C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER D—WATER PROGRAMS › PART 131—WATER QUALITY STANDARDS › Subpart A—General Provisions

40 C.F.R. § 131.3

Definitions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Act means the Clean Water Act (Pub. L. 92-500, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)).

(b) Criteria are elements of State water quality standards, expressed as constituent concentrations, levels, or narrative statements, representing a quality of water that supports a particular use. When criteria are met, water quality will generally protect the designated use.

(c) Section 304(a) criteria are developed by EPA under authority of section 304(a) of the Act based on the latest scientific information on the relationship that the effect of a constituent concentration has on particular aquatic species and/or human health. This information is issued periodically to the States as guidance for use in developing criteria.

(d) Toxic pollutants are those pollutants listed by the Administrator under section 307(a) of the Act.

(e) Existing uses are those uses actually attained in the water body on or after November 28, 1975, whether or not they are included in the water quality standards.

(f) Designated uses are those uses specified in water quality standards for each water body or segment whether or not they are being attained.

(g) Use attainability analysis is a structured scientific assessment of the factors affecting the attainment of the use which may include physical, chemical, biological, and economic factors as described in § 131.10(g).

(h) Water quality limited segment means any segment where it is known that water quality does not meet applicable water quality standards, and/or is not expected to meet applicable water quality standards, even after the application of the technology-based effluent limitations required by sections 301(b) and 306 of the Act.

(i) Water quality standards are provisions of State or Federal law which consist of a designated use or uses for the waters of the United States and water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses. Water quality standards are to protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the Act.

(j) States include: The 50 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Indian Tribes that EPA determines to be eligible for purposes of the water quality standards program.

(k) Federal Indian Reservation, Indian Reservation, or Reservation means all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way running through the reservation.”

(l) Indian Tribe or Tribe means any Indian Tribe, band, group, or community recognized by the Secretary of the Interior and exercising governmental authority over a Federal Indian reservation.

(m) Highest attainable use is the modified aquatic life, wildlife, or recreation use that is both closest to the uses specified in section 101(a)(2) of the Act and attainable, based on the evaluation of the factor(s) in § 131.10(g) that preclude(s) attainment of the use and any other information or analyses that were used to evaluate attainability. There is no required highest attainable use where the State demonstrates the relevant use specified in section 101(a)(2) of the Act and sub-categories of such a use are not attainable.

(n) Practicable, in the context of § 131.12(a)(2)(ii), means technologically possible, able to be put into practice, and economically viable.

(o) A water quality standards variance (WQS variance) is a time-limited designated use and criterion for a specific pollutant(s) or water quality parameter(s) that reflect the highest attainable condition during the term of the WQS variance.

(p) Pollutant Minimization Program, in the context of § 131.14, is a structured set of activities to improve processes and pollutant controls that will prevent and reduce pollutant loadings.

(q) Non-101(a)(2) use is any use unrelated to the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, wildlife or recreation in or on the water.

(r) Tribal reserved rights, for purposes of this part, are any rights to CWA-protected aquatic and/or aquatic-dependent resources reserved by right holders, either expressly or implicitly, through Federal treaties, statutes, or Executive orders.

(s) Right holders, for purposes of this part, are any Federally recognized Tribes holding Tribal reserved rights, regardless of whether the Tribe exercises authority over a Federal Indian reservation.

[48 FR 51405, Nov. 8, 1983, as amended at 56 FR 64893, Dec. 12, 1991; 59 FR 64344, Dec. 14, 1994; 80 FR 51046, Aug. 21, 2015; 89 FR 35747, May 2, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of Ecology
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of Ecology (1994) scotus · cites it 4× “" 40 CFR § 131.3 (b) (1993) (emphasis added).”
Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency & Scott Pruitt (2019) mtd · cites it 6× “…index="16" url="https://cite.case.law/citations/?q=40%20C.F.R.%20%C2%A7%20131.3"> 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (i). The CWA directs individual states to take responsibility for prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution within their waterways. <extracted-citation…”
Communities for a Better Environment v. State Water Resources Control Board (2003) calctapp · cites it 3× “§ 1313 (c)(2)(A); 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (i) (2002).) Water quality criteria can be either narrative or numeric.”
City of Dover, New Hampshire v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2013) dcd · cites it 6× “” 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (i). The water quality criteria can be “expressed as constituent concentrations, levels, or narrative statements, representing a quality of water that supports a particular use.”
Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. Usepa (2021) ca9 · cites it 4× “§ 1313 (c)(2)(A); 40 C.F.R. §§ 131.3 (b), 131.”
National Mining Ass'n v. Jackson (2011) dcd “See 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (b). While states have the responsibility to develop the water quality standards, the EPA reviews the standards for approval.”
Florida Public Interest Research Group Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency (2004) ca11 “” 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (b). While states are primarily responsible for establishing these water quality standards, the EPA, in turn, is required to undertake a review of any new or revised water quality standards adopted by the states.”
Northwest Environmental Advocates, a Non-Profit Oregon Corporation and Nina Bell v. City of Portland (1993) ca9 · cites it 2× “" 40 C.F.R. 131.3(b) (1992). 67 Many discharges remain unregulated and primarily subject to water quality standards, despite statutory deadlines for achieving effluent limitations, 33 U.”
Raymond Proffitt Foundation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1996) paed · cites it 2× “§ 1313 (c)(2)(A); 40 C.F.R. §§ 131.3 (f), 131.6(a), 131.”
City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control Board (2010) calctapp · cites it 2× “§ 1313 (a), (c)(2)(A); 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (i) (2010).) The Clean Water Act also requires states to “identify those waters within its boundaries for which the effluent limitations required by [the Act] are not stringent enough to implement any water quality standard applicable to…”
Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition v. Fola Coal Company, LLC (2017) ca4 “These water quality standards may be numerical or narrative, 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (b) (2016), and may, but need not be, contained in a permit.”
Communities for a Better Environment v. State Water Resources Control Board (2005) calctapp · cites it 3× “§ 1313 (c)(2)(A); 40 C.F.R. § 131.3 (i) (2002).) “Water quality criteria can be either narrative or numeric.”
Show all 64 citing cases →
— 40 C.F.R. § 131.3(b) — 1 case
Northwest Environmental Advocates, a Non-Profit Oregon Corporation and Nina Bell v. City of Portland (1993) ca9 “" 40 C.F.R. 131.3(b) (1992). 67 Many discharges remain unregulated and primarily subject to water quality standards, despite statutory deadlines for achieving effluent limitations, 33 U.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 131.3(e) — 1 case
California Ass'n of Sanitation Agencies v. State Water Resources Control Board (2012) calctapp
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.