25.04.2013 Views

responsiveness summary to public comments - US Environmental ...

responsiveness summary to public comments - US Environmental ...

responsiveness summary to public comments - US Environmental ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Page 8 of 40<br />

EPA Response: Mill Creek was initially listed by MDNR in 1998 due <strong>to</strong> impairment<br />

from sediment. MDNR subsequently removed sediment and replaced it with habitat-loss for the<br />

2002 list. Ultimately, Mill Creek was delisted by Missouri because no specific pollutant was<br />

listed as the cause of impairment. No new data and/or information has been provided <strong>to</strong> EPA<br />

that supports the removal of Mill Creek from Missouri’s 303(d) list. The basis for adding this<br />

waterbody back <strong>to</strong> Missouri’s list is discussed in Enclosure 1 <strong>to</strong> EPA’s April 29, 2003 decision<br />

letter <strong>to</strong> Missouri. Therefore, Mill Creek is being retained on Missouri’s 2002 303(d) list for<br />

sediment.<br />

Missouri River<br />

Comment: EPA received 4 letters containing <strong>comments</strong> which opposed EPA’s listing of<br />

two separate segments of Missouri River for mercury contamination based on fish tissue data<br />

retrieved from EPA’s S<strong>to</strong>rage & Retrieval database (STORET). The two segments are from the<br />

mouth of the Chari<strong>to</strong>n River <strong>to</strong> Kansas City, and from the mouth of the Kansas River <strong>to</strong> State<br />

line. In general, it was commented that: (a) EPA did not consider all readily available Missouri<br />

River fish tissue mercury information and appears <strong>to</strong> have ignored more recent sampling data<br />

collected after 1995 showing fish tissue mercury concentrations below the 300 parts per billion<br />

(ppb) trigger level; (b) EPA may not have consistently applied fish tissue criteria relative <strong>to</strong><br />

species of interest; (c) EPA did not apply appropriate analytical methodology; (d) EPA did not<br />

apply appropriate statistical analysis of available data; (e) Missouri has not adopted a numerical<br />

water quality standard for mercury for Human Health Protection-Fish Consumption. Therefore,<br />

EPA’s methyl-mercury criterion should not be used as the basis for listing before Missouri adopts<br />

it as a State water quality standard (WQS); (f) EPA did not identify the source of the alleged<br />

mercury impairment.<br />

EPA Response: As a result of EPA’s <strong>public</strong> comment period, more recent Regional<br />

Ambient Fish Tissue (RAFT) moni<strong>to</strong>ring data that had not been entered in<strong>to</strong> STORET was<br />

located. EPA Regional Labora<strong>to</strong>ry analyses of whole fish specimens (5 fish per sample)<br />

collected at locations on the Missouri River at St. Joseph and Kansas City since 1995, indicated<br />

that the Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services trigger level and EPA’s<br />

Recommended Criterion of 300 ppb mercury are not exceeded. Therefore, based on the more<br />

recent data, presented in the table below, EPA is removing mercury as a pollutant of concern for<br />

the two listed segments of the Missouri River.<br />

Collection dates Results<br />

8/9/2001 for Station #101 - Missouri River at Kansas City 38 ppb<br />

8/21/2001 for Station #102 - Missouri River at St. Joseph 82 ppb<br />

75 ppb (Field Duplicate)<br />

9/10/99 for Station #6 - Missouri River at St. Joseph 26 ppb<br />

9/13/99 for Station #7 - Missouri River at Kansas City 44 ppb<br />

45 ppb (Field Duplicate)<br />

10/3/97 for Station #6 - Missouri River at St. Joseph 83 ppb

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!