13. Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission:
Written comments may be submitted at the public hearing, by regular mail, fax, or email to:
Jennifer Jerich
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Water Quality
N7725 Highway 28
Horicon, Wi 53032-9782
Phone: (920) 387-7886
Fax: (920) 387-7888
A hearing and comments submission deadline is currently planned for December 2015.
(See PDF for image)SECTION 1. NR 106.03 (4m) and (11m) are created to read:
NR 106.03 (4m) “Great Lakes system” includes all the surface waters within the drainage basin of the Great Lakes.
(11m) “Same waterbody” means two hydrologically connected points with similar water quality characteristics in which a pollutant can travel between in a reasonable period of time without significantly changing chemically or physically. Hydrological connections can include surface and groundwater connections.
SECTION 2. NR 106.06 (2) (a) and (b) are repealed and recreated to read:
NR 106.06 (2) Limitations for bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs). (a) For purposes of this subsection, the following definitions apply:
1. “New discharge” means any point source that first received WPDES permit coverage from the department after November 6, 2000. It does not include a discharge from a publicly owned treatment works if the discharge from the treatment works is caused by a project that is correcting or preventing a public health problem.
2. “Existing discharge” means any point source that currently has a WPDES permit and that has continually had WPDES permit coverage since November 6, 2000 or earlier. It also includes a discharge from a publicly owned treatment works that becomes permitted after November 6, 2000 if the discharge from the treatment works is caused by a project that is correcting or preventing a public health problem.
3. “Expanded discharge” means any increase in concentration, level or loading of a BCC, which would exceed a limitation specified in a current WPDES permit, or which, according to the procedures in s. NR 106.05, would result in the establishment of a new limitation in a reissued or modified WPDES permit. It does not include an expanded discharge from a publicly owned treatment works if the expanded discharge from the treatment works is caused by a project that is correcting or preventing a public health problem. (b) Notwithstanding any other provisions in chs. NR 102 and 106, there shall be no mixing zones for effluent limitations for new discharges of BCCs or for the expanded portions of existing discharges of BCCs into waters of the Great Lakes system. Effluent limitations for new discharges of BCCs and for expanded portions of existing discharges shall equal the most stringent applicable water quality criterion or secondary value for the BCC. Effluent limitations for an expansion of an existing discharge of BCCs shall be determined by means of a mass balance where the limitation for the existing portion of a permitted discharge that meets the provisions of par. (br) 1. or 2. shall be determined using the requirements of sub. (4) and the limitation for any expanded portion of the discharge may not exceed the most stringent criterion or value for that BCC. Note: An example of a project that is preventing or correcting a public health problem is a situation where a community with failing septic systems connects to a POTW, as defined in s. 106.59, to avert a potential public health threat from the failing systems. SECTION 3. NR 106.06 (2) (br) is created to read:
NR 106.06 (2) (br) Effluent limitations for existing discharges of BCCs into waters of the Great Lakes system, may not include a mixing zone or exceed the most stringent applicable water quality criteria or secondary values for BCCs, except as provided under subd. 1. or 2.
1. Water conservation. A mixing zone may be granted and an effluent limitation may exceed the most stringent water quality criterion or secondary value for a discharged BCC if the permittee demonstrates in the permit application that failure to grant a mixing zone for the BCC would preclude water conservation measures that would lead to an overall load reduction of the BCC, even though a higher concentration of the BCC occurs in the effluent.
2. Technical and economic considerations. A mixing zone may be granted and an effluent limitation may exceed the most stringent water quality criterion or secondary value for the discharged BCC, provided the permittee demonstrates and the department concurs that all the following conditions are met:
a. For the BCC discharged, the permittee is in compliance with and will continue to comply with the WPDES permit requirements and this chapter.
b. The permittee has reduced and will continue to reduce loadings of the BCC for which a mixing zone is requested to the maximum extent possible, such that any additional controls or pollution prevention measures to reduce or ultimately eliminate the BCC discharged would result in unreasonable economic effects on the discharger or the affected community because the controls or measures are not feasible or cost-effective.
3. Approval Requirements. If the department approves a mixing zone for a BCC under this paragraph, the following requirements shall be met:
a. The approved mixing zone is no larger than necessary to account for the technical constraints and economic effects identified under subd. 2.
b. All water quality criteria or secondary values for the BCC shall be met at the edge of an approved mixing zone or be consistent with the applicable U.S. environmental protection agency (EPA) approved total maximum daily load (TMDL).
c. The permit shall contain a numeric effluent limitation for the BCC, determined using the requirements of sub. (4) and the limit shall not be less stringent than the limit that was effective on November 6, 2000.
d. The WPDES permit may, as appropriate, require the discharger to implement an ambient water quality monitoring plan to ensure compliance with water quality criteria and consistency with any applicable TMDL, including the evaluation of alternative means for reducing the BCC from other sources in the watershed.
e. Any mixing zone for a BCC approved by the department pursuant to this paragraph shall be limited to one permit term unless the permittee applies for a mixing zone approval at the next reissuance and the department approves the mixing zone in the subsequent permit applications in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph.
f. The corresponding permit fact sheet for an approved mixing zone shall specify the mixing provisions used in calculating the permit limits and shall identify each BCC for which a mixing zone is approved.
SECTION 4. NR 106.06 (6) is repealed and recreated to read:
NR 106.06 (6) Effluent Limitations Based Upon Elevated Background Concentrations. Whenever the representative background concentration for a toxic or organoleptic substance in the receiving water is determined to be greater than any applicable water quality criterion or secondary value for that substance the calculation of an effluent limitation and the determination of the need for the limitation in a permit shall be performed subject to all of the following:
(a) If the department has developed an EPA approved TMDL for the toxic or organoleptic substance in the receiving water, an effluent limitation for that substance shall be consistent with the TMDL.
(b) If no EPA approved TMDL has been developed and if the intake source of the wastewater is all from the same waterbody as the receiving water of the discharge, the department may determine that the discharge does not have a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above the applicable water quality criterion or secondary value for the substance, and may determine that a numeric limitation is not necessary, provided the permittee has demonstrated that all of the following conditions are met:
1. The permittee withdraws 100 percent of the intake water containing the substance from the same waterbody into which the discharge is made.
2. The permittee does not contribute any additional mass of the identified intake substance to its wastewater.
3. The permittee does not alter the identified intake substance chemically or physically in a manner that would cause adverse water quality impacts to occur that would not occur if the substance were left in-stream.
4. The permittee does not contribute to a statically significant increase the identified intake substance concentration, as determined by the department, at the edge of the mixing zone or at the point of discharge if a mixing zone is not allowed, as compared to the concentration of the substance in the intake water, unless the increased concentration does not cause or contribute to an excursion of water quality standard for that substance.
5. The timing and location of the discharge would not cause adverse water quality impacts to occur that would not occur if the identified intake substance were left in the receiving waterbody.
(c) 1. If no TMDL has been developed and the conditions in par. (b) are not met, an effluent limitation shall be included in the permit if the department determines that the discharge has a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above the applicable water quality criterion or secondary value for the substance. The limitation shall be included in the permit in accordance with the any of the following that applies:
1. For discharges within the Great Lakes system, the effluent limitation for that substance shall be equal to the most stringent applicable water quality criterion or secondary value.
2. For discharges outside of the Great Lakes system:
a. When all of the intake source of the wastewater is from the same waterbody as the receiving water of the discharge, the effluent limitation for that substance shall equal the representative background concentration of that substance in the receiving water.
b. When all of the intake source of the wastewater is from a waterbody that is different than the receiving water of the discharge, the effluent limitation for that substance shall be equal to the lowest applicable water quality criterion or secondary value.
c. When the intake source of the wastewater is in part from the same waterbody as the receiving water and in part from a different waterbody, the effluent limitation may be derived using subd. 2.a and b. to reflect the flow-weighted average of each source of the wastewater, provided that adequate monitoring to determine compliance can be established and is included in the permit.
(d) The determination of representative background concentrations for toxic or organoleptic substances in this subsection shall be statistically (P ≤ 0.01) or otherwise appropriately determined as the reasonably expected maximum background concentration for that substance.
(e) For purposes of this subsection, an intake pollutant in the source water is considered to be from the same waterbody as the receiving water of the discharge if the permittee successfully demonstrates all of the following to the department:
1. That the pollutant would have reached the outfall point in the receiving water within a reasonable period had it not been withdrawn by the permittee,
2. That the background concentration of the pollutant in the receiving water is at a similar concentration level to that in the intake water,
3. That other water quality characteristics, including temperature, pH and hardness are similar in the intake water and the receiving water.
Note: The term “same waterbody” may include a hydrologic connection between groundwater and surface water. See definition in s. NR 106.03 (11m). SECTION 5. NR 106.10 is repealed and recreated to read:
NR 106.10 Noncontact cooling water additives. The department shall establish water quality based effluent limitations for toxic and organoleptic substances in noncontact cooling water discharges as follows:
(1) For toxic and organoleptic substances commonly added by suppliers of drinking water systems and present in the noncontact cooling water, a water quality based effluent limitation calculated under s. NR 106.06 that is based on the applicable water quality criterion or secondary value shall be included in the permit unless the permittee demonstrates at least one of the following: (a) The concentration of the substance in the intake water is dissipated within the system that supplies the intake water to the permittee and is consistently less than the water quality based effluent limitation.
(b) An effluent limitation is not necessary as determined using the reasonable potential procedures in s. NR 106.05. (c) Prior to reaching the receiving water, the substance dissipates or is removed to a level that is below the water quality based effluent limitation.
(2) For other toxic and organoleptic substances intentionally added to noncontact cooling water by the permittee, the department shall follow the procedures specified in s. NR 106.05 and s. NR 106.06 to calculate a water quality based effluent limitation and determine whether the limitation is necessary in the permit. If there is no water quality criterion for an additive and there are potential water quality impacts from the additive, the department shall establish a secondary value for the additive in accordance with ch. NR 105 and calculate a limitation based on that value. All of the following requirements apply to the use and discharge of additives: (a) A permittee shall obtain written approval from the department prior to use of the additive.
(b) A permittee shall provide the department with dosage information and safety data sheets and toxicological data, as requested by the department to meet minimum data requirements specified in s. NR 105.05(4) and 105.06(6), Wis. Adm. Code, for each additive for which approval is sought. (c) Prior to increasing the usage of an additive in amounts greater than authorized by the department, a permittee shall get written approval from the department for the increased usage.
(d) After reissuance, if a permittee wants to use a new additive not previously approved by the department, the permittee shall get written approval from the department prior to use of the additive.
(e) A permittee may only use additives in accordance with the conditions of the department approval and any applicable permit terms. If the department does not approve use of the additive, the additive may not be discharged.
SECTION 6. NR 106.145 (1) (b) is amended to read:
NR 106.145 (1) (b) Representative data on the relatively low concentrations of mercury in wastewater are rare and methods for collecting that data have only recently been developed difficult to obtain due to specialized sample collection methods required and the precision and sensitivity of laboratory analyses.
SECTION 7. NR 106.145 (2) (title) is amended to read:
NR 106.145 (2) DETERMINING THE NECESSITY OF FOR MERCURY EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS.
SECTION 8. NR 106.145 (2) (b) (intro.) and 1. are consolidated, renumbered and amended to read:
