Skip to IR-related Clean Water Act basics.
Commenting on the IR
The Department of Environmental Quality is seeking public comments on Virginia’s 2024 305(b)/303(d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report (IR), a “summary of the water quality conditions in Virginia from Jan. 1, 2017, to Dec. 31, 2022.” The “biennial report satisfies the requirements of the U.S. Clean Water Act sections 305(b) and 303(d) and the Virginia Water Quality Monitoring, Information and Restoration Act.” (Source: Integrated Report, DEQ)
The deadline for comments is May 22. Direct comments and questions to:
- Sandra Mueller
- Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
- Water Monitoring and Assessment Program
- P.O. Box 1105
- Richmond, VA 23218-1105
- Via email attachment to deqecology@deq.virginia.gov (include your name, US mail address, telephone number, and email address)
The report is dense. Get a digestible version of the findings from DEQ Thursday, May 2 at 1:00 pm in a webinar. Members of the public are encouraged to submit questions during the webinar; DEQ will respond to these questions and those submitted via different avenues in a combined response which will be available online with the final report.
Waters on the NNK
Water—as in rivers, creeks, and the Chesapeake Bay—matters on the Northern Neck. Unfortunately, too many of our waterways are contaminated. One example is Pitmans Cove and Indian Creek in Lancaster and Northumberland counties. Fecal coliform is the cause. Across the Potomac-Shenandoah Riverbasin, the top causes of impairment are bacteria (84%, rivers), PCBs in fish tissue (74%, lakes; 59%, estuaries), and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) (56%, estuaries).
A number of segments of waterways have been delisted in the 2024 IR, including Lower Mahadoc Creek in Westmoreland County, West Yeocomico River in Northumberland and Westmoreland counties, and Cat Point Creek in Richmond County.
IR-related Clean Water Act basics
Having all the CWA-related data in one place does, in fact, make it easier for the state and localities to make decisions about needed improvements. And as the EPA has stated, “in many cases the findings and assessment data in [the 305(b) and 303(d) reports] did not agree.”
As the EPA writes, significant federal action to improve water quality dates to 1948. “Sweeping” amendments made in 1972 ushered in subsequent aggressive fixes addressing development, point and nonpoint source pollution, and wastewater infrastructure, and consistent reporting processes. (Use the link to see a timeline of the Clean Water Act.)
Prior to 2001, states reported water quality in a variety of ways and according to the EPA, “in many cases the findings and assessment data in [the 305(b) and 303(d) reports] did not agree.” Further, EPA’s guidance to write a consolidated report was designed “to streamline and reduce the reporting burden to the states and improve the information needed to make water quality management decisions.”
Both 305(b) and 303(d) are part of the federal Clean Water Act (Clean Water Act summary). From the summary page:
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. “Clean Water Act” became the Act’s common name with amendments in 1972.
Under the CWA, EPA has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry. EPA has also developed national water quality criteria recommendations for pollutants in surface waters.
Simply put, Section 303(d) speaks to states identifying and listing waters as impaired (polluted) and determining the Total Maximum Daily Load (the amount of pollution entering a waterway) allowed. Section 305(b) is the National Water Quality Inventory. The section requires states to collect and report information “describing their monitoring program, assessment methods, and the extent of waters supporting the goals of the CWA to provide for balanced population of fsh [sic], shellfsh, and wildlife and for recreational activities.” (Source: Clean Water Act Section 106 Tribal Guidance, p. 10)