Level I and Level II reviews. In the case of Section 404 permits from the Corps of Engineers, the Division of Water Quality will develop any needed 401 Certifications and the public notice will be published in conjunction with the US Corps of Engineers public notice procedures. Other permits requiring a Level II review will receive a separate public notice according to the normal State public notice procedures.
f. Implementation Procedures
The Executive Secretary shall establish reasonable protocols and guidelines (1) for completing technical, social, and economic need demonstrations, (2) for review and determination of adequacy of Level II ADRs and (3) for determination of additional treatment requirements. Protocols and guidelines will consider federal guidance and will include input from local governments, the regulated community, and the general public. The Executive Secretary will inform the Water Quality Board of any protocols or guidelines that are developed.
R317-2-6. Use Designations.
The Board as required by Section 19-5-110, shall group the waters of the state into classes so as to protect against controllable pollution the beneficial uses designated within each class as set forth below. Surface waters of the state are hereby classified as shown in R317-2-13.
6.1 Class 1 -- Protected for use as a raw water source for domestic water systems.
a. Class 1A -- Reserved.
b. Class 1B -- Reserved.
c. Class 1C -- Protected for domestic purposes with prior treatment by treatment processes as required by the Utah Division of Drinking Water
6.2 Class 2 -- Protected for recreational use and aesthetics.
a. Class 2A -- Protected for frequent primary contact recreation where there is a high likelihood of ingestion of water or a high degree of bodily contact with the water. Examples include, but are not limited to, swimming, rafting, kayaking, diving, and water skiing.
b. Class 2B -- Protected for infrequent primary contact recreation. Also protected for secondary contact recreation where there is a low likelihood of ingestion of water or a low degree of bodily contact with the water. Examples include, but are not limited to, wading, hunting, and fishing.
6.3 Class 3 -- Protected for use by aquatic wildlife.
a. Class 3A -- Protected for cold water species of game fish and other cold water aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
b. Class 3B -- Protected for warm water species of game fish and other warm water aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
c. Class 3C -- Protected for nongame fish and other aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
d. Class 3D -- Protected for waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife not included in Classes 3A, 3B, or 3C, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
e. Class 3E -- Severely habitat-limited waters. Narrative standards will be applied to protect these waters for aquatic wildlife.
6.4 Class 4 -- Protected for agricultural uses including irrigation of crops and stock watering.
6.5 Class 5 -- The Great Salt Lake.
a. Class 5A Gilbert Bay
Geographical Boundary -- All open waters at or below approximately 4,208-foot elevation south of the Union Pacific Causeway, excluding all of the Farmington Bay south of the Antelope Island Causeway and salt evaporation ponds.
Beneficial Uses -- Protected for frequent primary and secondary contact recreation, waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife including their necessary food chain.
b. Class 5B Gunnison Bay
Geographical Boundary -- All open waters at or below approximately 4,208-foot elevation north of the Union Pacific Causeway and west of the Promontory Mountains, excluding salt evaporation ponds.
Beneficial Uses -- Protected for infrequent primary and secondary contact recreation, waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife including their necessary food chain.
c. Class 5C Bear River Bay
Geographical Boundary -- All open waters at or below approximately 4,208-foot elevation north of the Union Pacific Causeway and east of the Promontory Mountains, excluding salt evaporation ponds.
Beneficial Uses -- Protected for infrequent primary and secondary contact recreation, waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife including their necessary food chain.
d. Class 5D Farmington Bay
Geographical Boundary -- All open waters at or below approximately 4,208-foot elevation east of Antelope Island and south of the [
Union Pacific]Antelope Island Causeway, excluding salt evaporation ponds.Beneficial Uses -- Protected for infrequent primary and secondary contact recreation, waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife including their necessary food chain.
e. Class 5E Transitional Waters along the Shoreline of the Great Salt Lake Geographical Boundary -- All waters below approximately 4,208-foot elevation to the current lake elevation of the open water of the Great Salt Lake receiving their source water from naturally occurring springs and streams, impounded wetlands, or facilities requiring a UPDES permit. The geographical areas of these transitional waters change corresponding to the fluctuation of open water elevation.
Beneficial Uses -- Protected for infrequent primary and secondary contact recreation, waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife including their necessary food chain.
R317-2-12. Category 1 and Category 2 Waters.
12.1 Category 1 Waters.
In addition to assigned use classes, the following surface waters of the State are hereby designated as Category 1 Waters:
a. All surface waters geographically located within the outer boundaries of U.S. National Forests whether on public or private lands with the following exceptions:
Category 2 Waters as listed in R317-2-12.2.
[
Weber River, a tributary to the Great Salt Lake, in the Weber River Drainage from Uintah to Mountain Green.]b. Other surface waters, which may include segments within U.S. National Forests as follows:
1. Colorado River Drainage
Calf Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Escalante River to headwaters.
Sand Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Escalante River to headwaters.
Mamie Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Escalante River to headwaters.
Deer Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Boulder Creek to headwaters (Garfield County).
Indian Creek and tributaries, through Newspaper Rock State Park to headwaters.
2. Green River Drainage
Price River (Lower Fish Creek from confluence with White River to Scofield Dam.
Range Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Green River to headwaters.
Strawberry River and tributaries, from confluence with Red Creek to headwaters.
Ashley Creek and tributaries, from Steinaker diversion to headwaters.
Jones Hole Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Green River to headwaters.
Green River, from state line to Flaming Gorge Dam.
Tollivers Creek, from confluence with Green River to headwaters.
Allen Creek, from confluence with Green River to headwaters.
3. Virgin River Drainage
North Fork Virgin River and tributaries, from confluence with East Fork Virgin River to headwaters.
East Fork Virgin River and tributaries from confluence with North Fork Virgin River to headwaters.
4. Kanab Creek Drainage
Kanab Creek and tributaries, from irrigation diversion at confluence with Reservoir Canyon to headwaters.
5. Bear River Drainage
Swan Creek and tributaries, from Bear Lake to headwaters.
North Eden Creek, from Upper North Eden Reservoir to headwaters.
Big Creek and tributaries, from Big Ditch diversion to headwaters.
Woodruff Creek and tributaries, from Woodruff diversion to headwaters.
6. Weber River Drainage
Burch Creek and tributaries, from Harrison Boulevard in Ogden to headwaters.
Hardscrabble Creek and tributaries, from confluence with East Canyon Creek to headwaters.
Chalk Creek and tributaries, from U.S. Highway 189 to headwaters.
Weber River and tributaries, from U.S. Highway 189 near Oakley to headwaters.
7. Jordan River Drainage
City Creek and tributaries, from City Creek Water Treatment Plant to headwaters (Salt Lake County).
Emigration Creek and tributaries, from Hogle Zoo to headwaters (Salt Lake County).
Red Butte Creek and tributaries, from Foothill Boulevard in Salt Lake City to headwaters.
Parley's Creek and tributaries, from 13th East in Salt Lake City to headwaters.
Mill Creek and tributaries, from Wasatch Boulevard in Salt Lake City to headwaters.
Big Cottonwood Creek and tributaries, from Wasatch Boulevard in Salt Lake City to headwaters.
Little Willow Creek and tributaries, from diversion to headwaters (Salt Lake County.)
Bell Canyon Creek and tributaries, from Lower Bells Canyon Reservoir to headwaters (Salt Lake County).
South Fork of Dry Creek and tributaries, from Draper Irrigation Company diversion to headwaters (Salt Lake County).
8. Provo River Drainage
Upper Falls drainage above Provo City diversion (Utah County).
Bridal Veil Falls drainage above Provo City diversion (Utah County).
Lost Creek and tributaries, above Provo City diversion (Utah County).
9. Sevier River Drainage
Chicken Creek and tributaries, from diversion at canyon mouth to headwaters.
Pigeon Creek and tributaries, from diversion to headwaters.
East Fork of Sevier River and tributaries, from Kingston diversion to headwaters.
Parowan Creek and tributaries, from Parowan City to headwaters.
Summit Creek and tributaries, from Summit City to headwaters.
Braffits Creek and tributaries, from canyon mouth to headwaters.
Right Hand Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Coal Creek to headwaters.
10. Raft River Drainage
Clear Creek and tributaries, from state line to headwaters (Box Elder County).
Birch Creek (Box Elder County), from state line to headwaters.
Cotton Thomas Creek from confluence with South Junction Creek to headwaters.
11. Western Great Salt Lake Drainage
All streams on the south slope of the Raft River Mountains above 7000' mean sea level.
Donner Creek (Box Elder County), from irrigation diversion to Utah-Nevada state line.
Bettridge Creek (Box Elder County), from irrigation diversion to Utah-Nevada state line.
Clover Creek, from diversion to headwaters.
All surface waters on public land on the Deep Creek Mountains.
12. Farmington Bay Drainage
Holmes Creek and tributaries, from Highway US-89 to headwaters (Davis County).
Shepard Creek and tributaries, from Height Bench diversion to headwaters (Davis County).
Farmington Creek and tributaries, from Height Bench Canal diversion to headwaters (Davis County).
Steed Creek and tributaries, from Highway US-89 to headwaters (Davis County).
12.2 Category 2 Waters.
In addition to assigned use classes, the following surface waters of the State are hereby designated as Category 2 Waters:
a. Green River Drainage
Deer Creek, a tributary of Huntington Creek, from the forest boundary to 4800 feet upstream.
Electric Lake.
b. Weber River Drainage
Weber River from Uintah to Mountain Green.
R317-2-13. Classification of Waters of the State (see R317-2-6).
13.1 Upper Colorado River Basin
. . . . . . .
13.2 Lower Colorado River Basin
a. Virgin River Drainage
TABLE
Beaver Dam Wash and tributaries, from Motoqua to headwaters 2B 3B 4 Virgin River and tributaries from state line to Quail Creek diversion except as listed below 2B 3B 4 Santa Clara River from confluence with Virgin River to Gunlock Reservoir 1C 2B 3B 4 Santa Clara River and tributaries, from Gunlock Reservoir to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Leed's Creek, from confluence with Quail Creek to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Quail Creek from Quail Creek Reservoir to headwaters 1C 2B 3A 4 Ash Creek and tributaries, from confluence with Virgin River to Ash Creek Reservoir 2B 3A 4 Ash Creek and tributaries, From Ash Creek Reservoir to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Virgin River and tributaries, from the Quail Creek diversion to headwaters, except as listed below 1C 2B 3C 4 North Fork Virgin River and tributaries 1C 2A[2B] 3A 4 East Fork Virgin River, from town of Glendale to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Kolob Creek, from confluence with Virgin River to headwaters 2B 3A 4b. Kanab Creek Drainage
TABLE
Kanab Creek and tributaries, from state line to irrigation diversion at confluence with Reservoir Canyon 2B 3C 4 Kanab Creek and tributaries, from irrigation diversion at confluence with Reservoir Canyon to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Johnson Wash and tributaries, from state line to confluence with Skutumpah Canyon 2B 3C 4 Johnson Wash and tributaries, from confluence with Skutumpah Canyon to headwaters 2B 3A 4
. . . . . . .
13.6 Sevier River Basin
a. Sevier River Drainage
TABLE
Sevier River and tributaries from Sevier Lake to Gunnison Bend Reservoir to U.S.National Forest boundary except as listed below 2B 3C 4 Beaver River and tributaries from Minersville City to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Little Creek and tributaries, From irrigation diversion to Headwaters 2B 3A 4 Pinto Creek and tributaries, From Newcastle Reservoir to Headwaters 2B 3A 4 Coal Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Summit Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Parowan Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Tributaries to Sevier River from Sevier Lake to Gunnison Bend Reservoir from U.S. National Forest boundary to headwaters, including: 2B 3A 4 Pioneer Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Chalk Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Meadow Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Corn Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Sevier River and tributaries below U.S. National Forest boundary from Gunnison Bend Reservoir to Annabella Diversion except except as listed below 2B 3B 4 Oak Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Round Valley Creek and tributaries, Millard County 2B 3A 4 Judd Creek and tributaries, Juab County 2B 3A 4 Meadow Creek and tributaries, Juab County 2B 3A 4 Cherry Creek and tributaries Juab County 2B 3A 4 Tanner Creek and tributaries, Juab County 2B 3E 4 Baker Hot Springs, Juab County 2B 3D 4 Chicken Creek and tributaries, Juab County 2B 3A 4 San Pitch River and tributaries, from confluence with Sevier River to Highway U-132 crossing except As listed below: 2B 3C 3D 4 Twelve Mile Creek (South Creek) and tributaries, from U.S. Forest Service boundary to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Six Mile Creek and tributaries, Sanpete County 2B 3A 4 Manti Creek (South Creek) and tributaries, from U.S. Forest Service boundary to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Ephraim Creek (Cottonwood Creek) and tributaries, from U.S. Forest Service to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Oak Creek and tributaries, from U.S. Forest Service boundary near Spring City to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Fountain Green Creek and tributaries, from U.S. Forest Service boundary to headwaters 2B 3A 4 San Pitch River and tributaries, from Highway U-132 crossing to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Tributaries to Sevier River from Gunnison Bend Reservoir to Annabelle Diversion from U.S. National Forest boundary to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Sevier River and tributaries, from Annabella diversion to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Monroe Creek and tributaries, from diversion to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Little Creek and tributaries, from irrigation diversion to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Pinto Creek and tributaries, from Newcastle Reservoir to headwaters 2B 3A 4 Coal Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Summit Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Parowan Creek and tributaries 2B 3A 4 Duck Creek and tributaries 1C 2B 3A 4. . . . . . .
13.12 Lakes and Reservoirs. All lakes and any reservoirs greater than 10 acres not listed in 13.12 are assigned by default to the classification of the stream with which they are associated.
. . . . . . .
bb. Weber County
TABLE
Causey Reservoir 2B 3A 4 Pineview Reservoir 1C 2A 2B 3A** 4 13.13 Unclassified Waters All waters not specifically classified are presumptively classified [as]: 2B[,] 3D[.]R317-2-14. Numeric Criteria.
TABLE 2.14.1
NUMERIC CRITERIA FOR DOMESTIC,
RECREATION, AND AGRICULTURAL USESParameter Domestic Recreation and Agri- Source Aesthetics culture 1C 2A 2B 4 BACTERIOLOGICAL (30-DAY GEOMETRIC MEAN) (NO.)/100 ML) (7) E. coli 206 126 206 MAXIMUM (NO.)/100 ML) (7) E. coli 668 409 668 PHYSICAL pH (RANGE) 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 Turbidity Increase (NTU) 10 10 METALS (DISSOLVED, MAXIMUM MG/L) (2) Arsenic 0.01 0.1 Barium 1.0 Beryllium <0.004 Cadmium 0.01 0.01 Chromium 0.05 0.10 Copper 0.2 Lead 0.015 0.1 Mercury 0.002 Selenium 0.05 0.05 Silver 0.05 INORGANICS (DISSOLVED, MAXIMUM MG/L) Bromate 0.01 Boron 0.75 Chlorite <1.0 Fluoride (3) 1.4-2.4 Nitrates as N 10 Total Dissolved Solids (4) 1200 RADIOLOGICAL (MAXIMUM pCi/L) Gross Alpha 15 15 Gross Beta 4 mrem/yr Radium 226, 228 (Combined) 5 Strontium 90 8 Tritium 20000 Uranium 30 ORGANICS (MAXIMUM UG/L) Chlorophenoxy Herbicides 2,4-D 70 2,4,5-TP 10 Methoxychlor 40 POLLUTION INDICATORS (5) BOD (MG/L) 5 5 5 Nitrate as N (MG/L) 4 4 Total Phosphorus as P (MG/L)(6) 0.05 0.05 FOOTNOTES: (1) Reserved (2) The dissolved metals method involves filtration of the sample in the field, acidification of the sample in the field, no digestion process in the laboratory, and analysis by approved laboratory methods for the required detection levels. (3) Maximum concentration varies according to the daily maximum mean air temperature. TEMP (C) MG/L 12.0 2.4 12.1-14.6 2.2 14.7-17.6 2.0 17.7-21.4 1.8 21.5-26.2 1.6 26.3-32.5 1.4 (4) Site-specific criteria for total dissolved solids may be adopted by rulemaking where it is demonstrated that: (a) a less stringent criterion is appropriate because of natural or un-alterable conditions; or (b) a less stringent, site-specific criterion and/or date-specified criterion is protective of existing and attainable agricultural uses; or (c) a more stringent criterion is attainable and necessary for the protection of sensitive crops. For water quality assessment purposes, up to 10% of representative samples may exceed the standard. SITE SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS) Castle Creek from confluence with the Colorado River to Seventh Day Adventist Diversion: 1,800 mg/l; Cottonwood Creek from the confluence with Huntington Creek to I-57: 3,500 mg/l; Ferron Creek from the confluence with San Rafael River to Highway 10: 3,500 mg/l; Huntington Creek and tributaries from the confluence with Cottonwood Creek to U-10: 4,800 mg/l; Ivie Creek and its tributaries from the confluence with Muddy Creek to U-10: 2,600 mg/l; Lost Creek from the confluence with Sevier River to U.S. Forest Service Boundary: 4,600 mg/l; Muddy Creek and tributaries from the confluence with Ivie Creek to U-10: 2,600 mg/l; Muddy Creek from confluence with Fremont River to confluence with [Quitchupah]Ivie Creek: 5,800 mg/l; North Creek from the confluence with Virgin River to headwaters: 2,035 mg/l; Onion Creek from the confluence with Colorado River to road crossing above Stinking Springs: 3000 mg/l; Brine Creek-Petersen Creek, from the confluence with the Sevier River to U-119 Crossing: 9,700 mg/l; Price River and tributaries from confluence with Green River to confluence with [Soldier]Coal Creek: 3,000 mg/l; Price River and tributaries from the confluence with Coal Creek to Carbon Canal Diversion: 1,700 mg/l [Price River and tributaries from the confluence with Green River to confluence with Soldier Creek: 3,000 mg/l;]Quitchupah Creek from the confluence with Ivie Creek to U-10: 1,700 mg/l; Rock Canyon Creek from the confluence with Cottonwood Creek to headwaters: 3,500 mg/l; San Pitch River from below Gunnison Reservoir to the Sevier River: 2,400 mg/l; San Rafael River from the confluence with the Green River to Buckhorn Crossing: 4,100 mg/l; San Rafael River from the Buckhorn Crossing to the confluence with Huntington Creek and Cottonwood Creek: 3,500 mg/l; Sevier River between Gunnison Bend Reservoir and DMAD Reservoir: 1,725 mg/l; Sevier River from Gunnison Bend Reservoir to Clear Lake: 3,370 mg/l; South Fork Spring Creek from confluence with Pelican Pond Slough Stream to US 89 1,450 mg/l (Apr.-Sept.) 1,950 mg/l (Oct.-March) Virgin River from the Utah/Arizona border to Pah Tempe Springs: 2,360 mg/l (5) Investigations should be conducted to develop more information where these pollution indicator levels are exceeded. (6) Total Phosphorus as P (mg/l) indicator for lakes and reservoirs shall be 0.025. (7) Where the criteria are exceeded and there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the indicator bacteria E. coli are primarily from natural sources (wildlife), e.g., in National Wildlife Refuges and State Waterfowl Management Areas, the criteria may be considered attained provided the density attributable to non-wildlife sources is less than the criteria. Exceedences of E. coli from nonhuman nonpoint sources will generally be addressed through appropriate Federal, State, and local nonpoint source programs. Measurement of E. coli using the "Quanti-Tray 2000" procedure is approved as a field analysis. Other EPA approved methods may also be used. For water quality assessment purposes, up to 10% of representative samples may exceed the 668 per 100 ml criterion (for 1C and 2B waters) and 409 per 100 ml (for 2A waters). For small datasets, where exceedences of these criteria are observed, follow-up ambient monitoring should be conducted to better characterize water quality.TABLE 2.14.2
NUMERIC CRITERIA FOR AQUATIC WILDLIFEParameter Aquatic Wildlife 3A 3B 3C 3D 5 PHYSICAL Total Dissolved Gases (1) (1) Minimum Dissolved Oxygen (MG/L) (2)(2a) 30 Day Average 6.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 7 Day Average 9.5/5.0 6.0/4.0 Minimum 8.0/4.0 5.0/3.0 3.0 3.0 Max. Temperature(C)(3) 20 27 27 Max. Temperature Change (C)(3) 2 4 4 pH (Range)(2a) 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0 Turbidity Increase (NTU) 10 10 15 15 METALS (4) (DISSOLVED, UG/L)(5) Aluminum 4 Day Average (6) 87 87 87 87 1 Hour Average 750 750 750 750 Arsenic (Trivalent) 4 Day Average 150 150 150 150 1 Hour Average 340 340 340 340 Cadmium (7) 4 Day Average 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 1 Hour Average 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Chromium (Hexavalent) 4 Day Average 11 11 11 11 1 Hour Average 16 16 16 16 Chromium (Trivalent) (7) 4 Day Average 74 74 74 74 1 Hour Average 570 570 570 570 Copper (7) 4 Day Average 9 9 9 9 1 Hour Average 13 13 13 13 Cyanide (Free) 4 Day Average 5.2 5.2 5.2 1 Hour Average 22 22 22 22 Iron (Maximum) 1000 1000 1000 1000 Lead (7) 4 Day Average 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1 Hour Average 65 65 65 65 Mercury 4 Day Average 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 1 Hour Average 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 Nickel (7) 4 Day Average 52 52 52 52 1 Hour Average 468 468 468 468 Selenium 4 Day Average 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 1 Hour Average 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 Selenium (14) Gilbert Bay (Class 5A) Great Salt Lake Geometric Mean over Nesting Season (mg/kg dry wt) 12.5 Silver 1 Hour Average (7) 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 Zinc (7) 4 Day Average 120 120 120 120 1 Hour Average 120 120 120 120 INORGANICS (MG/L) (4) Total Ammonia as N (9) 30 Day Average (9a) (9a) (9a) (9a) 1 Hour Average (9b) (9b) (9b) (9b) Chlorine (Total Residual) 4 Day Average 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 1 Hour Average 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 Hydrogen Sulfide (13) (Undissociated, Max. UG/L) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Phenol(Maximum) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 RADIOLOGICAL (MAXIMUM pCi/L) Gross Alpha (10) 15 15 15 15 ORGANICS (UG/L) (4) Aldrin 1 Hour Average 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Chlordane 4 Day Average 0.0043 0.0043 0.0043 0.0043 1 Hour Average 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 4,4' -DDT 4 Day Average 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 1 Hour Average 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Diazinon 4 Day Average 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 1 Hour Average 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Dieldrin 4 Day Average 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 1 Hour Average 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 Alpha-Endosulfan 4 Day Average 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 1 Hour Average 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 beta-Endosulfan 4 Day Average 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 1 Day Average 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Endrin 4 Day Average 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 1 Hour Average 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 Heptachlor 4 Day Average 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 1 Hour Average 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Heptachlor epoxide 4 Day Average 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 1 Hour Average 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane) 4 Day Average 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 1 Hour Average 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Methoxychlor (Maximum) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Mirex (Maximum) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Nonylphenol 4 Day Average 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 1 Hour Average 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Parathion 4 Day Average 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 1 Hour Average 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 PCB's 4 Day Average 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Pentachlorophenol (11) 4 Day Average 15 15 15 15 1 Hour Average 19 19 19 19 Toxaphene 4 Day Average 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 1 Hour Average 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 POLLUTION INDICATORS (11) Gross Beta (pCi/L) 50 50 50 50 BOD (MG/L) 5 5 5 5 Nitrate as N (MG/L) 4 4 4 Total Phosphorus as P(MG/L) (12) 0.05 0.05 FOOTNOTES: (1) Not to exceed 110% of saturation. (2) These limits are not applicable to lower water levels in deep impoundments. First number in column is for when early life stages are present, second number is for when all other life stages present. (2a) These criteria are not applicable to Great Salt Lake impounded wetlands. Surface water in these wetlands shall be protected from changes in pH and dissolved oxygen that create significant adverse impacts to the existing beneficial uses. (3) The temperature standard shall be at background where it can be shown that natural or un-alterable conditions prevent its attainment. In such cases rulemaking will be undertaken to modify the standard accordingly. Site Specific Standards for Temperature Ken's Lake: From June 1st - September 20th, 27 degrees C. (4) Where criteria are listed as 4-day average and 1-hour average concentrations, these concentrations should not be exceeded more often than once every three years on the average. (5) The dissolved metals method involves filtration of the sample in the field, acidification of the sample in the field, no digestion process in the laboratory, and analysis by EPA approved laboratory methods for the required detection levels. (6) The criterion for aluminum will be implemented as follows: Where the pH is equal to or greater than 7.0 and the hardness is equal to or greater than 50 ppm as CaC03 in the receiving water after mixing, the 87 ug/1 chronic criterion (expressed as total recoverable) will not apply, and aluminum will be regulated based on compliance with the 750 ug/1 acute aluminum criterion (expressed as total recoverable). (7) Hardness dependent criteria. 100 mg/l used. Conversion factors for ratio of total recoverable metals to dissolved metals must also be applied. In waters with a hardness greater than 400 mg/l as CaC03, calculations will assume a hardness of 400 mg/l as CaC03. See Table 2.14.3 for complete equations for hardness and conversion factors. (8) Reserved (9) The following equations are used to calculate Ammonia criteria concentrations: (9a) The thirty-day average concentration of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg/l as N) does not exceed, more than once every three years on the average, the chronic criterion calculated using the following equations. Fish Early Life Stages are Present: mg/l as N (Chronic)= ((0.0577/(1+107.688-pH))+ (2.487/(1+ [10PH-7.688]10pH-7.688))) * MIN (2.85, 1.45*100.028*(25-T) ) Fish Early Life Stages are Absent: mg/1 as N (Chronic) = ((0.0577/(1+107.688-pH)) + (2.487/ (1+10pH-7.688))) * 1.45*100.028* (25-MAX(T,7))) (9b) The one-hour average concentration of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg/l as N) does not exceed, more than once every three years on the average the acute criterion calculated using the following equations. Class 3A: mg/l as N (Acute) = (0.275/(1+107.204-pH)) + (39.0/1+10pH-7.204)) Class 3B, 3C, 3D: mg/l as N (Acute) = 0.411/(1+107.204-pH)) + (58.4/(1+10pH-7.204)) In addition, the highest four-day average within the 30-day period should not exceed 2.5 times the chronic criterion. The "Fish Early Life Stages are Present" 30-day average total ammonia criterion will be applied by default unless it is determined by the Division, on a site-specific basis, that it is appropriate to apply the "Fish Early Life Stages are Absent" 30-day average criterion for all or some portion of the year. At a minimum, the "Fish Early Life Stages are Present" criterion will apply from the beginning of spawning through the end of the early life stages. Early life stages include the pre-hatch embryonic stage, the post-hatch free embryo or yolk-sac fry stage, and the larval stage for the species of fish expected to occur at the site. The division will consult with the Division of Wildlife Resources in making such determinations. The Division will maintain information regarding the waterbodies and time periods where application of the "Early Life Stages are Absent" criterion is determined to be appropriate. (10) Investigation should be conducted to develop more information where these levels are exceeded. (11) pH dependent criteria. pH 7.8 used in table. See Table 2.14.4 for equation. (12) Total Phosphorus as P (mg/l) as a pollution indicator for lakes and reservoirs shall be 0.025. (13) Formula to convert dissolved sulfide to un-disassociated hydrogen sulfide is: H2S = Dissolved Sulfide * e((-1.92 + pH) + 12.05) (14) The selenium water quality standard of 12.5 (mg/kg dry weight) for Gilbert Bay is a tissue based standard using the complete egg/embryo of aquatic dependent birds using Gilbert Bay based upon a minimum of five samples over the nesting season. Assessment procedures are incorporated as a part of this standard as follows: Egg Concentration Triggers: DWQ Responses Below 5.0 mg/kg: Routine monitoring with sufficient intensity to determine if selenium concentrations within the Great Salt Lake ecosystem are increasing. 5.0 mg/kg: Increased monitoring to address data gaps, loadings, and areas of uncertainty identified from initial Great Salt Lake selenium studies. 6.4 mg/kg: Initiation of a Level II Antidegradation review by the State for all discharge permit renewals or new discharge permits to Great Salt Lake. The Level II Antidegradation review may include an analysis of loading reductions. 9.8 mg/kg: Initiation of preliminary TMDL studies to evaluate selenium loading sources. 12.5 mg/kg and above: Declare impairment. Formalize and implement TMDL. Antidegradation Level II Review procedures associated with this standard are referenced at R317-2-3.5.C.. . . . . . .
TABLE 2.14.3a
EQUATIONS TO CONVERT TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS STANDARD
WITH HARDNESS (1) DEPENDENCE TO DISSOLVED METALS STANDARD
BY APPLICATION OF A CONVERSION FACTOR (CF).Parameter 4-Day Average (Chronic) Concentration (UG/L) CADMIUM CF * e (0.7409 ([I]ln(hardness)) -4.719 CF = 1.101672 - [(In]ln(hardness) (0.041838) CHROMIUM III CF * e (0.8190([I]ln(hardness)) + 0.6848 CF = 0.860 COPPER CF * e(0.8545(ln(hardness)) -1.702) CF = 0.960 LEAD CF * e(1.273(ln(hardness))-4.705) CF = 1.46203 - [(ln]ln(hardness)(0.145712) NICKEL CF * e(0.8460(ln(hardness))+0.0584) CF = 0.997 SILVER N/A ZINC Cf * e(0.8473(ln(hardness))+0.884) CF = 0.986TABLE 2.14.3b
EQUATIONS TO CONVERT TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS STANDARD
WITH HARDNESS (1) DEPENDENCE TO DISSOLVED METALS STANDARD
BY APPLICATION OF A CONVERSION FACTOR (CF).Parameter 1-Hour Average (Acute) Concentration (UG/L) CADMIUM CF * e (1.0166([I]ln(hardness))-3.924) CF = 1.136672 - [(ln]ln(hardness)(0.041838) CHROMIUM (III) CF * e(0.8190(ln(hardness)) +3.7256) CF = 0.316 COPPER CF * e(0.9422(ln(hardness))- 1.700) CF = 0.960 LEAD CF * e(1.273(ln(hardness))-1.460) CF = 1.46203 - [(ln]ln(hardness)(0.145712) NICKEL CF * e(0.8460(ln(hardness)) +2.255 CF= 0.998 SILVER CF * e(1.72(ln(hardness))- 6.59 CF = 0.85 ZINC CF * e(0.8473(ln(hardness)) +0.884 CF = 0.978 FOOTNOTE: (1) Hardness as mg/l CaCO3.. . . . . . .
KEY: water pollution, water quality standards
Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [
January 12, 2009]2010Notice of Continuation: October 2, 2007
Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 19-5
Document Information
- Hearing Meeting:
- 01/11/2010 06:00 PM, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, 168 N 1950 W, Room 101, Salt Lake City, UT
- Effective Date:
- 1/27/2010
- Publication Date:
- 12/15/2009
- Filed Date:
- 12/01/2009
- Agencies:
- Environmental Quality,Water Quality
- Rulemaking Authority:
Section 19-5-105
- Authorized By:
- Walter Baker, Director
- DAR File No.:
- 33233
- Related Chapter/Rule NO.: (1)
- R317-2. Standards of Quality for Waters of the State.