HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Nov 2024 WQC Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 6
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE
November 13, 2024 Meeting Minutes
MEETING BRIEF
During the November 13, 2024 meeting of the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission’s Water Quality Committee, the Committee:
• Approved proceeding to the EMC for public notice and hearings with proposed
Triennial Review Amendments to select rules in 15A NCAC 02B .0200,
• Requested, without a formal motion, that DWR staff develop a PFAS Minimization
Initiative for major and minor industrial direct dischargers to surface water and all
SIUs that discharge to POTWs. The minimization initiative will require monitoring for
PFAS, and implementation of minimization activities required to eliminate or
significantly reduce discharges of PFOS, PFOA, and Gen X (levels TBD) over a 3-5 year
period, and
• Heard a presentation with updates on DEQ’s work on 1,4-dioxane, including updates
regarding the Greensboro Special Order by Consent and the Asheboro legal case.
WQC MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE
Steve Keen, Chair EMC Chair John Solomon, Ex-Officio
Michael Ellison, Vice-Chair Bill Yarborough
Tim Baumgartner Kevin Tweedy
Marion Deerhake
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE
EMC Commissioner Yvonne Bailey
EMC Commissioner Robin Smith
Ellie Young, EMC Counsel
Sushma Masemore, DEQ Assistant Secretary
Richard Rogers, DWR Director
Julie Grzyb, DWR Deputy Director
Karen Higgins, DWR
Stephanie Bolyard, DEQ
TABLE OF ACRONYMS
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CHPP Coastal Habitat Protection Plan
Page 2 of 6
CWA Clean Water Act
DMS NC Division of Mitigation Services
DWR or Division NC Division of Water Resources
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EMC or Commission NC Environmental Management Commission
MCL maximum contaminant level
NC North Carolina
NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code
NCGA North Carolina General Assembly
NCGS North Carolina General Statutes
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
OAH Office of Administrative Hearings
OSBM Office of State Budget and Management
POTW Publicly owned treatment works, a sewage treatment plant owned
and usually operated by a government agency.
PFAS per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, a group of chemicals
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RRC Rules Review Commission
SCM stormwater control measures
SIU significant industrial user
SNAP Stormwater Nitrogen and Phosphorus Tool
SOC Special (Court) Order by Consent
US United States
WQC or Committee NC EMC Water Quality Committee
WWTP wastewater treatment plant
I. Preliminary Matters
1. Meeting called to order and notice provided of NCGS 138A-15 regarding
conflict of interest: Chair Keen called the WQC meeting to order at 1:00pm and inquired
about any known conflicts of interest. No conflicts were announced.
2. Approval of September 11, 2024 meeting minutes: The Committee approved
the draft September 11, 2024 meeting minutes without discussion.
Page 3 of 6
II. Items
1. Action - Request Approval to Proceed to the EMC for Public Notice and
hearings with Proposed Triennial Review Amendments to Select Rules in 15A NCAC
02B .0200 (Chris Ventaloro, DWR)
Chris Ventaloro, DWR, presented this action item. He requested to proceed to the full
Environmental Management Commission in January 2025 with a request to proceed to
public notice and hearing for the 2023-2025 surface water standards triennial review.
This request included a presentation on the proposal to update the primary recreation
(Class B) bacterial indicator from the fecal coliform bacteria group to Escherichia coli (E.
coli) in 15A NCAC 02B .0219 and the proposal to update the language related to water
quality standards variances in 15A NCAC 02B .0226 to include a reference to variances
requirements described in 40 CFR 131.14.
Mr. Ventaloro provided attachments for the proposed rule changes, the OSBM-
approved Regulatory Impact Analysis, and the NC Study of the E. coli and Fecal Coliform
Pathogenic Indicators for Recreational Waters – Final Report (January 10, 2024).
Commissioner Tweedy asked if there will be changes to the recreational standard in
Class C (secondary recreation) waters. Mr. Ventaloro responded that Class C waters will
continue to use total coliforms as the bacterial indicator for now. Mr. Ventaloro also
indicated that EPA does not currently have national recommended water quality criteria
for secondary recreation waters so DEQ will need to determine the appropriate E. coli
criteria to protect for this use.
Commissioner Tweedy asked about the status of the items that were proposed to be
removed from this rulemaking including the updating of the human health criteria
exposure factors in 15A NCAC 02B .0208, the updating of select existing human health
criteria, the adoption of human health criteria for 1,4-dioxane, and the adoption of
technical corrections. Deputy Director Julie Grzyb replied that these items are proposed
to be held back due to the continuing work on related legislative reports as well as
ongoing litigation related to 1,4-dioxane.
EMC Chair Solomon added that the ruling related to the Asheboro litigation was
directed at that process but could have implications for these other items. WQC Vice
Chair Ellison made a motion to approve the proposed action item request, and the
motion was seconded by Commissioner Baumgartner. The motion passed unanimously
without discussion.
Page 4 of 6
2. Discussion - PFAS Minimization Plan Concepts (Julie Grzyb, DWR)
Julie Grzyb, DWR Deputy Director, began her presentation with a summary of what
happened regarding this topic at the September 2024 WQC meeting. The second
motion during that meeting directed DWR to propose a draft rule and draft RIA to
establish monitoring for every industrial and NPDES permit and require PFAS source
reduction plans as part of every SIU and municipal pretreatment program.
Ms. Grzyb provided a description and timeline of Michigan’s PFAS monitoring and
source reduction program, noting that they are ahead of the game. Then she stated that
DEQ is requesting guidance from the WQC regarding Source Reduction Plans to comply
with the second motion from the September 2024 WQC meeting. DEQ’s four questions
to the WQC are as follows:
1) Who will be required to monitor?
2) Who will be required to evaluate source reduction options and submit
minimization plans?
3) What PFAS levels trigger a minimization plan and what reduction targets
ensure success?
4) What is the implementation timeline?
Commissioner Ellison asked about cost to sample and analyze for one round the suite of
8 PFAS that DEQ wants to regulate. Stephanie Bolyard, DEQ, replied that it is about
$1800 in terms of staff time.
EMC Chair Solomon commented that the EMC wants the polluters to pay and it wants to
take an 80/20 approach to find the 20% of the SIUs that are the biggest PFAS users and
get them to quickly start minimizing. He said that some SIUs will be able to stop using
PFAS, or be able clean it out, but that some industries will still have to use PFAS, and
that would require other solutions. He said it is best for industries to figure out for
themselves the best way to reduce PFAS instead of being locked into a certain number.
Commissioner Tweedy asked if the monitoring we are doing now gives us sufficient data
to start this process instead of starting over at square one. Ms. Grzyb indicated that we
do have a lot of data in the Cape Fear region but generally we don’t have that data
statewide.
Commissioner Deerhake said it would be important to have a performance evaluation
every 2-3 years of each program to ensure that proper enforcement is being done at the
Page 5 of 6
SIU level. She also said that there should be some sort of enforcement mechanism so
that SIUs don’t consider PFAS minimization as optional.
Commissioner Baumgartner noted that the WQC doesn’t have the answers to DEQ’s
four questions at the moment, and Chair Keen stated that this agenda item is a
discussion item and that further follow-though can occur in January.
DWR Director Rogers said that DWR staff will develop a PFAS minimization initiative for
major and minor industrial direct dischargers and all significant and direct users that
discharge to POTWs. This initiative will require PFOS monitoring and implementation of
minimization activities to eliminate or reduce PFOS discharges to less than 12 parts per
trillion over a 3-5 year period. Director Rogers said his initiative could include other
chemicals like Gen X and PFOA if the WQC agrees.
DEQ Secretary Mary Penny Kelley briefly addressed the WQC and noted her
appreciation of the progress being made. In conclusion, WQC members agreed on the
following statement without passing a motion:
The WQC directs DWR staff to develop a PFAS Minimization Initiative for
Major and Minor industrial direct dischargers to surface water and all
SIUs that discharge to POTWs. The minimization initiative will require
monitoring for PFAS, and implementation of minimization activities
required to eliminate or significantly reduce discharges of PFOS, PFOA,
and Gen X (levels TBD) over a 3-5 year period.
3. Discussion - 1,4-dioxane Update
Julie Grzyb, DWR Deputy Director, gave a presentation regarding the Greensboro Special
Order by Consent (SOC) and 1,4-dioxane mitigation efforts in the Cape Fear Region. She
provided a brief history of the Greensboro SOC and noted that Greensboro has made
significant reductions in 1,4-dioxane discharges. She said Greensboro was still requiring
SIUs to test samples to identify the cause of any spikes.
Ms. Grzyb then discussed the City of Asheboro NPDES permit, noting that an
administrative law judge (ALJ) ruled that the 1,4-dioxane limits in the permit were void
and unenforceable. The EPA objected to that ruling, noting that it was inconsistent with
the Clean Water Act and stating that if a more suitable permit wasn’t developed, then
EPA would take over and become the exclusive authority to issue the permit. DEQ has
appealed the ALJ’s decision to Wake County Superior Court.
Page 6 of 6
Ms. Grzyb said that DEQ is looking for guidance on 1,4-dioxane recommendations. She
said DEQ’s main concern is source control limited to certain facilities. A discussion
followed amongst Commissioners about how best to proceed.
III. Director’s Remarks
DWR Director Rogers reserved his comments for tomorrow’s EMC meeting.
IV. Conclusion
Chair Keen stated that WQC members have received many emails from the public. He
noted that they now have DEQ email addresses, and he asked DEQ to consider creating
an auto-response to mass emails WQC members receive. That way, people would know
their concerns were being heard.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 3pm.