Achieving GLI’s objective to have consistent  water quality standards for controlling point sources of toxic pollutants  may prove difficult, however, because of flexible implementation  procedures that allow discharge of pollutants at levels greater than GLI  water quality standards. States Have Largely Completed Adopting GLI Standards in Their Regulatory Programs, but Measuring Some Pollutants at GLI Levels Is a Significant Challenge

By 1998, the Great Lakes states largely completed adopting GLI provisions  in their regulatory programs by incorporating GLI standards in their  environmental regulations and NPDES permit programs. Upon reviewing  state regulations, however, EPA found that several states had either failed  to adopt some GLI provisions or adopted provisions that were inconsistent  with GLI guidance. However, in Wisconsin, the GLI provisions  promulgated by EPA have not been implemented because state officials  believe provisions that are not explicitly supported by Wisconsin law  cannot be implemented and because material disagreements exist between  state officials and EPA over the GLI provisions. EPA Has Not Ensured Consistent Implementation of GLI Standards or Taken Adequate Steps Toward Measuring Progress in Achieving GLI Goals

To ensure the eight Great Lakes states implement GLI consistently, EPA  stated in GLI that it would undertake certain activities, including issuing a  mercury permitting strategy and developing and operating a Clearinghouse  for the sharing of information by states to facilitate the development and  implementation of GLI water quality standards. Although EPA believed that there  was sufficient flexibility in GLI to handle the unique problems posed by  mercury, such as variances and TMDLs, it intended to develop a mercury  permitting strategy to provide a holistic, comprehensive approach by the  states for addressing this pollutant. Conclusions

While GLI has limited potential to improve overall water quality in the  Great Lakes Basin because of its focus on point source pollution, it is  important that GLI’s goals be achieved because they assist in the virtual  elimination of toxic pollutants called for in the GLWQA. Recommendations for Executive Action

To better ensure the full and consistent implementation of the Great Lakes  Initiative and improve measures for monitoring progress toward achieving  GLI’s goals, we are recommending that the EPA Administrator direct EPA  Region 5, in coordination with Regions 2 and 3, to take the following three  actions:   issue a permitting strategy that ensures a more consistent approach to  controlling mercury by the states,   ensure the GLI Clearinghouse is fully developed, maintained, and made  available to the Great Lakes states to assist them in developing water  quality standards for pollutants covered by GLI, and   gather and track information that can be used to assess the progress of  implementing GLI and the impact it has on reducing pollutant  discharges from point sources in the Great Lakes Basin. GLI was an effort by the United States to  further control these substances.
Why GAO Did This Study

The virtual elimination of toxic pollutants in the Great Lakes is a goal shared by the United States and Canada. While some progress has been made, pollution levels remain unacceptably high. The Great Lakes Initiative (GLI) requires stringent water quality standards for many pollutants in discharges regulated by states administering National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit programs. As requested, this report examines the (1) GLI's focus and potential impact on water quality in the Great Lakes Basin, (2) status of GLI's adoption by the states and any challenges to achieving intended goals, and (3) steps taken by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for ensuring full and consistent implementation of GLI and for assessing progress toward achieving its goals.

What GAO Found

GLI has limited potential to improve overall water quality in the Great Lakes Basin because it primarily focuses on regulated point sources of pollution, while nonpoint sources, such as air deposition and agricultural runoff, are greater sources of pollution. GLI's potential impact is further limited because it allows the use of flexible implementation procedures, such as variances, whereby facilities can discharge pollutants at levels exceeding stringent GLI water quality standards. Finally, many of the chemical pollutants regulated by GLI have already been restricted or banned by EPA and have a limited presence in point source discharges. By 1998, the eight Great Lakes states had largely adopted GLI water quality standards and implementation procedures in their environmental regulations and NPDES programs. However, EPA determined that some states had failed to adopt some GLS provisions or had adopted provisions that were inconsistent with GLI and EPA promulgated rules imposing GLI standards. Wisconsin officials, however, believe that the state cannot implement standards that are not explicitly supported by state law, and disagreements with EPA over the rules remain unresolved. As a result, GLI has not been fully adopted or implemented in the state. Finally, a major challenge to fully achieving GLI's goals remains because methods for measuring many pollutants at the low levels established in GLI do not exist. Consequently, some pollutants cannot be regulated at these levels. EPA has not ensured consistent GLI implementation by the states nor has the agency taken adequate steps toward measuring progress. For example, EPA did not issue a mercury permitting strategy to promote consistent approaches to the problems posed by mercury as it stated in GLI. In the absence of a strategy, states developed permits for mercury that vary from state to state. Attempts by EPA to assess GLI's impact have been limited because of inadequate data or information that has not been gathered for determining progress on dischargers' efforts to reduce pollutants.