Public: The public will benefit from a more transparent approach to protecting Wisconsin’s high quality water and the ability to participate in the selection of these waters.
7. Summary and preliminary comparison with any existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule:
33 USC s. 1313(c) (section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act) requires that states periodically review and modify or adopt, if necessary, water quality standards. This requirement applies to all surface waters in the state.
33 USC s. 1313(b) provides that the EPA may promulgate water quality standards if a state fails to promulgate a standard in accordance with the timeframes established 33 USC 1313(a). 33 USC s1313(d)(4)(B) (section 303(d)(4)(B) of the Clean Water Act) allows effluent limitations to be revised only if the revisions are subject to and consistent with the EPA’s antidegradation policy.
Act
40 CFR 131.12 contains the federal antidegradation policy and procedures, and requires states with approved programs to be consistent with the federal antidegradation requirements. 40 CFR 132 Appendix E contains antidegradation procedures for discharges of certain pollutants to the Great Lake Basin. 8. Anticipated economic impact of implementing the rule (note if the rule is likely to have a significant economic impact on small businesses):
The Department expects moderate economic impacts as a result of this rule. The economic impact of this rule package is dependent on the approach selected. Selection of the waterbody-by-waterbody approach would allow the Department to focus where antidegradation reviews are required. Reviews would only be needed for new/increased discharges that would significantly lower the water quality of the waters determined to be high quality. Selection of the parameter-by-parameter approach would allow the Department to implement the same process for all waters. Reviews would be needed for new/increased discharges of parameters where water quality is better than necessary to support uses. As part of this rule package, both approaches will be evaluated to ensure that the selected approach provides adequate protection to the State’s waters while minimizing economic impacts. Businesses, industries, and municipalities that discharge to surface waters and hold a WPDES permit or may obtain a WPDES permit in the future may be affected by this rule. The Department will solicit public input on the projected economic impact and will convene an advisory group to provide input on the proposed rule modifications.
9. Anticipated number, month and locations of public hearings:
The Department anticipates holding 2 public hearings in the month of December 2018. Hearing cities will be: Madison and Wausau or Eau Claire (or other as appropriate).
The Department will hold these hearings in these locations to receive input from affected parties based in the Madison area and at a centrally located city in the state.
Contact Person:
Sarah Yang
Environmental Toxicologist
Bureau of Water Quality
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
608-266-9262
