ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 4, 1999
IN THE MATTER OF:
PERMITTING PROCEDURES FOR THE
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN: 35 ILL. ADM.
CODE 301, 302 AND 309.141
)
)
)
)
)
R99-8
(Rulemaking - Water)
Proposed Rule. First Notice.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by G.T. Girard, C.A. Manning and N.J. Melas):
On July 28, 1998, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) filed a
rulemaking proposal which amends the Board’s water regulations concerning permitting
procedures for the Lake Michigan Basin. The proposed rules amend portions of the Board’s rules
dealing with the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permits (NPDES) and are
necessary to implement the federal Great Lakes Initiative (GLI) which was previously adopted by
the Board. See, In the Matter of: Conforming Amendments for the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 302.101; 302.105; 302.Subpart E; 303.443 and 304.222, (December 18, 1997) R97-
25. The proposal was filed pursuant to Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act (Act)
(415 ILCS 5/27 (1996)) and was accompanied by a statement of reasons (Reasons). The Board
accepted this proposal on August 6, 1998.
Two hearings have been held in this matter before Hearing Officer Marie Tipsord. The
first hearing was held on October 5, 1998, in Chicago, Illinois (Tr.1). At that hearing, the Agency
submitted testimony in support of the proposal. A second hearing was held on December 8,
1998, in Springfield, Illinois (Tr.2). The Agency presented additional testimony and testimony
was offered by Mr. William Seith on behalf of the Illinois Attorney General’s Office (Attorney
General). A deadline of January 14, 1999, was set for posthearing comments to be submitted and
as of today’s order, the Board has received only one public comment.
Today, the Board sends this proposal to first notice. Based on the Agency’s proposal and
the hearings, the Board finds that proceeding to first notice is warranted. In addition, the Board
will proceed to first notice with specific sections of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302 and we amend the
caption at this time to include that Part. As discussed below, the amendments to Part 302 are
limited in nature. In the sections that follow, the Board will briefly discuss procedural history,
then the proposed rule and finally explain the economic justification and technical feasibility of the
proposal.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Prior to filing this proposal with the Board, the Agency promulgated regulations at 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 352 to implement procedures necessary for the issuance of NPDES permits in the
Lake Michigan Basin. Reasons at 3. The Part 352 regulations were intended by the Agency to
2
implement the Board’s GLI regulations promulgated in R97-25. During the Agency’s Part 352
rulemaking the Attorney General questioned the authority of the Agency to proceed with certain
portions of that rulemaking. The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules of the Illinois
Legislature recommended that the Agency and the Attorney General “work together to more
clearly determine the relative jurisdiction of the” Agency.
Id
. The Agency submitted this
proposal (R99-8) to the Board in response.
Id
. The Agency stated that the proposal was
submitted to determine whether the Agency’s regulations adopted at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352 are
consistent with the Board’s regulations and, if they are not consistent, to determine which
regulations should be amended.
Id
. The Agency also submitted these amendments to “determine
the limits” of the Agency’s and the Board’s “rulemaking authority.”
Id
.
On December 17, 1998, the Board denied a motion to dismiss R99-8 filed by the Illinois
Environmental Regulatory Group (IERG) and supported by the Chemical Industry Council (PC
1). In that order, the Board found that the Board does not need to decide the Agency’s authority
for rulemaking in this proceeding. Section 13 of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS
5/13 (1996)) clearly grants the Board the authority to adopt rules. The Agency’s rulemaking
proposal contains proposed amendments to the Board’s water rules that will clarify
implementation of the federally required Great Lakes Initiative. The Board further found that the
Board can adopt or not adopt the proposed rules on the merits based on the Board’s own
authority to adopt the rules proposed by the Agency.
In denying IERG’s motion to dismiss the Board considered testimony from the December
8, 1998 hearing. At that hearing, Seith of the Attorney General’s Office testified that the Board
need not “deal with” the issue of the Agency’s authority to promulgate regulations because “this
Board clearly does have the authority to promulgate these regulations.” Tr.2 at 28. Based on the
Attorney General’s experience with enforcement actions in similar cases, Seith stated that the
Board should adopt the proposed rules to ensure enforceability of the GLI program and the
limitations written into permits for individual dischargers. Tr. 2 at 31-33. The Board also
considered the decision by the Illinois Supreme Court which discussed the rulemaking roles of the
Board and the Agency in the context of water regulations (Granite City Division of National Steel
Company v. Illinois Pollution Control Board, 155 Ill.2d 149, 613 N.E.2d 719 (April 15, 1993)).
PROPOSAL
The Agency proposes to amend the Board’s rules by updating the citation to the Code of
Federal regulations at section 301.105, adding specialized definitions that are contained in the
Agency’s rule at Section 352.104 and adding implementation procedures under Section
309.141(h). The amendments to the incorporations by reference under Section 301.105(c) update
the citation to 40 C.F.R. 136 to reflect the 1996 edition of the federal rules, which contain the
approved test methods, and add a new incorporation by reference to a test procedure specified in
40 C.F.R. 132.
The definitions proposed today at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301 are, for the most part, derived
from the federal GLI regulations at 40 C.F.R. 132.2. These include definitions of the terms
“bioaccumulative chemicals of concern,” “method detection level,” “minimum level,”
“quantification level,” “total maximum daily load,” “wasteload allocation” and “wet weather point
3
source.” In addition, the order includes definitions proposed by the Agency of certain terms used
in the implementation procedures.
The procedures for the implementation of the federal GLI are set forth under a new
subsection at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.141(h). These procedures are intended to be used by the
Agency when issuing NPDES permits to Lake Michigan Basin Dischargers. Section
309.141(h)(1) provides that the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or the Waste Load
Allocations (WLA) will be set through either the Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan
(LaMP) or the remedial action plan (RAP) for an Area of Concern. Reasons at 5. This provision
is consistent with the federal GLI procedure concerning TMDL and WLA at 40 C.F.R. 132
Appendix F, Procedure 3. If neither LaMP or RAP has been completed the effluent limits shall be
established pursuant to the remaining sections of Section 309.141.
Id
. If calculation of a TMDL
or a WLA is incomplete but completion of a TMDL is expected to supersede limits established
through other provisions, the limits shall be set as interim and the permit shall include a reopener
clause, which would be triggered by the completion of TMDL or WLA.
Id
.
Section 309.141(h)(2) specifies an acceptable risk level of one in 100,000 for establishing
Tier I criteria and Tier II values for combination of substances exhibiting carcinogenic or other
nonthreshold toxic mechanism. This risk level which is termed an “additive risk” level in the
proposed rules is based upon the assumption that the cumulative risk to human health from a
combination of individual carcinogens in a mixture is additive. In this regard, the federal GLI
guidance notes that since there is very little information concerning the interactive effects of
pollutants in a mixture, it is reasonable to consider that the risk to human health from such
substances is additive. 60 FR 15377. The proposed additive risk level of 1 in 100,000, which is
recommended by the federal GLI guidelines, was adopted by the Board in in R97-25. (In the
Matter of: Conforming Amendments for the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.101;
302.105; 302.Subpart E; 303.443 and 304.222, (December 18, 1997) R97-25) as an acceptable
risk for such substances. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.590. In addition, Sections 309.141(h)(2)(A) and
(h)(2)(B) set forth specific requirements for the consideration of additive effects of two classes of
substances known as the chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDD) and chlorinated dibenzofurans
(CDF). Reasons at 5. These procedures are derived from the federal GLI at 40 C.F.R. 132
Appendix F, Procedure 4. In both CDD and CDF, the arrangement of the atoms in the molecule
can vary, creating different levels of toxic effects from the molecule, which is termed as a
congener.
Id
. The proposed procedure assigns specific conversion factors to the congeners that
allows a permit writer to calculate the additive effect on a consistent basis.
Section 309.141(h)(3) sets forth the conversion factors to be used in translating between
water quality standards, criteria or values for metals expressed in either the dissolved form or as
total amount recoverable. Reasons at 6. In this regard, the Agency notes that while many
modern water quality standards are expressed in the dissolved form,
1
historical water quality and
effluent data has been reported as total amount recoverable. Reasons at 6. The proposed
conversion factors, which are based on the Agency’s review of scientific literature, allows for the
1
The standards are expressed in dissolved form since that form was used in developing the
toxicological information as being more available for absorption by aquatic life.
4
consistent translation of total recoverable metal to dissolved form. Further, the proposed
provision also allows for the use of alternate site-specific conversion factor.
Section 309.141(h)(4) together with the procedures specified in 35 Ill. Adm. Code
352.Subpart D provide guidance to the Agency in choosing which pollutants require water quality
based effluent limits (WQBEL) and, if required, at what level in NPDES permits. Reasons at 6.
Subsection (h)(4)(A) specifies the first step in the process which involves the estimation of
projected effluent quality (PEQ) of a parameter in the discharge of a facility, taking into account
the chronic or acute exposure periods of the standard, criteria or value.
Id
. The proposed
provision requires the PEQ to be based on representative facility specific data that reflect the
upper bound of a 95 percent confidence level for the 95th percentile value. Subsection (h)(4)(B)
provides a method of calculating the PEQ when less than ten facility specific data points are
available. The PEQ or the alternate PEQ must be compared with water quality standard, criteria,
or value to determine whether to impose no limit, consider dilution and mixing, or require
additional monitoring. Subsection (h)(4)(C) requires the Agency to use monthly average effluent
data to evaluate the need for WQBELs to meet chronic standards and daily effluent data to
evaluate the need for effluent limits to meet acute standards. Reasons at 6-7. Subsection
(h)(4)(D) allows alternative scientifically defensible statistical methods to calculate PEQ. Reasons
at 7.
If PEQ for a parameter is greater than the water quality standard, criteria or value for that
parameter, the next step involves the consideration of dilution and mixing in accordance with
Section 309.141(h)(5), which allows for such consideration based on the degree of treatment.
Mixing zone and dilution may be considered only if the discharger is providing treatment
consistent with the best degree of treatment under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.102(a). Reasons at 7.
The next step in the process involves the comparison of PEQ of a parameter with the
projected effluent limitation (PEL) for that parameter to determine the need for specifying a
WQBEL in the NPDES permit. Section 309.141(h)(6) sets forth a simple mass balance formula
for calculating PEL giving consideration to the water quality standard, relative flowrates of
effluent and receiving water, dilution allowance and the background concentration of the
parameter. Reasons at 7.
Section 309.141(h)(7) sets forth the conditions under which a WQBEL or certain
monitoring requirements must be included in the NPDES permit based upon a comparison of PEQ
and PEL. Reasons at 7.
The Board is also proposing amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302. The amendments are
proposed because at the close of the rulemaking in R97-25 (In the Matter of: Conforming
Amendments for the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.101; 302.105; 302.Subpart E;
303.443 and 304.222, (December 18, 1997) R97-25), JCAR submitted a list of typographical
errors which occurred in the text of Part 302. The Board proposes only typographical corrections
and nonsubstantive amendments to Part 302.
ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS AND TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
5
The Agency indicated that the procedures outlined in these amendments are necessary to
implement the federal Great Lakes Initiative in Illinois. Tr.2 at 19. The implementation costs of
the GLI were found to be reasonable in R97-25 (In the Matter of: Conforming Amendments for
the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.101; 302.105; 302.Subpart E; 303.443 and
304.222, (December 18, 1997) R97-25). The Agency reiterates its position from R97-25 (In the
Matter of: Conforming Amendments for the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.101;
302.105; 302.Subpart E; 303.443 and 304.222, (December 18, 1997) R97-25) by stating:
It is the opinion of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency that these
proposed procedures are not so significantly different than the existing procedures
to protect the Lake Michigan Basin as to cause significant cost increase. If such
unreasonable cost increases are demonstrated, the Great Lakes Initiative provides
for consideration of adjustments on a case by case basis to avoid hardship.
Reasons at 8.
As to the technical feasibility of the proposal, Mr. Toby Frevert and Mr. Tom McSwiggin
testified on behalf of the Agency, that the procedures are technically feasible. See Tr.2 at 14-19.
Specifically, Frevert stated that the procedures are “generally feasible” and constitute “a default
procedure that we [the Agency] would essentially put the world on notice we [the Agency] intend
to operate by, unless somebody can propose or substantiate some other procedure.” Tr.2 at 15.
Frevert testified that the procedures proposed by the Agency are reasonable to establish
permit limits that are adequate to protect water quality, yet do not have extreme conservatism that
they become impracticable for an operator. Tr.2 at 14-15. He noted that the Agency used the
statistical procedures recommended by the USEPA that demonstrate compliance based on upper
bound 95 percent confidence of the 95th percentile of the effluent concentration. Tr.2 at 15.
Frevert maintained that the procedures are flexible enough to be technically feasible across the
Board.
Id
. He also noted that the proposed procedures are consistent with the federal GLI
implementation procedures. Tr.2 at 18-19.
DISCUSSION
These amendments propose changes to the Board’s water regulations which implement
the federal Great Lakes Initiative in the Lake Michigan Basin of Illinois. Although, the Agency
indicated it was proposing these amendments to “determine the limits” of the Agency’s and the
Board’s “rulemaking authority,” the Board need not comment on the Agency’s authority to adopt
rules. Rather, the Board notes that the proposed amendments clarify the Agency’s authority to
carry out procedures which are necessary to implement the federal GLI and for therefore, the
Board believes that proceeding to first notice is appropriate.
The Board, in deciding whether to proceed with any amendment to its rules, must
determine economic reasonableness and technical feasibility. In this proceeding the only evidence
in the record indicates that proposed amendments are economically reasonable and technically
feasible. Therefore, the Board finds the proposal is economically reasonable and technically
feasible and the Board will proceed to first notice.
6
Finally, the Board is convinced that the inclusion of these amendments in the regulations
implementing the Great Lakes Initiative will clarify issues and assist in the administration of the
program in Illinois. Therefore the Board will proceed to first notice under the Administrative
Procedure Act. 5 ILCS 100/1-1
et seq
.
CONCLUSION
The Board finds that the proposal filed by the Agency warrants proceeding to first notice
under the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. 5 ILCS 100/1-1
et seq
. Further, the Board finds
that the proposal is economically reasonable and technically feasible.
ORDER
TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION
CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PART 301
INTRODUCTION
Section
301.101
Authority
301.102
Policy
301.103
Repeals
301.104
Analytical Testing
301.105
References to Other Sections
301.106
Incorporations by Reference
301.107
Severability
301.108
Adjusted Standards
301.200
Definitions
301.205
Act
301.210
Administrator
301.215
Agency
301.220
Aquatic Life
301.221
Area of Concern
301.225
Artificial Cooling Lake
301.230
Basin
301.231
Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern
301.235
Board
301.240
CWA
301.245
Calumet River System
7
301.250
Chicago River System
301.255
Combined Sewer
301.260
Combined Sewer Service Area
301.265
Construction
301.270
Dilution Ratio
301.275
Effluent
301.280
Hearing Board
301.285
Industrial Wastes
301.290
Institute
301.295
Interstate Waters
301.300
Intrastate Waters
301.301
Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan
301.305
Land Runoff
301.310
Marine Toilet
301.311
Method Detection Level
301.312
Minimum Level
301.315
Modification
301.320
New Source
301.325
NPDES
301.330
Other Wastes
301.331
Outlier
301.335
Person
301.340
Pollutant
301.341
Pollutant Minimization Program
301.345
Population Equivalent
301.346
Preliminary Effluent Limitation
301.350
Pretreatment Works
301.355
Primary Contact
301.356
Projected Effluent Quality
301.360
Public and Food Processing Water Supply
301.365
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
301.370
Publicly Regulated Treatment Works
301.371
Quantification Level
301.372
Reasonable Potential Analysis
301.373
Same Body of Water
301.375
Sanitary Sewer
301.380
Secondary Contact
301.385
Sewage
301.390
Sewer
301.395
Sludge
301.400
Standard of Performance
301.405
STORET
301.410
Storm Sewer
301.411
Total Maximum Daily Load
301.415
Treatment Works
8
301.420
Underground Waters
301.421
Wasteload Allocation
301.425
Wastewater
301.430
Wastewater Source
301.435
Watercraft
301.440
Waters
301.441
Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation
301.442
Wet Weather Point Source
301.443
Whole Effluent Toxicity
APPENDIX
References to Previous Rules
AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Section 27 of the Environmental
Protection Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 111 1/2, pars. 1013 and 1027).
SOURCE: Filed with the Secretary of State January 1, 1978; amended at 3 Ill. Reg. 25, p. 190,
effective June 21, 1979; amended at 5 Ill. Reg. 6384, effective May 28, 1981; codified at 6 Ill.
Reg. 7818; amended in R88-1 at 13 Ill. Reg. 5984, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-
21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2879, effective February 13, 1990 amended in R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg.
_________, effective _____________________.
Note: Capitalization denotes statutory language.
Section 301.106 Incorporations by Reference
a)
Abbreviations. The following abbreviated names are used for materials
incorporated by reference:
"ASTM" means American Society for Testing and Materials
"GPO" means Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
"NTIS" means National Technical Information Service
"Standard Methods" means "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater", available from the American Public Health Association
"USEPA" means United States Environmental Protection Agency
b)
The Board incorporates the following publications by reference:
American Public Health Association et al., 1015 Fifteenth Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20005
9
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th
Edition, 1985
ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1976 Race Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19013 (215) 299-5400
ASTM Standard E 724-80 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static Acute
Toxicity Tests with Larvae of Four Species of Bivalve Molluscs", approved
1980.
ASTM Standard E 729-80 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static Acute
Toxicity Tests with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates, and Amphibians",
approved 1980.
ASTM Standard E 857-81 "Standard Practice for Conducting Subacute
Dietary Toxicity Tests with Avian Species", approved 1981.
ASTM Standard E 1023-84 "Standard Guide for Assessing the Hazard of a
Material to Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses", approved 1984.
ASTM Standard E 1103-86 "Method for Determining Subchronic Dermal
Toxicity", approved 1986.
ASTM Standard E 1147-87 "Standard Test Method for Partition
Coefficient (n-Octanol/Water) Estimation by Liquid Chromatography",
approved February 27, 1987
ASTM Standard E 1192-88 "Standard Guide for Conducting Acute
Toxicity Tests on Aqueous Effluents with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates and
Amphibians", approved 1988.
ASTM Standard E 1193-87 "Standard Guide for Conducting Renewal
Life-Cycle Toxicity Tests with Daphnia Magna", approved 1987.
ASTM Standard E 1241-88 "Standard Guide for Conducting Early Life-
Stage Toxicity Tests with Fishes", approved 1988.
ASTM Standard E 1242-88 "Standard Practice for Using Octanol-Water
Partition Coefficients to Estimate Median Lethal Concentrations for Fish
due to Narcosis", approved 1988.
ASTM Standard E 4429-84 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static
Acute Toxicity Tests on Wastewaters with Daphnia", approved 1984.
10
NTIS. National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161 (703) 487-4600
SIDES: STORET Input Data Editing System, January, 1973, Document
Number PB-227 052/8
Water Quality Data Base Management Systems, February, 1984,
Document Number AD-P004 768/8
USEPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C. 20460
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity Assessment for 1,3-Butadiene,
September, 1985, Document Number EPA/600/8-85/004A
c)
The Board incorporates the following federal regulations by reference. Available
from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington D.C. 20402. (202)783-3238:
Procedure 5.b.2 of Appendix F of 40 CFR 132 (1995)
40 CFR 136 (19961988)
40 CFR 141 (1988)
40 CFR 302.4 (1988)
d)
This Section incorporates no future editions or amendments.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.221 Area of Concern
Area of Concern or AOC is an area specially designated for remediation efforts.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.231 Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern
Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern or BCC means a chemical or class of chemicals meeting
the definition at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.501.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.301 Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan
Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan or LaMP is a plan to manage the Illinois portion of
Lake Michigan as approved by USEPA.
11
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.311 Method Detection Level
Method Detection Level is the minimum concentration of an analyte (substance) that can be
measured and reported with a 99 percent confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than
zero as determined by the procedure set forth in Appendix B of 40 CFR 136.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.312 Minimum Level
Minimum Level or ML is the concentration at which the entire analytical system must give a
recognizable signal and acceptable calibration point. The ML is the concentration in a sample that
is equivalent to the concentration of the lowest calibration standard analyzed by a specific
analytical procedure approved in 40 CFR 136, assuming that all the method-specified sample
weights, volumes and processing steps have been followed.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.331 Outlier
Outlier is a test value that is not statistically valid under tests approved in 40 CFR 136.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.341 Pollutant Minimization Program
Pollutant Minimization Program means a plan to achieve or maintain the goal of reducing
contaminant discharges to below water quality based effluent limits.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.346 Preliminary Effluent Limitation
Preliminary Effluent Limitation or PEL is an estimate of an allowable discharge taking into
consideration mixing or dilution.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.356 Projected Effluent Quality
Projected Effluent Quality or PEQ is the amount of a contaminant estimated to be discharged by a
facility or activity taking into account statistical analysis of the discharge or activity.
12
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.371 Quantification Level
Quantification Level is a measurement of the concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a
specified laboratory procedure approved in 40 CFR 136 and calibrated at a specified
concentration above the method detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at which
a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a specified laboratory procedure for
monitoring of the contaminant.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.372 Reasonable Potential Analysis
Reasonable Potential Analysis or Reasonable Potential to Exceed means the procedure to predict
whether an existing or future discharge would cause or contribute to a violation of water quality
standards, criteria or values.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.373 Same Body of Water
Same Body of Water means that, for purposes of evaluating intake toxic substances consistent
with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.425, the Agency will consider intake toxic substances to be from the
same body of water if the Agency finds that the intake toxic substance would have reached the
vicinity of the outfall point in the receiving water within a reasonable period had it not been
removed by the permittee and there is a direct hydrological connection between the intake and the
discharge points. Notwithstanding the provisions of this definition, an intake toxic substance shall
be considered to be from the same body of water if the permittee's intake point is located on Lake
Michigan and the outfall point is located on a tributary of Lake Michigan. In this situation, the
background concentration of the toxic substance in the receiving water shall be similar to or
greater than that in the intake water and the difference, if any, between the water quality
characteristics of the intake and receiving water shall not result in an adverse impact on the
receiving water.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.411 Total Maximum Daily Load
Total Maximum Daily Load or TMDL is the sum of the individual wasteload allocations for point
sources and load allocations for nonpoint sources and natural background, as more fully defined
at 40 CFR 130.2(i). A TMDL sets and allocates the maximum amount of a pollutant that may be
introduced into a water body and still assure attainment and maintenance of water quality
standards.
13
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.421 Wasteload Allocation
Waste Load Allocation or WLA is the portion of receiving water's loading capacity that is
allocated to one of its existing or future point sources of pollution, as more fully defined at 40
CFR 130.2(h). In the absence of a TMDL approved by USEPA pursuant to 40 CFR 130.7 or an
assessment and remediation plan developed and approved in accordance with procedure 3.A of
Appendix F of 40 CFR 132, a WLA is the allocation for an individual point source that ensures
that the level of water quality to be achieved by the point source is derived from and complies
with all applicable water quality standards.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.441 Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation
Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation or WQBEL is a limit imposed in a permit so that the
applicable water quality standard, criteria or value is not exceeded outside of a designated mixing
zone.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.442 Wet Weather Point Source
Wet Weather Point Source means any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance from which
pollutants are, or may be, discharged as the result of a wet weather event. Discharges from wet
weather point sources shall include only: discharges of storm water from a municipal separate
storm sewer as defined at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(8); storm water discharge associated with industrial
activity as defined at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14); discharges of storm water and sanitary wastewaters
(domestic, commercial, and industrial) from a combined sewer overflow; or any other stormwater
discharge for which a permit is required under Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act. A storm
water discharge associated with industrial activity which is mixed with process wastewater shall
not be considered a wet weather point source.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 301.443 Whole Effluent Toxicity
Whole Effluent Toxicity or WET means a test procedure that determines the effect of an effluent
on aquatic life.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
14
SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION
CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PART 302
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
SUBPART A: GENERAL WATER QUALITY PROVISIONS
Section
302.100
Definitions
302.101
Scope and Applicability
302.102
Allowed Mixing, Mixing Zones and ZIDS
302.103
Stream Flows
302.104
Main River Temperatures
302.105
Nondegradation
SUBPART B: GENERAL USE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Section
302.201
Scope and Applicability
302.202
Purpose
302.203
Offensive Conditions
302.204
pH
302.205
Phosphorus
302.206
Dissolved Oxygen
302.207
Radioactivity
302.208
Numeric Standards for Chemical Constituents
302.209
Fecal Coliform
302.210
Other Toxic Substances
302.211
Temperature
302.212
Ammonia Nitrogen and Un-ionized Ammonia
302.213
Effluent Modified Waters (Ammonia)
SUBPART C: PUBLIC AND FOOD PROCESSING WATER SUPPLY STANDARDS
Section
302.301
Scope and Applicability
302.302
Algicide Permits
302.303
Finished Water Standards
302.304
Chemical Constituents
302.305
Other Contaminants
302.306
Fecal Coliform
15
SUBPART D: SECONDARY CONTACT AND INDIGENOUS AQUATIC LIFE
STANDARDS
Section
302.401
Scope and Applicability
302.402
Purpose
302.403
Unnatural Sludge
302.404
pH
302.405
Dissolved Oxygen
302.406
Fecal Coliform (Repealed)
302.407
Chemical Constituents
302.408
Temperature
302.409
Cyanide
302.410
Substances Toxic to Aquatic Life
SUBPART E: LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Section
302.501
Scope, Applicability, and Definitions
302.502
Dissolved Oxygen
302.503
pH
302.504
Chemical Constituents
302.505
Fecal Coliform
302.506
Temperature
302.507
Thermal Standards for
Existing Sources on January 1, 1971
302.508
Thermal Standards for
Sources Under Construction But Not in Operation on
January 1, 1971
302.509
Other Sources
302.510
Incorporations by Reference
302.515
Offensive Conditions
302.520
Regulation and Designation of Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern
(BCCs)
302.521
Supplemental Antidegradation Provisions for BCCs
302.525
Radioactivity
302.530
Supplemental Mixing Provisions for Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern
(BCCs)
302.535
Ammonia Nitrogen
302.540
Other Toxic Substances
302.545
Data Requirements
302.550
Analytical Testing
302.553
Determining the Lake Michigan Aquatic Toxicity Criteria or Values - General
Procedures
302.555
Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Criterion (LMAATC): Independent of Water Chemistry
16
302.560
Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Criterion (LMAATC): Dependent on Water Chemistry
302.563
Determining the Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Value (LMAATV)
302.565
Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Criterion
(LMCATC) or the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Value
(LMCATV)
302.570
Procedures for Deriving Bioaccumulation Factors for the Lake Michigan
Basin
302.575
Procedures for Deriving Tier I Water Quality Criteria in the Lake Michigan
Basin to Protect Wildlife
302.580
Procedures for Deriving Water Quality Criteria and Values in the Lake
Michigan Basin to Protect Human Health - General
302.585
Procedures for Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health
Threshold Criterion (LMHHTC) and the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health
Threshold Value (LMHHTV)
302.590
Procedures for Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health
Nonthreshold Criterion (LMHHNC) or the Lake Michigan Basin Human
Health Nonthreshold Value (LMHHNV)
302.595
Listing of Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern, Derived Criteria and
Values
SUBPART F: PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
Section
302.601
Scope and Applicability
302.603
Definitions
302.604
Mathematical Abbreviations
302.606
Data Requirements
302.612
Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion for an Individual Substance
- General Procedures
302.615
Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Toxicity Independent of
Water Chemistry
302.618
Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Toxicity Dependent on
Water Chemistry
302.621
Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Procedures for
Combinations of Substances
302.627
Determining the Chronic Aquatic Toxicity Criterion for an Individual
Substance - General Procedures
302.630
Determining the Chronic Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Procedure for
Combination of Substances
302.633
The Wild and Domestic Animal Protection Criterion
302.642
The Human Threshold Criterion
302.645
Determining the Acceptable Daily Intake
17
302.648
Determining the Human Threshold Criterion
302.651
The Human Nonthreshold Criterion
302.654
Determining the Risk Associated Intake
302.657
Determining the Human Nonthreshold Criterion
302.658
Stream Flow for Application of Human Nonthreshold Criterion
302.660
Bioconcentration Factor
302.663
Determination of Bioconcentration Factor
302.666
Utilizing the Bioconcentration Factor
302.669
Listing of Derived Criteria
APPENDIX A
References to Previous Rules
APPENDIX B
Sources of Codified Sections
AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Sections 11(b) and 27 of the
Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13, 11(b), and 27]
SOURCE: Filed with the Secretary of State January 1, 1978; amended at 2 Ill. Reg. 44, p. 151,
effective November 2, 1978; amended at 3 Ill. Reg. 20, p. 95, effective May 17, 1979; amended at
3 Ill. Reg. 25, p. 190, effective June 21, 1979; codified at 6 Ill. Reg. 7818; amended at 6 Ill. Reg.
11161, effective September 7, 1982; amended at 6 Ill. Reg. 13750, effective October 26, 1982;
amended at 8 Ill. Reg. 1629, effective January 18, 1984; peremptory amendments at 10 Ill. Reg.
461, effective December 23, 1985; amended at R87-27 at 12 Ill. Reg. 9911, effective May 27,
1988; amended at R85-29 at 12 Ill. Reg. 12082, effective July 11, 1988; amended in R88-1 at 13
Ill. Reg. 5998, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2899, effective
February 13, 1990; amended in R88-21(B) at 14 Ill. Reg. 11974, effective July 9, 1990; amended
in R94-1(A) at 20 Ill. Reg. 7682, effective May 24, 1996; amended in R94-1(B) at 21 Ill. Reg.
370, effective December 23, 1996; expedited correction at 21 Ill. Reg. 6273, effective December
23, 1996; amended in R97-25 at 21 Ill. Reg. 1356, effective December 24, 1997; amended in
R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.
BOARD NOTE: This Part implements the Environmental Protection Act, as of July 1, 1994.
SUBPART A: GENERAL WATER QUALITY PROVISIONS
Section 302.101 Scope and Applicability
a)
This Part contains schedules of water quality standards which are applicable
throughout the State as designated in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303. Site specific water
quality standards are found with the water use designations in 35 Ill. Adm. Code
303.
18
b)
Subpart B contains general use water quality standards which must be met in
waters of the State for which there is no specific designation (35 Ill. Adm. Code
303.201).
c)
Subpart C contains the public and food processing water supply standards. These
are cumulative with Subpart B and must be met by all designated waters at the
point at which water is drawn for treatment and distribution as a potable supply or
for food processing (35 Ill. Adm. Code 303.202).
d)
Subpart D contains the secondary contact and indigenous aquatic life standards.
These standards must be met only by certain waters designated in 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 303.204 and 303.441.
e)
Subpart E contains the Lake Michigan Basin water quality standards. These must
be met in the waters of the Lake Michigan Basin as designated in 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 303.443.
f)
Subpart F contains the procedures for determining each of the criteria designated
in Section 302.210.
g)
Unless the contrary is clearly indicated, all references to "Parts" or "Sections" are
to Ill. Adm. Code, Title 35: Environmental Protection. For example, "Part 309" is
35 Ill. Adm. Code 309, and "Section 309.101" is 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.101.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
SUBPART E: LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Section 302.501 Scope, Applicability, and Definitions
a)
Subpart E contains the Lake Michigan Basin water quality standards. These must
be met in the waters of the Lake Michigan Basin as designated in 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 303.443.
b)
In addition to the definitions provided at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.200 through
301.444, and in place of conflicting definitions at Section 302.100, the following
terms have the meanings specified for the Lake Michigan Basin:
“Acceptable daily exposure” or “ADE” means an estimate of the maximum daily
dose of a substance which is not expected to result in adverse noncancer effects to
the general human population, including sensitive subgroups.
“Acceptable endpoints”, for the purpose of wildlife criteria derivation, means
acceptable subchronic and chronic endpoints thatwhich affect reproductive or
developmental success, organismal viability or growth, or any other endpoint
19
thatwhich is, or is directly related to, parameters that influence population
dynamics.
“Acute to chronic ratio” or “ACR” is the standard measure of the acute toxicity of
a material divided by an appropriate measure of the chronic toxicity of the same
material under comparable conditions.
“Acute toxicity” means adverse effects that result from an exposure period
thatwhich is a small portion of the life span of the organism.
“Adverse effect” means any deleterious effect to organisms due to exposure to a
substance. This includes effects thatwhich are or may become debilitating, harmful
or toxic to the normal functions of the organism, but does not include non-harmful
effects such as tissue discoloration alone or the induction of enzymes involved in
the metabolism of the substance.
“Baseline BAF” for organic chemicals, means a BAF that is based on the
concentration of freely dissolved chemical in the ambient water and takes into
account the partitioning of the chemical within the organism; for inorganic
chemicals, a BAF is based on the wet weight of the tissue.
“Baseline BCF” for organic chemicals, means a BCF that is based on the
concentration of freely dissolved chemical in the ambient water and takes into
account the partitioning of the chemical within the organism; for inorganic
chemicals, a BAF is based on the wet weight of the tissue.
“Bioaccumulative chemical of concern” or “BCC” is any chemical that has the
potential to cause adverse effects and that, upon entering the surface waters, by
itself or as its toxic transformation product, accumulates in aquatic organisms by a
human health bioaccumulation factor greater than 1,000, after considering
metabolism and other physiochemical properties that might enhance or inhibit
bioaccumulation, in accordance with the methodology in Section 302.570. In
addition, the half life of the chemical in the water column, sediment or biota must
be greater than eight weeks. BCCs include, but are not limited to, the following
substances:
Chlordane
4,4’-DDD; p,p’-DDD; 4,4’-TDE;
p,p’-TDE
4,4’-DDE; p,p’-DDE
4,4’-DDT; p,p’-DDT
Dieldrin
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene; Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorocyclohexanes; BHCs
alpha- Hexachlorocyclohexane; alpha-BHC
20
beta- Hexachlorocyclohexane; beta-BHC
delta- Hexachlorocyclohexane; delta-BHC
Lindane; gamma- Hexachlorocyclohexane; gamma-BHC
Mercury
Mirex
Octachlorostyrene
PCBs; polychlorinated biphenyls
Pentachlorobenzene
Photomirex
2,3,7,8-TCDD; Dioxin
1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
Toxaphene
“Bioaccumulation” is the net accumulation of a substance by an organism as a
result of uptake from all environmental sources.
“Bioaccumulation factor” or “BAF” is the ratio (in L/kg) of a substance's
concentration in the tissue of an aquatic organism to its concentration in the
ambient water, in situations where both the organism and its food are exposed and
the ratio does not change substantially over time.
“Bioconcentration” means the net accumulation of a substance by an aquatic
organism as a result of uptake directly from the ambient water through gill
membranes or other external body surfaces.
“Bioconcentration Factor” or “BCF” is the ratio (in L/kg) of a substance’s
concentration in the tissue of an aquatic organism to its concentration in the
ambient water, in situations where the organism is exposed through the water only
and the ratio does not change substantially over time.
“Biota-sediment accumulation factor” or “BSAF” means the ratio (in kg of organic
carbon/kg of lipid) of a substance’s lipid-normalized concentration in the tissue of
an aquatic organism to its organic carbon-normalized concentration in surface
sediment, in situations where the ratio does not change substantially over time,
both the organism and its food are exposed, and the surface sediment is
representative of average surface sediment in the vicinity of the organism.
“Carcinogen” means a substance thatwhich causes an increased incidence of benign
or malignant neoplasms, or substantially decreases the time to develop neoplasms,
in animals or humans. The classification of carcinogens is determined by the
procedures in Section II.A of aAppendix C to 40 CFR 132 (1996) incorporated by
reference in Section 302.510.
“Chronic effect” means an adverse effect that is measured by assessing an
21
acceptable endpoint, and results from continual exposure over several generations,
or at least over a significant part of the test species' projected life span or life stage.
“Chronic toxicity” means adverse effects that result from an exposure period
thatwhich is a large portion of the life span of the organism.
“Dissolved organic carbon” or “DOC” means organic carbon
thatwhich passes
through a 1
μ
m pore size filter.
“Dissolved metal” means the concentration of a metal that will pass through a 0.45
μ
m pore size filter.
“Food chain” means the energy stored by plants is passed along through the
ecosystem through trophic levels in a series of steps of eating and being eaten, also
known as a food web.
“Food chain multiplier” or “FCM” means the ratio of a BAF to an appropriate
BCF.
“Linearized multi-stage model” means a mathematical model for cancer risk
assessment. This model fits linear dose-response curves to low doses. It is
consistent with a no-threshold model of carcinogenesis.
“Lowest observed adverse effect level” or “LOAEL” means the lowest tested dose
or concentration of a substance thatwhich results in an observed adverse effect in
exposed test organisms when all higher doses or concentrations result in the same
or more severe effects.
“No observed adverse effect level” or “NOAEL” means the highest tested dose or
concentration of a substance which results in no observed adverse effect in
exposed test organisms where higher doses or concentrations result in an adverse
effect.
“Octanol water partition coefficient” or “Kow” is the ratio of the concentration of
a substance in the n-octanol phase to its concentration in the aqueous phase in an
equilibrated two-phase octanol water system. For log Kow, the log of the octanol
water partition coefficient is a base 10 logarithm.
“Open Waters of Lake Michigan” means all of the waters within Lake Michigan in
Illinois jurisdiction lakeward from a line drawn across the mouth of tributaries to
Lake Michigan, but not including waters enclosed by constructed breakwaters.
“Particulate organic carbon” or “POC” means organic carbon
thatwhich is retained
by a 1
μ
m pore size filter.
22
“Relative source contribution” or “RSC” means the percent of total exposure
which can be attributed to surface water through water intake and fish
consumption.
“Resident or indigenous species” means species thatwhich currently live a
substantial portion of their life cycle, or reproduce, in a given body of water, or
thatwhich are native species whose historical range includes a given body of water.
“Risk associated dose” or “RAD” means a dose of a known or presumed
carcinogenic substance in mg/kg/day which, over a lifetime of exposure, is
estimated to be associated with a plausible upper bound incremental cancer risk
equal to one in 100,000.
“Slope factor” or “q
1
*” is the incremental rate of cancer development calculated
through use of a linearized multistage model or other appropriate model. It is
expressed in mg/kg/day of exposure to the chemical in question.
"Standard Methods" means "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater", available from the American Public Health Association.
“Subchronic effect” means an adverse effect, measured by assessing an acceptable
endpoint, resulting from continual exposure for a period of time less than that
deemed necessary for a chronic test.
“Target species” is a species to be protected by the criterion.
“Target species value” is the criterion value for the target species.
“Test species” is a species that has test data available to derive a criterion.
“Test dose” or “TD” is a LOAEL or NOAEL for the test species.
“Tier I criteria” are numeric values derived by use of the Tier I methodologies that
either have been adopted as numeric criteria into a water quality standard or are
used to implement narrative water quality criteria.
“Tier II values” are numeric values derived by use of the Tier II methodologies
that are used to implement narrative water quality criteria. They are applied as
criteria, have the same effect, and subject to the same appeal rights as criteria.
“Trophic level” means a functional classification of taxa within a community that is
based on feeding relationships. For example, aquatic green plants and herbivores
comprise the first and second trophic levels in a food chain.
“Toxic unit acute” or “
TU
a
” is the reciprocal of the effluent concentration that
23
causes 50 percent of the test organisms to die by the end of the acute exposure
period, which is 48 hours for invertebrates and 96 hours for vertebrates.
“Toxic unit chronic” or “
TU
c
” is the reciprocal of the effluent concentration that
causes no observable effect on the test organisms by the end of the chronic
exposure period, which is at least seven days for Ceriodaphnia
,
fathead minnow
and rainbow trout.
“Uncertainty factor” or “UF” is one of several numeric factors used in deriving
criteria from experimental data to account for the quality or quantity of the
available data.
"USEPA" means United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.502 Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen (STORET number 00300) must not be less than 90% of saturation, except due
to natural causes, in the Open Waters of Lake Michigan as defined at Section 302.501. The other
waters of the Lake Michigan Basinbasin must not be less than 6.0 mg/L during at least 16 hours
of any 24 hour period, nor less than 5.0 mg/L at any time.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.503 pH
pH (STORET number 00400) must be within the range of 7.0 to 9.0, except for natural causes, in
the Open Waters of Lake Michigan as defined at Section 302.501. Other waters of the Basinbasin
must be within the range of 6.5 to 9.0, except for natural causes.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.504 Chemical Constituents
The following concentrations of chemical constituents must not be exceeded, except as provided
in Sections 302.102 and 302.530:
a)
The following standards must be met in all waters of the Lake Michigan Basin.
Acute aquatic life standards (AS) must not be exceeded at any time except for
those waters for which the Agency has approved a zone of initial dilution (ZID)
pursuant to Sections 302.102 and 302.530. Chronic aquatic life standards (CS)
and human health standards (HHS) must not be exceeded outside of waters in
which mixing is allowed pursuant to Section 302.102 and 302.530 by the
arithmetic average of at least four consecutive samples collected over a period of
24
at least four days. The samples used to demonstrate compliance with the CS or
HHS must be collected in a manner which assures an average representation of the
sampling period.
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
AS
CS
HHS
Arsenic
(Trivalent, dissolved)
22680
μ
g/L
340
148
NA
Cadmium (dissolved)
01025
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A=-3.6867
B = 1.128
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = -2.715
B = 0.7852
NA
Chromium
(Hexavalent, total)
01032
μ
g/L
16
11
NA
Chromium
(Trivalent, dissolved)
80357
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 3.7256
B =0.819
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 0.6848
B = 0.819
NA
Copper
(dissolved)
01040
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = -1.700
B = 0.9422
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = -1.702
B = 0.8545
NA
Cyanide
(Weak acid dissociable)
00718
μ
g/L
22
5.2
NA
Lead
(dissolved)
01049
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = -1.055
B = 1.273
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = -4.003
B = 1.273
NA
Nickel
(dissolved)
01065
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 2.255
B = 0.846
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 0.0584
B = 0.846
NA
Selenium
01145
μ
g/L
NA
5.0
NA
25
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
AS
CS
HHS
(dissolved)
TRC
50060
μ
g/L
19
11
NA
Zinc
(dissolved)
01090
μ
g/L
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 0.884
B = 0.8473
exp[A
+Bln(H)]
A = 0.884
B = 0.8473
NA
Benzene
34030
μ
g/L
NA
NA
310
Chlorobenzene
34301
mg/L
NA
NA
3.2
2,4-Dimethylphenol
34606
mg/L
NA
NA
8.7
2,4-Dinitrophenol
03756
mg/L
NA
NA
2.8
Endrin
39390
μ
g/L
0.086
0.036
NA
Hexachloroethane
34396
μ
g/L
NA
NA
6.7
Methylene chloride
34423
mg/L
NA
NA
2.6
Parathion
39540
μ
g/L
0.065
0.013
NA
Pentachlorophenol
03761
μ
g/L
exp B ([pH]
+A)
A = -4.869
B = 1.005
exp B ([pH]
+A)
A = -5.134
B = 1.005
NA
Toluene
78131
mg/L
NA
NA
51.0
Trichloroethylene
39180
μ
g/L
NA
NA
370
Where:
NA = Not Applied
26
Exp[x] = base of natural logarithms
raised to the x-power
ln(H) = natural logarithm of Hardness
(STORET 00900)
b)
The following water quality standards must not be exceeded at any time in any
waters of the Lake Michigan Basin, unless a different standard is specified under
subsection (c) of this Section.
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
Water Quality Standard
Barium (total)
01007
mg/L
5.0
Boron (total)
01022
mg/L
1.0
Chloride (total)
00940
mg/L
500
Fluoride
00951
mg/L
1.4
Iron (dissolved)
01046
mg/L
1.0
Manganese (total)
01055
mg/L
1.0
Phenols
32730
mg/L
0.1
Sulfate
00945
mg/L
500
Total Dissolved Solids
70300
mg/L
1000
c)
In addition to the standards specified in subsections (a) and (b) of this Section, the
following standards must not be exceeded at any time in the Open Waters of Lake
Michigan as defined in Section 302.501.
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
Water Quality Standard
Arsenic (total)
01002
μ
g/L
50.0
Barium (total)
01007
mg/L
1.0
Chloride
00940
mg/L
12.0
27
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
Water Quality Standard
Iron (dissolved)
01046
mg/L
0.30
Lead (total)
01051
μ
g/L
50.0
Manganese (total)
01055
mg/L
0.15
Nitrate-Nitrogen
00620
mg/L
10.0
Phosphorus
00665
μ
g/L
7.0
Selenium (total)
01147
μ
g/L
10.0
Sulfate
00945
mg/L
24.0
Total Dissolved Solids
70300
mg/L
180.0
Oil (hexane solubles or
equivalent)
00550,
00556 or
00560
mg/L
0.10
Phenols
32730
μ
g/L
1.0
d)
In addition to the standards specified in subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this Section,
the following human health standards (HHS) must not be exceeded in the Open
Waterswaters of Lake Michigan as defined in Section 302.501 by the arithmetic
average of at least four consecutive samples collected over a period of at least four
days. The samples used to demonstrate compliance with the HHS must be
collected in a manner which assures an average representation of the sampling
period.
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
Water Quality Standard
Benzene
34030
μ
g/L
12.0
Chlorobenzene
34301
μ
g/L
470.0
2,4-Dimethylphenol
34606
μ
g/L
450.0
28
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
Water Quality Standard
2,4-Dinitrophenol
03757
μ
g/L
55.0
Hexachloroethane
(total)
34396
μ
g/L
5.30
Lindane
39782
μ
g/L
0.47
Methylene chloride
34423
μ
g/L
47.0
Toluene
78131
mg/L
5.60
Trichloroethylene
39180
μ
g/L
29.0
e)
For the following bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs), acute aquatic life
standards (AS) must not be exceeded at any time in any waters of the Lake
Michigan Basin and chronic aquatic life standards (CS), human health standards
(HHS), and wildlife standards (WS) must not be exceeded in any waters of the
Lake Michigan Basin by the arithmetic average of at least four consecutive samples
collected over a period of at least four days subject to the limitations of Sections
302.520 and 302.530. The samples used to demonstrate compliance with the HHS
and WS must be collected in a manner that assures an average representation of
the sampling period.
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
AS
CS
HHS
WS
Mercury (total)
71900
ng/L
1,700
910
3.1
1.3
Chlordane
39350
ng/L
NA
NA
0.25
NA
DDT and metabolites
39370
pg/L
NA
NA
150
11.0
Dieldrin
39380
ng/L
240
56
0.0065
NA
Hexachlorobenzene
39700
ng/L
NA
NA
0.45
NA
Lindane
39782
μ
g/L
0.95
NA
0.5
NA
PCBs (class)
79819
pg/L
NA
NA
26
120
29
Constituent
STORET
Number
Unit
AS
CS
HHS
WS
2,3,7,8-TCDD
03556
fg/L
NA
NA
8.6
3.1
Toxaphene
39400
pg/L
NA
NA
68
NA
Where:
mg/L = milligrams per liter (10
-3
grams per liter)
μ
g/L = micrograms per liter (10
-6
grams per liter)
ng/L = nanograms per liter (10
-9
grams per liter)
pg/L = picograms per liter (10
-12
grams per liter)
fg/L = femtograms per liter (10
-15
grams per liter)
NA = Not Applied
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.507 Thermal Standards for Existing Sources on January 1, 1971
All sources of heated effluents in existence as of January 1, 1971, shall meet the following
restrictions outside of a mixing zone which shall be no greater than a circle with a radius of 305 m
(1000 feet) or an equal fixed area of simple form.
a)
There shall be no abnormal temperature changes that may affect aquatic life.
b)
The normal daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations that existed before the
addition of heat shall be maintained.
c)
The maximum temperature rise at any time above natural temperatures shall not
exceed 1.7
o
C (3
o
F). In addition, the water temperature shall not exceed the
maximum limits indicated in the following table:
o
C
o
F
o
C
o
F
JAN.
7
45
JUL.
27
80
FEB.
7
45
AUG.
27
80
MAR.
7
45
SEPT.
27
80
APR.
13
55
OCT.
18
65
MAY
16
60
NOV.
16
60
JUN.
21
70
DEC.
10
50
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
30
Section 302.521 Supplemental Antidegradation Provisions for BCCs
a)
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 302.105, waters within the Lake
Michigan Basin must not be lowered in quality due to new or increased loading of
substances defined as bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs) in Section
302.501 from any source or activity subject to the NPDES permitting, Section 401
water quality certification provisions of the Clean Water Act (P.L. 92-100, as
amended), or joint permits from the Agency and the Illinois Department of Natural
Resources under Section 39(n) of the Act [415 ILCS 5/39(n)] until and unless it
can be affirmatively demonstrated that such change is necessary to accommodate
important economic or social development.
1)
Where ambient concentrations of a BCC are equal to or exceed an
applicable water quality criterion, no increase in loading of that BCC is
allowed.
2)
Where ambient concentrations of a BCC are below the applicable water
quality criterion, a demonstration to justify increased loading of that BCC
must include the following:
A)
Pollution Prevention Alternatives Analysis. Identify any cost-
effective reasonably available pollution prevention alternatives and
techniques that would eliminate or significantly reduce the extent of
increased loading of the BCC.
B)
Alternative or Enhanced Treatment Analysis. Identify alternative or
enhanced treatment techniques that are cost effective and
reasonably available to the entity that would eliminate or
significantly reduce the extent of increased loading of the BCC.
C)
Important Social or Economic Development Analysis. Identify the
social or economic development and the benefits that would be
forgone if the increased loading of the BCC is not allowed.
3)
In no case shall increased loading of BCCs result in exceedence of
applicable water quality criteria or concentrations exceeding the level of
water quality necessary to protect existing uses.
4)
Changes in loadings of any BCC within the existing capacity and processes
of an existing NPDES authorized discharge, certified activity pursuant to
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, or joint permits from the Agency and
the Illinois Department of Natural Resources under Section 39(n) of the
Act are not subject to the antidegradation review of subsection (a) of this
Section. These changes include but are not limited to:
31
A)
normal operational variability, including, but not limited to,
intermittent increased discharges due to wet weather conditions;
B)
changes in intake water pollutants;
C)
increasing the production hours of the facility; or
D)
increasing the rate of production.
5)
Any determination to allow increased loading of a BCC pursuant to a
demonstration of important economic or social development need shall
satisfy the public participation requirements of 40 CFR 25 prior to final
issuance of the NPDES permit, Section 401 water quality certification, or
joint permits from the Agency and the Illinois Department of Natural
Resources under Section 39(n) of the Act.
b)
The following actions are not subject to the provisions of subsection (a) of this
Section, unless the Agency determines the circumstances of an individual situation
warrant application of those provisions to adequately protect water quality:
1)
Short-term, temporary (i.e., weeks or months) lowering of water quality;
2)
Bypasses that are not prohibited at 40 CFR 122.41 (m); or
3)
Response actions pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, or similar federal
or State authority, undertaken to alleviate a release into the environment of
hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants thatwhich may pose
danger to public health or welfare.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.530 Supplemental Mixing Provisions for Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern
(BCCs)
The General Provisions of Section 302.102 (Allowed Mixing, Mixing Zones and ZIDs) apply
within the Lake Michigan Basin except as otherwise provided herein for substances defined as
BCCs in Section 302.501:
a)
No mixing shall be allowed for BCCs for new discharges commencing on or after
December 24, 1997.
b)
Discharges of BCCs existing as of December 24, 1997 are eligible for mixing
allowance consistent with Section 302.102 until March 23, 2007. After March 23,
32
2007 mixing for BCCs will not be allowed except as provided in subsections (c)
and (d) of this Section.
c)
Mixing allowance for a source in existence on December 24, 1997 may continue
beyond March 23, 2007 where it can be demonstrated on a case by case basis that
continuation of mixing allowance is necessary to achieve water conservation
measures that result in overall reduction of BCC mass loading to the Lake
Michigan Basin.
d)
Mixing allowance for a source in existence on December 24, 1997 shall only
continue if necessitated by technical and economic factors. Any mixing allowance
continued beyond March 23, 2007 based on technical and economic factors shall
be limited to not more than one NPDES permit term, and shall reflect the
maximum achievable BCC loading reduction within the identified technical and
economic considerations necessitating the exception. Such continued mixing
allowance shall not be renewed beyond that permit term unless a new
determination of technical and economic necessity is made.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.535 Ammonia Nitrogen
The Open Waters of Lake Michigan as defined in Section 302.501 must not exceed 0.02 mg/L
total ammonia (as N: STORET Number 00610). The remaining waters of the Lake Michigan
Basinbasin shall be subject to the following:
a)
Total ammonia nitrogen (as N: STORET Number 00610) must in no case exceed
15 mg/L.
b)
Un-ionized ammonia nitrogen (as N: STORET Number 00612) must not exceed
the acute and chronic standards given below subject to the provisions of Sections
302.208(a) and (b) of this Part:
1)
From April through October, the Acute Standard (AS) shall be 0.33 mg/L
and the chronic standard (CS) shall be 0.057 mg/L.
2)
From November through March, the AS shall be 0.14 mg/L and the CS
shall be 0.025 mg/L.
c)
For purposes of this Section, the concentration of un-ionized ammonia nitrogen as
N and total ammonia as N shall be computed according to the following equations:
U=
N
[0.94412(1 + 10
x
) + 0.0559]
33
and N = U[0.94412(1 + 10
x
) + 0.0559]
Where: X = 0.09018 + 2729.92
-pH
(T + 273.16)
U = Concentration of un-ionized ammonia as N in mg/L
N = Concentration of ammonia nitrogen as N in mg/L
T = Temperature in degrees Celsius.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.540 Other Toxic Substances
Waters of the Lake Michigan Basin must be free from any substance or any combination of
substances in concentrations toxic or harmful to human health, or to animal, plant or aquatic life.
The numeric standards protective of particular uses specified for individual chemical substances in
Section 302.504 are not subject to recalculation by this Section, however, where no standard is
applied for a category, a numeric value may be calculated herein.
a)
Any substance shall be deemed toxic or harmful to aquatic life if present in
concentrations that exceed the following:
1)
A Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity Criterion
(LMAATC) or Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Value (LMAATV) derived pursuant to procedures set forth in Sections
302.555, 302.560 or 302.563 at any time; or
2)
A Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Criterion
(LMCATC) or Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity
Value (LMCATV) derived pursuant to procedures set forth in Section
302.565 as an average of four samples collected on four different days.
b)
Any combination of substances, including effluents, shall be deemed toxic to
aquatic life if present in concentrations that exceed either subsection (b)(1) or (2)
of this Section:
1)
No sample of water from the Lake Michigan Basin collected outside of a
designated zone of initial dilution shall exceed 0.3 TU
a
as determined for
the most sensitive species tested using acute toxicity testing methods.
2)
No sample of water from the Lake Michigan Basin collected outside a
designated mixing zone shall exceed 1.0 TU
c
as determined for the most
sensitive species tested using chronic toxicity testing methods.
34
3)
To demonstrate compliance with subsections (1) and (2) of this subsection
(b), at least two resident or indigenous species will be tested. The rainbow
trout will be used to represent fishes for the Open Waters of Lake
Michigan and the fathead minnow will represent fishes for the other waters
of the Lake Michigan Basin. Ceriodaphnia will represent invertebrates for
all waters of the Lake Michigan Basin. Other common species shall be
used if listed in Table I A of 40 CFR 136, incorporated by reference at
Section 302.510, and approved by the Agency.
c)
Any substance shall be deemed toxic or harmful to wildlife if present in
concentrations that exceed a Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Wildlife Criterion
(LMWLC) derived pursuant to procedures set forth in Section 302.575 as an
arithmetic average of four samples collected over four different days.
d)
For any substance that is a threat to human health through drinking water exposure
only, the resulting criterion or value shall be applicable to only the Open Waters of
Lake Michigan. For any substance that is determined to be a BCC, the resulting
criterion shall apply in the entire Lake Michigan Basin. These substances shall be
deemed toxic or harmful to human health if present in concentrations that exceed
either of the following:
1)
A Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Threshold Criterion
(LMHHTC) or Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Threshold
Value (LMHHTV) based on disease or functional impairment due to a
physiological mechanism for which there is a threshold dose below which
no damage occurs as derived pursuant to procedures set forth in Section
302.585 as an arithmetic average of four samples collected over four
different days; or
2)
A Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Nonthreshold Criterion
(LMHHNC) or Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Nonthreshold
Value (LMHHNV) based on disease or functional impairment due to a
physiological mechanism for which any dose may cause some risk of
damage as derived pursuant to procedures set forth in Section 302.590 as
an arithmetic average of four samples collected over four different days.
e)
The derived criteria and values apply at all points outside of any waters in which
mixing is allowed pursuant to Section 302.102 or Section 302.530.
f)
The procedures of this Subpart E set forth minimum data requirements,
appropriate test protocols and data assessment methods for establishing criteria or
values pursuant to subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this Section. No other
procedures may be used to establish such criteria or values unless approved by the
Board in a rulemaking or adjusted standards proceeding pursuant to Title VII of
the Act. The validity and applicability of these procedures may not be challenged
35
in any proceeding brought pursuant to Title VIII or X of the Act, although the
validity and correctness of application of the numeric criteria or values derived
pursuant to this Subpart may be challenged in such proceedings pursuant to
subsection (g) of this Section.
g)
Challenges to application of criteria and values.
1)
A permittee may challenge the validity and correctness of application of a
criterion or value derived by the Agency pursuant to this Section only at
the time such criterion or value is first applied in its NPDES permit
pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.152 or in an action pursuant to Title
VIII of the Act for violation of the toxicity water quality standard. Failure
of a person to challenge the validity of a criterion or value at the time of its
first application to that person’s facility shall constitute a waiver of such
challenge in any subsequent proceeding involving application of the
criterion or value to that person.
2)
Consistent with subsection (g)(1) of this Section, if a criterion or value is
included as, or is used to derive, a condition of an NPDES discharge
permit, a permittee may challenge the criterion or value in a permit appeal
pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.181. In any such action, the Agency
shall include in the record all information upon which it has relied in
developing and applying the criterion or value, and whether such
information was developed by the Agency or submitted by the petitioner.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF SHALL BE ON THE PETITIONER pursuant
to Section 40(a)(1) of the Act.
3)
Consistent with subsection (g)(1) of this Section, in an action where
alleged violation of the toxicity water quality standard is based on alleged
excursion of a criterion or value, the person bringing such action shall have
the burdens of going forward with proof and persuasion regarding the
general validity and correctness of application of the criterion or value.
h)
Subsections (a) through (e) of this Section do not apply to USEPA registered
pesticides approved for aquatic application and applied pursuant to the following
conditions:
1)
Application shall be made in strict accordance with label directions;
2)
Applicator shall be properly certified under the provisions of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 135 et seq. (1972));
3)
Applications of aquatic pesticides must be in accordance with the laws,
regulations and guidelines of all State and federal agencies authorized by
law to regulate, use or supervise pesticide applications;
36
4)
No aquatic pesticide shall be applied to waters affecting public or food
processing water supplies unless a permit to apply the pesticide has been
obtained from the Agency. All permits shall be issued so as not to cause a
violation of the Act or of any of the Board's rules or regulations. To aid
applicators in determining their responsibilities under this subsection (h), a
list of waters affecting public water supplies will be published and
maintained by the Agency's Division of Public Water Supplies.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.545 Data Requirements
The Agency shall review, for validity, applicability and completeness the data used in calculating
criteria or values. To the extent available, and to the extent not otherwise specified, testing
procedures, selection of test species and other aspects of data acquisition must be according to
methods published by USEPA or nationally recognized standards of organizations, including but
not limited to, those methods found in Standard Methods, incorporated by reference in Section
302.510, or recommended in 40 CFR 132 and incorporated by reference in Section 302.510.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.555 Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Criterion (LMAATC): Independent of Water Chemistry
If the acute toxicity of the chemical has not been shown to be related to a water quality
characteristic, including, but not limited to, hardness, pH, or temperature, the Tier I LMAATC is
calculated using the procedures below.
a)
For each species for which more than one acute value is available, the Species
Mean Acute Value (SMAV) is calculated as the geometric mean of the acute
values from all tests.
b)
For each genus for which one or more SMAVs are available, the Genus Mean
Acute Value (GMAV) is calculated as the geometric mean of the SMAVs available
for the genus.
c)
The GMAVs are ordered from high to low in numerical order.
d)
Ranks (R) are assigned to the GMAVs from "1" for the lowest to "N" for the
highest. If two or more GMAVs are identical, successive ranks are arbitrarily
assigned.
e)
The cumulative probability, P, is calculated for each GMAV as R/(N+1).
f)
The GMAVs to be used in the calculations of subsection (g) of this Section must
be those with cumulative probabilities closest to 0.05. If there are fewer than 59
37
GMAVs in the total data set, the values utilized must be the lowest four obtained
through the ranking procedures of subsections (c) and (d) of this Section.
g)
Using the GMAVs identified pursuant to subsection (f) of this Section and the Ps
calculated pursuant to subsection (e) of this Section, the Final Acute Value (FAV)
and the LMAATC are calculated as:
FAV = exp(A) and
LMAATC = FAV/2
Where:
A = L + 0.2236 S
L = [
ä
(lnGMAV) - S(
ä
(P
0.5
))]/4
S = [[
ä
((lnGMAV)
2
) - ((
ä
(lnGMAV))
2
)/4]/[
ä
(P) - ((
ä
(P
0.5
))
2
)/4]]
0.5
h)
If a resident or indigenous species, whose presence is necessary to sustain
commercial or recreational activities, will not be protected by the calculated FAV,
then the SMAV for that species is used as the FAV.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.560 Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity
Criterion (LMAATC): Dependent on Water Chemistry
If data are available to show that a relationship exists between a water quality characteristic
(WQC) and acute toxicity to two or more species, a Tier I LMAATC must be calculated using
procedures in this Section. Although the relationship between hardness and acute toxicity is
typically non-linear, it can be linearized by a logarithmic transformation (i.e., for any variable, K,
f(K) = logarithm of K) of the variables and plotting the logarithm of hardness against the
logarithm of acute toxicity. Similarly, relationships between acute toxicity and other water quality
characteristics, such as pH or temperature, may require a transformation, including no
transformation (i.e., for any variable, K, f(K) = K) for one or both variables to obtain least squares
linear regression of the transformed acute toxicity values on the transformed values of the water
quality characteristic. An LMAATC is calculated using the following procedures.
a)
For each species for which acute toxicity values are available at two or more
different values of the water quality characteristic, a linear least squares regression
of the transformed acute toxicity (TAT) values on the transformed water quality
characteristic (TWQC) values is performed to obtain the slope of the line
describing the relationship.
b)
Each of the slopes determined pursuant to subsection (a) of this Section is
evaluated as to whether it is statistically valid, taking into account the range and
number of tested values of the water quality characteristic and the degree of
agreement within and between species. If slopes are not available for at least one
fish and one invertebrate species, or if the available slopes are too dissimilar or if
too few data are available to define the relationship between acute toxicity and the
38
water quality characteristic, then the LMAATC must be calculated using the
procedures in Section 302.555.
c)
Normalize the TAT values for each species by subtracting W, the arithmetic mean
of the TAT values of a species, from each of the TAT values used in the
determination of the mean, such that the arithmetic mean of the normalized TAT
values for each species individually or for any combination of species is zero (0.0).
d)
Normalize the TWQC values for each species using X, the arithmetic mean of the
TWQC values of a species, in the same manner as in subsection (c) of this Section.
e)
Group all the normalized data by treating them as if they were from a single
species and perform a least squares linear regression of all the normalized TAT
values on the corresponding normalized TWQC values to obtain the pooled acute
slope, V.
f)
For each species, the graphical intercept representing the species TAT intercept,
f(Y), at a specific selected value, Z, of the WQC is calculated using the equation:
f(Y) = W - V(X - g(Z))
Where:
f() is the transformation used to convert acute toxicity values to TAT values
Y is the species acute toxicity intercept or species acute intercept
W is the arithmetic mean of the TAT values as specified in subsection (c) of this
Section
V is the pooled acute slope as specified in subsection (e) of this Section
X is the arithmetic mean of the TWQC values as specified in subsection (c) of this
Section
g() is the transformation used to convert the WQC values to TWQC values
Z is a selected value of the WQC
g)
For each species, determine the species acute intercept, Y, by carrying out an
inverse transformation of the species TAT value, f(Y). For example, in the case of
a logarithmic transformation, Y = antilogarithm of (f(Y));: or in the case where no
transformation is used, Y = f(Y).
h)
The Final Acute Intercept (FAI) is derived by using the species acute intercepts,
obtained from subsection (f) of this Section, in accordance with the procedures
described in Section 302.555 (b) through (g), with the word "value" replaced by
the word "intercept". Note that in this procedure geometric means and natural
logarithms are always used.
i)
The Aquatic Acute Intercept (AAI) is obtained by dividing the FAI by two.
39
If, for a commercially or recreationally important species, the geometric mean of
the acute values at Z is lower than the FAV at Z, then the geometric mean of that
species must be used as the FAV.
j)
The LMAATC at any value of the WQC, denoted by WQCx, is calculated using
the terms defined in subsection (f) of this Section and the equation:
LMAATC = exp[V(g(WQCx) - g(Z)) + f(AAI)]
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.563 Determining the Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity Value
(LMAATV)
If all eight minimum data requirements for calculating aan FAV using Tier I procedures are not
met, a Tier II LMAATV must be calculated for a substance as follows:
a)
The lowest GMAV in the database is divided by the Secondary Acute Factor
(SAF) corresponding to the number of satisfied minimum data requirements listed
in the Tier I methodology (Section 302.553). In order to calculate a Tier II
LMAATV, the data base must contain, at a minimum, a GMAV for one of the
following three genera in the family Daphnidae -- Ceriodaphnia sp., Daphnia sp.,
or Simocephalus sp. The Secondary Acute Factors are:
Number of Minimum data requirements satisfied (required taxa)
Secondary Acute Factor
1
43.8
2
26.0
3
16.0
4
14.0
5
12.2
6
10.4
7
8.6
b)
If dependent on a water quality characteristic, the Tier II LMAATV must be
calculated according to Section 302.560.
40
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.565 Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Criterion
(LMCATC) or the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Value (LMCATV)
a)
Determining Tier I LMCATC
1)
When chronic toxicity data are available for at least eight resident or
indigenous species from eight different North American genera of
freshwater organisms as specified in Section 302.553, a Tier I LMCATC is
derived in the same manner as the FAV in Section 302.555 or 302.560 by
substituting LMCATC for FAV or FAI, chronic for acute, SMCV (Species
Mean Chronic Value) for SMAV, and GMCV (Genus Mean Chronic
Value) for GMAV.
2)
If data are not available to meet the requirements of subsection (a) of this
Section, a Tier I LMCATC is calculated by dividing the FAV by the
geometric mean of the acute-chronic ratios (ACRs) obtained from at least
one species of aquatic animal from at least three different families provided
that of the three species:
A)
At least one is a fish;
B)
At least one is an invertebrate; and
C)
At least one species is an acutely sensitive freshwater species if the
other two are saltwater species.
3)
The acute-chronic ratio (ACR) for a species equals the acute toxicity
concentration from data considered under Section 302.555 or 302.560,
divided by the chronic toxicity concentration.
4)
If a resident or indigenous species whose presence is necessary to sustain
commercial or recreational activities will not be protected by the calculated
LMCATC, then the SMCV for that species is used as the CATC.
b)
Determining the Tier II LMCATV
1)
If all eight minimum data requirements for calculating a FCV using Tier I
procedures are not met, or if there are not enough data for all three ACRs,
a Tier II Lake Michigan Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Value shall be
calculated using a secondary acute chronic ratio (SACR) determined as
follows:
A)
If fewer than three valid experimentally determined ACRs are
available:
i)
Use sufficient ACRs of 18 so that the total number of ACRs
equals three; and
ii)
Calculate the Secondary Acute-Chronic Ratio as the
geometric mean of the three ACRs; or
41
B)
If no experimentally determined ACRs are available, the SACR is
18.
2)
Calculate the Tier II LMCATV using one of the following equations:
A)
Tier II LMCATV = FAV / SACR
B)
Tier II LMCATV = SAV / FACR
C)
Tier II LMCATV = SAV / SACR
Where:
the SAV equals 2 times the value of the Tier II LMAATV
calculated in Section 302.563
3)
If, for a commercially or recreationally important species, the SMCV is
lower than the calculated Tier II LMCATV, then the SMCV must be used
as the Tier II LMCATV.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
Section 302.580 Procedures for Deriving Water Quality Criteria and Values in the Lake
Michigan Basin to Protect Human Health-General
a)
The Lake Michigan Basin human health criteria or values for a substance are those
concentrations at which humans are protected from adverse effects resulting from
incidental exposure to, or ingestion of, the waters of Lake Michigan and from
ingestion of aquatic organisms taken from the waters of Lake Michigan. A Lake
Michigan Human Health Threshold Criterion (LMHHTC) or Lake Michigan
Human Health Threshold Value (LMHHTV) will be calculated for all substances
according to Section 302.585, if data is available. Water quality criteria or values
for substances which are, or may be, carcinogenic to humans will also be
calculated according to procedures for the Lake Michigan Human Health
Nonthreshold Criterion (LMHHNC) or the Lake Michigan Human Health
Nonthreshold Value (LMHHNV) in Section 302.590.
b)
Minimum data requirements for BAFs for Lake Michigan Basin human health
criteria:
1)
Tier I.
A)
For all organic chemicals, either a field-measured BAF or a BAF
derived using the BSAF methodology is required unless the
chemical has a BAF less than 125, then a BAF derived by any
methodology is required; and
42
B)
For all inorganic chemicals, including organometals such as
mercury, either a field-measured BAF or a laboratory-measured
BCF is required.
2)
Tier II. Any bioaccumulation factor method in Section 302.570(a) may be
used to derive a Tier II criterion.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
TITLE 35 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION
CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PART 309
PERMITS
SUBPART A: NPDES PERMITS
Section
309.101
Preamble
309.102
NPDES Permit Required
309.103
Application - General
309.104
Renewal
309.105
Authority to Deny NPDES Permits
309.106
Access to Facilities and Further Information
309.107
Distribution of Applications
309.108
Tentative Determination and Draft Permit
309.109
Public Notice
309.110
Contents of Public Notice of Application
309.111
Combined Notices
309.112
Agency Action After Comment Period
309.113
Fact Sheets
309.114
Notice to Other Governmental Agencies
309.115
Public Hearings on NPDES Permit Applications
309.116
Notice of Agency Hearing
309.117
Agency Hearing
309.118
Agency Hearing File
309.119
Agency Action After Hearing
309.141
Terms and Conditions of NPDES Permits
309.142
Water Quality Standards and Waste Load Allocation
43
309.143
Effluent Limitations
309.144
Federal New Source Standards of Performance
309.145
Duration of Permits
309.146
Authority to Establish Recording, Reporting, Monitoring and Sampling
Requirements
309.147
Authority to Apply Entry and Inspection Requirements
309.148
Schedules of Compliance
309.149
Authority to Require Notice of Introduction of Pollutants into Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
309.150
Authority to Ensure Compliance by Industrial Users with Sections 204(b),
307 and 308 of the Clean Water Act
309.151
Maintenance and Equipment
309.152
Toxic Pollutants
309.153
Deep Well Disposal of Pollutants (Repealed)
309.154
Authorization to Construct
309.155
Sewage Sludge Disposal
309.156
Total Dissolved Solids Reporting and Monitoring
309.181
Appeal of Final Agency Action on a Permit Application
309.182
Authority to Modify, Suspend or Revoke Permits
309.183
Revision of Schedule of Compliance
309.184
Permit Modification Pursuant to Variance
309.185
Public Access to Information
309.191
Effective Date
SUBPART B: OTHER PERMITS
Section
309.201
Preamble
309.202
Construction Permits
309.203
Operating Permits; New or Modified Sources
309.204
Operating Permits; Existing Sources
309.205
Joint Construction and Operating Permits
309.206
Experimental Permits
309.207
Former Permits (Repealed)
309.208
Permits for Sites Receiving Sludge for Land Application
309.221
Applications - Contents
309.222
Applications - Signatures and Authorizations
309.223
Applications - Registered or Certified Mail
309.224
Applications - Time to Apply
309.225
Applications - Filing and Final Action by Agency
309.241
Standards for Issuance
309.242
Duration of Permits Issued Under Subpart B
309.243
Conditions
309.244
Appeals from Conditions in Permits
309.261
Permit No Defense
309.262
Design, Operation and Maintenance Criteria
44
309.263
Modification of Permits
309.264
Permit Revocation
309.265
Approval of Federal Permits
309.266
Procedures
309.281
Effective Date
309.282
Severability
Appendix A
References to Previous Rules
AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 13 and 13.3 and authorized by Section 27 of the
Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/13, 13.3 and 27).
SOURCE: Adopted in R71-14, at 4 PCB 3, March 7, 1972; amended in R73-11, 12, at 14 PCB
661, December 5, 1974, at 16 PCB 511, April 24, 1975, and at 28 PCB 509, December 20, 1977;
amended in R73-11, 12, at 29 PCB 477, at 2 Ill. Reg. 16, p. 20, effective April 20, 1978;
amended in R79-13, at 39 PCB 263, at 4 Ill. Reg. 34, p. 159, effective August 7, 1980; amended
in R77-12B, at 41 PCB 369, at 5 Ill. Reg. 6384, effective May 28, 1981; amended in R76-21, at
44 PCB 203, at 6 Ill. Reg. 563, effective December 24, 1981; codified at 6 Ill. Reg. 7818;
amended in R82-5, 10, at 54 PCB 411, at 8 Ill. Reg. 1612, effective January 18, 1984; amended in
R86-44 at 12 Ill. Reg. 2495 effective January 13, 1988; amended in R88-1 at 13 Ill. Reg. 5993,
effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2892, effective February 13, 1990;
amended in R91-5 at 16 Ill. Reg. 7339, effective April 27, 1992; amended in R95-22 at 20 Ill.
Reg. 5526, effective April 1, 1996; amended in R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective
______________________.
SUBPART A: NPDES PERMITS
Section 309.141
Terms and Conditions of NPDES Permits
In establishing the terms and conditions of each issued NPDES Permit, the Agency shall apply and
ensure compliance with all of the following, whenever applicable:
a)
Effluent limitations under SectionsSection 301 and 302 of the CWA;
b)
Standards of performance for new sources under Section 306 of the CWA;
c)
Effluent standards, effluent prohibitions, and pretreatment standards under Section
307 of the CWA;
d)
Any more stringent limitation, including those:
45
1)
necessary to meet water quality standards, treatment standards, or
schedules of compliance, established pursuant to any Illinois statute or
regulation (under authority preserved by Section 510 of the CWA),
2)
necessary to meet any other federal law or regulation or
3)
required to implement any applicable water quality standards; such
limitations to include any legally applicable requirements necessary to
implement total maximum daily loads established pursuant to Section
303(d) of the CWA and incorporated in the continuing planning process
approved under Section 303(e) of the CWA and any regulations or
guidelines issued pursuant thereto;
e)
Any more stringent legally applicable requirements necessary to comply with a
plan approved pursuant to Section 208(b) of the CWA;
f)
Prior to promulgation by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency of applicable effluent standards and limitations pursuant to Sections 301,
302, 306 and 307 of the CWA, such conditions as the Agency determines are
necessary to carry out the provisions of the CWA
1
; and
g)
If the NPDES Permit is for the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters from
a vessel or other floating craft (except that no NPDES Permit shall be issued for
the discharge of pollutants from a vessel or other floating craft into Lake
Michigan) any applicable regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the
Department in which the Coast Guard is operating, establishing specifications for
safe transportation, handling, carriage, storage and stowage of pollutants.
1
Section 309.141(f) was declared invalid in Peabody Coal Co. v. PCB, 3 Ill. App. 3d 5 (5th
District, 1976) and declared valid in U.S. Steel v. PCB, 52 Ill. App. 3d 1 (2d District, 1977).
h) If the NPDES Permit is for the discharge of pollutants from other than wet
weather point sources into the Lake Michigan Basin as defined at 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 303.443;
1) Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Waste Load Allocation (WLA)
will be established through either the LaMP or a RAP for an Area of
Concern. If a LaMP or RAP has not been completed and adopted, effluent
limits shall be established consistent with the other provisions of this
Section, including but not limited to, Additivity, Intake Pollutants, Loading
Limits, Level of Detection/Level of Quantification and Compliance
Schedules. When calculation of TMDLs or a Waste Load Allocation is
incomplete and it is expected that limits established through other
provisions will be superseded upon completion of the TMDL or Waste
46
Load Allocation process, said limits shall be identified as interim and the
permit shall include a reopener clause triggered by completion of TMDL or
WLA determination. Any new limits brought about through exercise of the
reopener clause shall be eligible for delayed compliance dates and
compliance schedules consistent with Section 39(b) of the Act 415 ILCS
5/39(b) 1996, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.148, and 35 Ill. Adm. Code
352.Subpart H.
2)
35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.590 establishes an acceptable additive risk level of
one in 100,000 (10(-5)) for establishing Tier I criteria and Tier II values for
combinations of substances exhibiting a carcinogenic or other nonthreshold
toxic mechanism. For those discharges containing multiple nonthreshold
substances application of this additive standard shall be consistent with this
subsection.
A)
For discharges in the Lake Michigan basin containing one or more
2,3,7,8-substituted chlorinated dibenzo-
p
-dioxins or 2,3,7,8-
substituted dibenzofurans, the tetrachloro dibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
(TCDD) toxicity equivalence concentration (TEC
TCDD
) shall be
determined as outlined in subsection B.
B)
The values listed in this Table 1 shall be used to determine the
2,3,7,8-TCDD toxicity equivalence concentrations using the
following equation:
(TEC)
TCDD
= Sigma(C)
x
(TEF)
x
(BEF)
x
WHERE:
(TEC)
TCDD
= 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxicity equivalence concentration in
effluent
(C)
x
= Concentration of total chemical x in effluent
(TEF)
x
= TCDD toxicity equivalency factor for x
(BEF)
x
- TCDD bioaccumulation equivalency factor for x
TABLE 1
Congener
TEF
BEF
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1.0
1.0
1,2,3,7,8-PeCdd
0.5
0.9
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
0.3
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
0.01
0.0
OCDD
0.001
0.0
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.1
0.8
47
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
0.05
0.2
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
0.5
1.6
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.0
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.2
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.7
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
0.1
0.6
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
0.01
0.0
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
0.01
0.4
OCDF
0.001
0.0
C)
Any combination of carcinogenic or otherwise nonthreshold toxic
substances shall be assessed on a case by case basis. The Agency
shall only consider such additivity for chemicals that exhibit the
same type of effect and the same mechanism of toxicity, based on
available scientific information that supports a reasonable
assumption of additive effects.
3) A)
The numeric standards for certain metal parameters in 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 302.504 are established as dissolved forms of the substance
since the dissolved form more closely relates to the toxicology
literature utilized in deriving the standard. However, most discharge
monitoring data used in deriving a PEQ will be from a total
recoverable analytical method and permit limits if and when
established will be set at total recoverable to accommodate the total
recoverable analytical method. The Agency will use a conversion
factor to determine the amount of total metal corresponding to
dissolved metal for each metal with a water quality standard set at
dissolved concentration. In the absence of facility specific data the
following default conversion factors will be used for both PEQ
derivation and establishing WQBELs. The conversion factor
represents the portion of the total recoverable metal presumed to be
in dissolved form. The conversion values given in the following
table are multiplied by the appropriate total recoverable metal
concentration to obtain a corresponding dissolved concentration
that then may be compared to the acute or chronic standard. A
dissolved metal concentration may be divided by the conversion
factor to obtain a corresponding total metal value which will
generally be the metal form regulated in NPDES permits.
Metal
Conversion Factor
Acute Standard Chronic Standard
Arsenic
1.000
1.000
Cadmium
0.850
0.850
Chromium (Trivalent)
0.316
0.860
Chromium (Hexavalent)
0.982
0.962
48
Copper
0.960
0.960
Mercury
0.850
0.850
Nickel
0.998
0.997
Selenium
0.922
0.922
Zinc
0.978
0.986
B)
A permittee may propose an alternate conversion factor for any
particular site specific application. The request must contain
sufficient site specific data, or other data that is representative of
the site, to identify a representative ratio of the dissolved fraction to
the total recoverable fraction of the metal in the receiving water
body at the edge of the mixing zone. If a site specific conversion
factor is approved, that factor will be used for PEQ derivation and
establishment of a WQBEL in lieu of its default counterpart in
subsection (A) above.
4)
A)
The first step in determining if a reasonable potential to exceed the
water quality standard exists for any particular pollutant parameter
is the estimation of the maximum expected effluent concentration
for that substance. That estimation will be completed for both acute
and chronic exposure periods and is termed the PEQ. The PEQ
shall be derived from representative facility specific data to reflect a
95 percent confidence level for the 95th percentile value. These
data will be presumed to adhere to a lognormal distribution pattern
unless the actual effluent data demonstrates a different distribution
pattern. If facility specific data in excess of 10 data values is
available, a coefficient of variation that is the ratio of the standard
deviation to the arithmetic average shall be calculated by the
Agency. The PEQ is derived as the upper bound of a 95 percent
confidence bracket around the 95th percentile value through a
multiplier from the following table applied to the maximum value in
the data set that has its quality assured consistent with 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 352.410 as appropriate for acute and chronic data sets.
PEQ = (maximum data point)(statistical multiplier)
Coefficient of Variation
No.
Samples
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1
1.4
1.9
2.6
3.6
4.7
6.2
8.0
10.1
12.6
15.5
18.7
22.3
26.4
2
1.3
1.6
2.0
2.5
3.1
3.8
4.6
5.4
6.4
7.4
8.5
9.7
10.9
3
1.2
1.5
1.8
2.1
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.6
5.2
5.8
6.5
7.2
49
4
1.2
1.4
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.6
2.9
3.3
3.7
4.2
4.6
5.0
5.5
5
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.9
3.2
3.6
3.9
4.2
4.5
6
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.4
2.6
2.9
3.1
3.4
3.7
3.9
7
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.1
3.3
3.5
8
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
9
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.4
2.6
2.8
2.9
10
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.6
2.7
11
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
12
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
13
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
14
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
15
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
16
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
17
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.9
18
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.9
19
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
20
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
30
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
40
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
50
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
60 or
greater
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
i)
If the PEQ is less than or equal to the water quality
standard, there is no reasonable potential and no limit will
be established in the permit.
ii)
If the PEQ is more than the water quality standard, the
Agency will proceed to consideration of dilution and mixing
pursuant to subsection 309.141(h)(5).
B)
If facility-specific data of 10 or less data values is available, an
alternative PEQ shall be derived using the table in subsection
309.141(h)(4)(A) assuming a coefficient of variation of 0.6, applied
to the maximum value in the data set that has its quality assured
consistent with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.410.
i)
If the PEQ is less than or equal to the water quality
standard, there is no reasonable potential and no limit will
be established in the permit.
ii)
If the PEQ exceeds the water quality standard, an
alternative PEQ will be calculated using the maximum value
in the data set and a multiplier of 1.4. If the alternative PEQ
also exceeds the water quality standard, the Agency will
50
proceed to consider dilution and mixing pursuant to
subsection 309.141(h)(5).
iii)
If the PEQ exceeds the water quality standard but the
alternative PEQ is less than or equal to the standard, the
Agency will either proceed to consider dilution and mixing
pursuant to subsection 309.141(h)(5), or will incorporate a
monitoring requirement and reopener clause to reassess the
potential to exceed within a specified time schedule, not to
exceed one year. In determining which of these options to
use in any individual application, the Agency shall consider
the operational and economic impacts on the permittee and
the effect, if any, deferral of a final decision would have on
an ultimate compliance schedule if a permit limit were
subsequently determined to be necessary.
C)
The Agency shall compare monthly average effluent data values,
when available, with chronic aquatic life, human health and wildlife
standards to evaluate the need for monthly average WQBELs. The
Agency shall use daily effluent data values to determine whether a
potential exists to exceed acute aquatic life water quality standards.
D
The Agency may apply other scientifically defensible statistical
methods for calculating PEQ for use in the reasonable potential
analysis as provided for in Procedure 5.b.2 of Appendix F to 40
CFR 132, incorporated by reference at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.106.
E)
Regardless of the statistical procedure used, if the PEQ for the
parameter is less than or equal to the water quality standard for that
parameter, the Agency shall deem the discharge not to have a
reasonable potential to exceed, and a water quality based effluent
limit (WQBEL) shall not be required unless otherwise required
under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.430.
5)
If the PEQ for a parameter is greater than the particular water quality
standard, criteria or value for that parameter, the Agency will assess the
level of treatment being provided by the discharger. If the discharger is
providing (or will be providing) a level of treatment consistent with the best
degree of treatment required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.102(a), the PEQ
derived under subsection 309.141(h) (4) shall be compared to a preliminary
effluent limitation (PEL) determined by applying an appropriate mixing zone
or a default mixing zone to the discharge. Mixing opportunity and dilution
credit will be considered as follows:
51
A)
Discharges to tributaries of the Lake Michigan Basin shall
be considered to have no available dilution for either acute
or chronic exposures, and the PEL will be set equivalent to
the water quality standard unless dilution is documented
through a mixing zone study.
B)
Direct discharges to the Open Waters of Lake Michigan
shall have a default mixing allowance of 2:1 for acute
standards, criteria or values and 10:1 for chronic standards,
criteria or values if the discharge configuration indicates that
the effluent readily and rapidly mixes with the receiving
waters. If ready and rapid mixing is in doubt the Agency
shall deny any default dilution or mixing allowance and
require a mixing or dispersion study to determine the proper
dilution allowance. If the discharger applies for more than
the default dilution or mixing allowance, it must submit a
mixing or dispersion study to justify its request. Whenever a
mixing or dispersion study is available, it shall be used to
determine dilution or mixing allowance in lieu of the default
allowance.
6) (A) The Preliminary Effluent Limitation (“PEL”) is calculated in a
simple mass balance approach reflecting the dilution allowance established
in subsection 309.141(h)(5):
WQS = [(Qe)(PEL) + (Qd)(Cd)] / [Qe + Qd] or
PEL = [WQS(Qe + Qd) - (Qd)(Cd)] / Qe
where:
WQS = applicable water quality standard, criteria or value
Qe = effluent flowrate
Qd = allowable dilution flowrate
Cd = background pollutant concentration in dilution water
B) The representative background concentration of pollutants to
develop TMDLs and WLAs calculated in the absence of a TMDL
shall be established as follows:
i) "Background" represents all pollutant loadings, specifically
loadings that flow from upstream waters into the specified
watershed, water body, or water body segment for which a
TMDL or WLA in the absence of a TMDL is being
developed and enter the specified watershed, water body, or
52
water body segment through atmospheric deposition,
chemical reaction, or sediment release or resuspension.
(ii) When determining what available data are acceptable for
use in calculating background, the Agency shall use its best
professional judgment, including consideration of the
sampling location and the reliability of the data through
comparison, in part, to detection and quantification levels.
When data in more than 1 of the data sets or categories
described in subsection (iii) of this subsection (B) exists,
best professional judgment shall be used to select the data
that most accurately reflects or estimates background
concentrations. Pollutant degradation and transport
information may be considered when using pollutant loading
data to estimate a water column concentration.
(iii) The representative background concentration for a pollutant
in the specified watershed, water body, or water body
segment shall be established as the geometric mean of
acceptable water column data or water column
concentrations estimated through the use of acceptable or
projected pollutant loading data. When determining
the geometric mean of the data for a pollutant that includes
values both above and below the detection level, values less
than the detection level shall be assumed to be present at 1/2
of the detection level if the detection level is less than the
lowest water quality value for that pollutant. If all of the
acceptable data in a data set are below the detection level
for a pollutant, then all the data for the pollutant in that data
set shall be assumed to be zero. If the detection level of the
available data is greater than the lowest water quality value
for the pollutant, then the background concentration will be
determined by the Agency on a case-by-case basis
after considering all representative data, including
acceptable fish tissue data.
7)
A)
If the PEQ is less than or equal to the PEL, it will be concluded that
there is no reasonable potential to exceed. Under such
circumstances a permit limit for that contaminant will not be set
unless otherwise justified under one or more provisions of 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 352.430.
B)
If the PEQ is equal or greater than the PEL, and the PEQ was
calculated using a data set of more than 10 values, a water quality
based effluent limitation (WQBEL) will be included in the permit. If
53
the PEQ was calculated using a data set of less than or equal to 10
values, and the alternative PEQ calculated under subsection
309.141(h)(4)(B) also exceeds the PEL, a WQBEL will be included
in the permit.
C)
If the PEQ was calculated using a data set of less than or equal to
10 values, and the PEQ is greater than the PEL but the alternative
PEQ is less than the PEL, the Agency will either establish a
WQBEL in the permit or incorporate a monitoring requirement and
reopener clause to reassess potential to exceed within a specified
time schedule, not to exceed one year. In determining which of
these options to use in any individual application, the Agency shall
consider the operational and economic impacts on the permittee
and the effect, if any, deferral of a final decision would have on an
ultimate compliance schedule if a permit limit were subsequently
determined to be necessary.
D)
The WQBEL will be set at the PEL, unless the PEL is appropriately
modified to reflect credit for intake pollutants when the discharged
water originates in the same water body to which it is being
discharged. Consideration of intake credit will be limited to the
provisions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.425.
E)
The reasonable potential analysis shall be completed separately for
acute and chronic aquatic life effects. When WQBELs are based on
acute impacts, the limit will be expressed as a daily maximum.
When the WQBEL is based on chronic effects, the limit will be
expressed as a monthly average. Human health and wildlife based
WQBELs will be expressed as monthly averages. If circumstances
warrant, the Agency shall consider alternatives to daily and monthly
limits.
(Source: Amended at 23 Ill. Reg. _________, effective ______________________.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that the
above opinion and order was adopted on the 4th day of March 1999 by a vote of 7-0.
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
