ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
November 21, 1996
IN MATTER OF:
TRIENNIAL WATER QUALITY REVIEW
AMENDMENTS TO 35 Ill. Adm. Code
302.202, 302.212, 302.213 and 304.301
(Ammonia Nitrogen)
)
)
)
)
)
)
R 94-1(B)
(Rulemaking - Water)
Proposed Rule. Second Notice.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by R.C. Flemal and C.A. Manning):
This matter comes before the Board on a regulatory proposal initially filed on February
24, 1994 by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency). Today’s action concerns
the most recently amended version of the Agency’s proposal, filed on April 8, 1996, and solely
addresses the ammonia nitrogen provisions of that proposal.
The Board's responsibility in this matter arises from the Environmental Protection Act
(Act) (415 ILCS 5/1
et seq.
(1994)). The Board is charged therein to "determine, define, and
implement the environmental control standards applicable in the state of Illinois." (415 ILCS
5/5(b) (1994).) More generally, the Board's rulemaking charge is based on the system of
checks and balances integral to the Illinois environmental governance: the Board bears
responsibility for the rulemaking and principal adjudicatory functions, while the Agency bears
primary responsibility for the administration of the Act and Board regulations. The latter
includes administering today's proposed amendments.
The Agency filed the instant proposal as part of its required review of the applicable
water quality standards of Illinois pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. § 1251
et seq
. (1993)). Under
section 101-607 of the CWA, the Agency is required to periodically, but at least every three
years, review the water quality standards applicable in the State. This review, which is
commonly known as the "triennial review," lends its name to the instant proceeding.
The Board today proposes amendments to the ammonia nitrogen standards for second
notice. The Board proposes the same amendments as proposed at first notice, except for a
number of formatting and other nonsubstantive technical changes recommended by the Joint
Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR).
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
2
This proceeding has an extensive history that includes a severed docket, a pre-hearing
conference, five public hearings, numerous exhibits,
1
several amended and counter proposals,
41 public comments,
2
and a variety of motions filings. This history was recounted in detail in
the Board’s first notice opinion and will not be repeated here, except to note such particulars as
bear on today’s decision to proceed to second notice.
3
This docket originally included a variety of amendments to the Board’s water quality
rules at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302-304. In a prior part of this docket, R94-1(A), the Board
adopted all the proposed amendments, except for those relating to ammonia nitrogen. The
ammonia nitrogen provisions have been reserved for the instant docket, R94-1(B), and, as
noted earlier, are the subject of today’s opinion and order.
First notice of the instant proposal was adopted by the Board on July 18, 1996. The
first notice proposal closely followed the Agency’s final proposal, filed on April 8, 1996 (PC
8(B)). An overview of the proposed amendments is presented below.
MOTION TO STRIKE PC 15(B)
Before discussing the proposed amendments, the Board will initially address the
Agency’s motion to strike certain portions of a public comment. On September 24, 1996 the
Ammonia Group
4
filed a post-first notice public comment, PC 15(B). On October 1, 1996 the
Agency filed a motion to strike portions of PC 15(B). On October 4, 1996 the Ammonia
Group filed a response to the motion and a motion to accept the filing.
The Agency asserts that the portions of PC 15(B) that comment on the proposed
amendments to Section 302 should be stricken because these comments were not timely filed.
The Agency observes that the proposed amendments to Section 302 were published in the
Illinois Register
on August 9, 1996, and the amendment to Section 304 was published on
August 16, 1996. The publications were accompanied by statements that the Board would
accept comments for a period of 45 days from the date of publication. Therefore, the Agency
concludes that any comments on Section 302 needed to be filed by September 23, 1996. Since
1
For purposes of citation herein, hearing transcripts are cited according to hearing number and
page (e.g., Tr1. at __), and prefiled testimony is cited according to author and page (e.g., Mosher
at ___) or to Exhibit number (Exh.).
2
The Board received two public comments after publication of first notice in the
Illinois
Register
, PC 14(B), filed by John C. Hall & Associates, and PC 15(B), filed by the Ammonia
Group. These comments have been reviewed and were considered in reaching our decision
today.
3
Anyone interested in reviewing the full procedural history of this case may consult the first
notice opinion. See In the Matter of:
TRIENNIAL WATER QUALITY REVIEW:
AMENDMENTS TO
35 ILL. ADM. CODE 302.202, 302.212, 302.213, 304.122, AND 304.301
,
First Notice Opinion and Order, July 18, 1996.
4
The Ammonia Group consists of municipalities and sanitary districts that have participated
collectively in this proceeding. In their most recent filing, the group is identified as consisting of the
Cities of Batavia, Geneva, and St. Charles, and the Galesburg Sanitary District. (PC 15(B).)
3
the Ammonia Group’s comments were filed on September 24, 1996, the Agency contends that
those portions of the Ammonia Group’s comment referencing Section 302 should be stricken.
The Ammonia Group counters that since the amendments to Sections 302 and 304 are
part of the same docket and are inextricably intertwined and cross-reference each other, all
first notice comments should have been due no later than September 30, 1996 (45 days after
August 16, 1995, the date the amendments to Section 304 were published in the
Illinois
Register
). Additionally, if the Board finds that the comments were filed late, the Ammonia
Group requests that the Board accept the comments as filed since the comments were only one
day late and were not filed at that time for purposes of delay. Further, the Ammonia Group
believes that no material prejudice has resulted to any participant by the late filing.
The Board accepts the comments of the Ammonia Group as filed. The Board finds no
reason to strike those portions of the Ammonia Group’s comments pertaining to Section 302.
The separate publication of the amendments in the
Illinois Register
resulted from the way the
documents were filed with the Secretary of State. The Board did not intend to create two
separate comment periods for the two sections. Further, the Board finds that the filing of
comments in a rulemaking one day beyond the date designated in the
Illinois Register
is an
insufficient reason for the Board to strike the comments. Moreover, the Board concludes that
no prejudice will result to the participants by accepting the comments as filed. The Board
notes that this is a rulemaking proceeding in which we seek public comments to obtain a
complete record on which to base our decision. Striking the comments of the Ammonia Group
would only prejudice the Board by depriving us of information relevant to this proceeding.
OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL
Having dealt with preliminary matters, we now turn to discuss the proposed
amendments. The Board today proposes adoption of amendments to the ammonia nitrogen
general use water quality standards as submitted by the Agency for second notice. As
mentioned earlier, today’s second notice proposal is substantially the same as the proposal
adopted for first notice. The following is a summary of the salient provisions of that proposal.
Ammonia: General Use Water Quality Standards
The Board’s water quality standards are found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302. At interest
today are the Board’s general use water quality standards for ammonia, found at 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 302.212.
One of the general use water quality standards for ammonia is a total ammonia nitrogen
standard of 15 mg/L. This standard is not proposed to be changed today.
The current standards also include an un-ionized ammonia of 0.04 mg/L, applicable at
times when total ammonia nitrogen concentrations are between 1.5 mg/L and 15 mg/L. This
standard is proposed to be replaced by four separate un-ionized ammonia standards: acute and
chronic un-ionized ammonia standards applicable in the summer months, and acute and chronic
un-ionized ammonia standards applicable in the winter months. The four proposed values are:
4
Acute Standard (AS) - Summer
0.33 mg/L
Chronic Standard (CS) - Summer
0.057 mg/L
Acute Standard (AS) - Winter
0.14 mg/L
Chronic Standard (CS) - Winter
0.025 mg/L
Revised tables showing the allowable total ammonia nitrogen concentrations at each of
the four un-ionized ammonia standards are also included in today’s proposal.
Effluent Modified Waters (Ammonia)
Today's newly proposed Sections 302.213 and 304.122(c) and (d) define and give the
Agency authority to implement a new concept in water quality management, Effluent Modified
Waters (EMW). EMW are waters downstream from an effluent outfall and outside of any
allowable mixing zone, wherein discharges to the EMW are driven by general effluent
standards rather than by back-calculation from the water quality standards. EMW are to be
identified by the Agency.
For an EMW designation to apply, there must be a showing that total ammonia
discharge concentrations are 1.5 mg/L or less in summer and 4.0 mg/L or less in winter, that
the existing level of treatment will be maintained, and that new or increased ammonia loadings
to the stream would meet nondegradation standards in the stream. Further, acute ammonia
standards must be met, and there can be no known uses of the stream that would be adversely
affected by the discharge.
Today’s action also includes proposed repeal of Section 302.301, which provided for an
exception to compliance with water quality standards for certain discharges during the winter
months. This section expired by its own terms on July 1, 1991. The EMW provisions are
intended to replace in part Section 302.301.
DISCUSSION
It is the Board’s responsibility whenever it engages in rulemaking to assure that the
rule, as adopted, protects the environment, as well as conserves the public and private
resources needed to maintain that protection. It is often a daunting responsibility.
Nevertheless, we believe rules that are simultaneously environmentally responsive and
economically responsible can be achieved. We further believe that today’s action represents
such a balance.
Our long experience also reflects that we are most likely to achieve well-balanced rules
when we have the active participation of the various interested and affected persons during the
rulemaking process. That has certainly occurred here. Beginning in 1991, the Agency began
5
corroborating with the Illinois Association of Wastewater Agencies (IAWA),
5
the association
that represents all municipal dischargers in Illinois, on revisions to the State’s general use
water quality standards for ammonia nitrogen. (Statement of Reasons at 4.) We have also
been aided by the participation of the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), environmental groups including the Sierra Club and Trout Unlimited, and a number
of communities (exemplified by the Ammonia Group) and other dischargers. The instant
proposal has evolved over the tenure of this rulemaking proceeding in reaction to the
perspectives of the participants. It reached maturity, we believe, in April 1996 when the
Agency filed its amended proposal (PC 8(B)). That proposal not only provided resolution of
many of the contentious issues that had been raised throughout the rulemaking process, but
also reflected consideration of environmental responsiveness and economic responsibility that
is necessary for the Board to adopt the proposal. We accordingly adopted the proposal for first
notice, and we today move the proposal forward to second notice.
In the remaining portions of this opinion we set forth the rationale for today’s action.
Additionally, because the instant proposal does not include all the provisions advocated by all
participants, we also explain why those provisions were not included. Moreover, we note that
most of the discussion that follows focuses on the standards proposed in the ammonia-related
amendments (Section 302.212). We emphasize that it is these proposed standards and their
environmental consequences, and the consequences related to National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits, that have been the focal point of this proceeding and
consequently are the focal point of our discussion here.
Environmental Impact
The Board’s action today is based on the need to protect the State’s lakes and streams
from an elevated concentration of ammonia. Ammonia at elevated concentrations is toxic to
aquatic organisms. Healthy aquatic communities are an integral part of a healthy environment.
Accordingly, maintenance of a healthy environment requires placing a ceiling (i.e., a standard)
on the amount of ammonia in our lakes and streams. The value of the ceiling (i.e., the value
of standard) should be set at a level that prevents toxicity to the aquatic organisms.
We are fortunate that ammonia’s effects on aquatic organisms constitute one of the
better-studied aspects of environmental toxicology. We therefore know the concentrations at
which ammonia becomes toxic to a large number of aquatic organisms, including a variety of
fishes, shellfish, insects, and other invertebrates indigenous to Illinois waters. This wealth of
information is summarized in the USEPA’s “Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia -
1984,” also known as the National Criteria Document (NCD) for ammonia. This document is
present in the record as Exhibit E of the Agency’s original proposal.
We are also fortunate that there is a straightforward procedure used to convert raw
toxicological data, such as that contained in the NCD, into meaningful water quality standards.
5
The IAWA generally supports today’s proposal and has long stressed the importance of
adopting scientifically-based water quality standards in Illinois. (PC 13(B).)
6
This procedure essentially consists of identifying the aquatic species that are present and that
need protection, noting the record of toxicology information for the species and contaminant at
issue, and by using a set of protocols, deriving the ceiling value(s) that ensure the survival of
the species at issue. The protocols are well-developed and accepted. They can be found in the
USEPA’s “Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the
Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses.” This document is present in the record as
Exhibit D of the Agency’s original proposal. The protocols are also contained in our own
regulations at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.Subpart F.
The Agency has carried out the exercise of calculating standards necessary to protect
aquatic life indigenous to Illinois. They have used the most recent data, including some data
more recent than that provided in the NCD. On this basis, the Agency has proposed water
quality standards that are necessary to assure protection of aquatic life in the general use waters
of this State. We also note that the NCD provides a “default” set of standards, premised on
the presence of ammonia-sensitive species that do not exist in Illinois general use waters. By
recalculating the standards using only indigenous species, the Agency was able to propose
standards less stringent than would follow from simply accepting the “default” standards.
Moreover, we believe that a large number of participants in this proceeding agree with
us fully, or in major part, concerning the need for the water quality standards in today’s
proposal. We do note, however, that some doubtfulness and some dissension with this
viewpoint has been voiced. There is a perspective that the proposed standards are not strict
enough, while another perspective is that the proposed standards are too strict.
The view that the proposed standards are not strict enough stems, in part, from the
observation that there are some waters in Illinois where unusually ammonia-sensitive fish,
particularly salmonid fish, including trout, are present. We agree that such waters do exist,
although they are quite limited. It is because they are limited in extent that we do not today
support incorporating salmonid fish into any derivation of ammonia standards for Illinois’
general use waters. We believe that the general use water quality standards should have
general applicability and are accordingly an inappropriate vehicle to address support of very
special and geographically-restricted areas. The Board observes that it has long utilized special
standards for special needs
6
and that it will always entertain proposals to utilize this concept to
give necessary protection to any Illinois waters that have special needs, including needs based
on the presence of trout or other organisms.
The opposing viewpoint that the proposed standards are too strict stems largely from
the observation that most streams seem to be quite healthy now at current ammonia levels.
7
In
fact, even the Agency admits that only short reaches of streams in Illinois today warrant
classification as “ammonia impaired.” The Board disagrees that this is a reason to not
6
The Board maintains a section in its water quality rules titled "Water Use Designations and Site
Specific Water Quality Standards" at 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 303. The Board promulgates the
standards that are necessary to support special uses.
7
The record is indeed full of anecdotal information regarding the success of fisherman in the
general use waters of Illinois.
7
undertake today’s action. Today’s action is necessary to ensure that our waters stay healthy or
become more healthy than they are now. We maintain Illinois’ water by knowing and
establishing such standards, as are presented today, that assure the continued protection of
these waters.
The Issue of Permit Limits
As we noted above, we believe that today’s proposed water quality standards are fully
defensible and are necessary to protect aquatic life generally in Illinois. Were this the sole
issue before the Board, this proceeding would in all likelihood have been completed a long
time ago, and the standards we still entertain as a proposal herein would have been adopted
earlier.
The fact of the matter is that this has not happened, and it has not happened because
water quality standards serve more than the one purpose of defining the ceiling concentration
necessary to protect life in our streams and lakes. Water quality standards also serve the very
practical purpose of being the beginning point for determining limits in discharge permits. It is
in this second purpose, and in fears that permit limits might change as a result of modifying the
standards, that the disagreement in this proceeding has been most pronounced.
The problem is essentially making practice comport with theory. The theory is that it is
possible to determine the maximum amount that any discharger may discharge into a stream by
determining the maximum amount the discharger may release without causing the in-stream
water quality standard to be exceeded. Unfortunately, the theory falls short in practice.
There are too many variables in most discharger/water body pairs to make simple
associations between the discharger and the in-stream water quality. Variations in the
operations of the discharging plant, variations in discharge concentration, variations in stream
flow, stream mixing, ambient in-stream concentrations, up-stream activities, and even season
of the year all contribute to the confounding of any simple relationship.
Nevertheless, difficult or not, it is necessary that it be determined how much anyone
can discharge without causing the water quality standards to be violated. It is necessary
because it is the law that discharges be limited, so as not to cause or contribute to water quality
violations. It is also the law that no one may discharge unless they have a permit that specifies
the limits of their discharging (i.e., they must have an NPDES permit).
Under the Act, the Agency makes the determination of what limits are permissible in
any Illinois NPDES permits. In turn, this Board reviews such Agency decisions that are
contested. Moreover, the USEPA has oversight granted to it by Congress over all NPDES
permits and may disapprove those that are found by USEPA to be inappropriate.
The permitting decision begins by the Agency noting the applicable water quality
standard(s) and using this information, in combination with other stream-specific and
discharger-specific information, to come up with requisite permit limits. There is an “Agency
way” of doing this that involves a mass balance procedure. The Agency procedure is not
8
necessarily the only way the requisite permit limits could be determined, nor is it necessarily
the way permitting authorities in other states accomplish this task. It is, however, a procedure
that is established and has the endorsement of the USEPA.
It has been clear from the earliest stages of this proceeding that a principal and even
sole concern of many of the participants from the regulated community is that the Agency
would use the proposed ammonia standards as the basis for imposing new, more stringent
NPDES ammonia permit limits. More stringent NPDES permit limits could in turn require
more extensive treatment and treatment facilities, each of which could impose a perceived
unnecessary cost upon the discharger. This concern was certainly brought into focus when the
Agency, at a hearing in November 1994, identified 20 municipal treatment facilities that, in the
worst case, it believed would need to have their NPDES permits adjusted downward, as a
result of this proposed water quality standards, to such degree that additional treatment would
be required.
This concern has been compounded by the fact that none of the dischargers are able to
determine what NPDES permit limits they would face under the proposed rules, short of
actually applying for a new NPDES permit under the new standards and seeing what permit
limits would come out of the Agency procedure. Nor could they tell in advance what might
provide a successful basis for challenge should they disagree with the new permit limits
determined by the Agency. Thus, none of the “target 20” could tell whether they were indeed
a worst case example, or in fact whether there was any consequence to them at all.
Accordingly, a large part of the debate encountered within this proceeding has focused
on the methodology used by the Agency to derive permit limits from water quality standards.
Indeed, uncertainty about this matter has been at the core of why this proceeding has taken so
long. Although the Agency has included, in the record, guidelines that it follows in developing
permits (See Exhs. 2L and 2M) and asserts that it intends to adopt regulations concerning the
permitting procedures (Tr2. at 156; Tr3. at 261), the uncertainty still remains largely
unaddressed.
The Board has had to weigh whether the proposed standards can in fact move forward,
while the issue of permit calculating procedures remains in limbo. The Board determined at
first notice that the standards could move forward. The Board again today makes that same
determination. We do so because we believe that protection of the environment requires the
proposed standards and because we believe that features associated with today’s proposal,
including many of the revisions the Agency made to its proposal in the April 1996 filing and
the use of the EMWs, resolve the problematic areas for most ammonia dischargers.
Some of the participants, particularly the Ammonia Group, have suggested that the
Board itself adopt, as Board rules, procedures by which the Agency must calculate permit
limits. We declined at first notice to do so and reiterate that position today. There are several
reasons that support our decision, including that we are not ready today, in the absence of a
record, to adopt or even consider for review such detailed, specific rules as would be
necessary. Moreover, we are not today convinced that it is either appropriate or necessary to
do so. The Agency is the State’s permitting authority, and we are reluctant to substantially
9
alter the permitting structure in the way advocated without more justification than has yet been
presented to us. We prefer instead the alternative that the Ammonia Group itself has posed to
us that “the Agency [be] allowed to implement the standards ... on a case-by-case basis
through the permitting process subject to Board review” (PC 4(B) at 11). That is the current
procedure, and we deem it appropriate under this proposed rules.
This is not to say, however, that we put the issue of permit calculating procedures to
rest. Indeed, we fully expect to look very closely at all permit calculation procedures brought
to us in any ammonia permit appeal and to demand that the procedures be completely justified.
Moreover, we stand ready to develop Board standards for the determination of permit limits to
the degree our authority under the Act allows and as circumstances require. The Board also
notes that under Section 28.1 of the Act the Board is authorized to grant an adjusted standard
for those who can support such an adjustment.
We finally note that the Ammonia Group also suggested that the Board provide by rule
for the use of “scientifically defensible alternatives” to whatever water-quality based effluent
limit procedure is used by the Agency. (PC 15(B) at 5.) The Board is not prepared at this
time to do so, given that there is little evidence in the record to justify how details of this
concept could be fashioned. However, as we note above, the Board intends to remain attentive
to the ammonia permitting process and to whatever additional rulemaking efforts may be
needed to assure that all NPDES permit limits are indeed “scientifically defensible.”
Numerical Value of the Standards
During the tenure of this proceeding, there has been disagreement regarding the
numerical value of some of the standards. As we noted earlier, much of this disagreement was
resolved when the Agency in PC 8(B) acceded to several of the recommendations made by
other participants, including the IAWA. Moreover, at the final hearing in this matter, the
Agency presented a revision of the standards calculations and, based on very recent new
toxicity information, recommended numbers closer to those previously recommended by other
participants. (Tr4. at 34; PC 8(b).)
For the purpose of the record, we note that there is only one area of apparent continued
disagreement. It is in regard to the chronic standards proposed for un-ionized ammonia. The
Agency proposed, and we adopted for first notice, values of 0.057 mg/L applicable during the
summer months and 0.025 mg/L applicable in the winter months. The Ammonia Group has
urged that these values be 0.06 and 0.03 mg/L,
8
respectively. (PC 4(B) at 2, 8, and 19.) We
decline to adopt the Ammonia Group’s numbers because we find nothing in the discussion of
this issue that warrants rejecting the Agency’s calculations and because the difference in the
two sets of numbers is of small consequence.
8
The Board notes that in its post-first notice public comment the Ammonia Group urged a winter
chronic standard of 0.04 mg/L. (See PC 15(B) at 11.) To the Board’s knowledge, in all prior
argument the Ammonia Group had urged a standard of 0.03 mg/L. (See, for example, PC 4(B) at
2, 8, and 19.)
10
The Ammonia Group’s reason for preferring the values of 0.06 and 0.03 mg/L may
stem from the notion that the two numbers should be expressed with only one significant figure
each. If so, the Board disagrees with this contention. Un-ionized ammonia is an unusual
water quality parameter in that it is a calculated rather than directly measured parameter.
Thus, the accuracy with which un-ionized ammonia can be specified is dependent upon the
accuracy with which the three components (pH, temperature, and total ammonia) of an un-
ionized ammonia calculation can be measured. pH and temperature are characteristically
measured accurate to two significant figures, and total ammonia to two or three significant
figures. The derived un-ionized ammonia is appropriately specified to the same number of
significant figures as is encountered in the least of the component measurements. That is, un-
ionized ammonia is appropriately specified to two significant figures, which is what we
propose.
Economic Impact
There are several components concerning the economic impact of the proposed rules.
The first is that the adoption of the instant proposed water quality standards may require some
facilities to incur costs. The significant costs will occur if facilities need to upgrade or add
nitrification to their wastewater treatment to comply with new, lower permit limits. We
cannot, however, at this point be certain whether any facilities will definitely find themselves
in this position.
As we noted, the Agency did, in the initial stages of this proceeding, identify 20
municipal wastewater treatment facilities that it then believed might need upgrading, as the
worst case scenario. (Mosher at 34.) The Agency estimated that the total cost of upgrading all
of these facilities would be approximately $42 million. (Mosher at 34.) The Agency
subsequently revised these figures downward to 11 facilities and a total cost of about $20
million (Exh. 41 at 39), still as the worst-case scenario.
Whether these latest cost figures are likely to occur remains uncertain. Since the
Agency’s list includes only municipal dischargers, and some industrial discharges would
conceivably also need treatment updates, the Agency figures may be underestimations.
However, a number of the municipal dischargers that were on the Agency’s list, particularly
those located on the Fox River, have made some forceful arguments during the course of this
proceeding that, notwithstanding the Agency’s placing them on the list, they may not need to
significantly upgrade their facilities to keep their receiving streams in compliance with the new
standards.
Another factor that confounds our ability to calculate the actual cost of the instant
proposal is that some facilities will need to upgrade, including possibly adding additional
ammonia removal capability, at some future date irrespective of whether the current or
proposed standards are used. Ammonia removal occurs at facilities now because there are
places where the safe ammonia carrying capacity of the receiving waters is taxed. As
populations grow and discharge loadings increase, this will become progressively more the
case whatever the in-stream ammonia standard may be. It would be inappropriate to totally
11
attribute such growth-related needs for increased treatment to the small modifications of the
ammonia standards today proposed.
While there may be costs associated with today’s proposal, there are also distinct
benefits. The new standards better protect Illinois’ waterways now and for the future. This, in
turn, promises a better, cleaner, healthier environment for the State. A healthier environment
is an enormous benefit, albeit even more difficult to quantify than are the costs.
The benefits to the environment and the potential costs to some dischargers both stem
from the portion of today’s proposal dealing with standards: the standards protect the
environment, while some dischargers may have to provide better treatment so that the
standards are achieved. We find that the balance presented in the instant case is not
unreasonable.
The Agency points out that there is also a benefit associated with adoption of the EMW
provisions of today’s proposal. Expiration of the winter ammonia exemption at 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 304.301 has produced a circumstance where many major municipal dischargers will have
to comply with lowered winter ammonia permit limits. In many of these cases, compliance
with the lowered limits will have implementation costs. The EMW provisions would provide
an exemption similar to that previously available under Section 304.301 and hence allow the
implementation costs to be avoided. The Agency estimates these avoidance costs to be
approximately $157 million. (PC 12(B) at 11.)
Effluent Modified Waters
As noted above, of particular import to today’s proposal is the concept of EMW. This
concept allows for environmental protection of those waterways needing protection at the same
time that it minimizes the impact to dischargers to those waterways.
The Board recognizes that the standard treatment methodology for ammonia nitrogen is
nitrification in a biological treatment plant, usually activated sludge. This treatment method
does not assure compliance with the chronic ammonia standards proposed at all times outside
of a mixing zone, especially in small streams. The Board further recognizes that additional
treatment would come at great cost and with little or no benefit. The concept of EMW is
proposed to ensure that well-run treatment plants are not found to be routinely in violation
where no harm is done to the aquatic environment.
The Ammonia Group suggests the use of seasonal EMW. (PC 15(B) at 5.) The
Ammonia Group contends that there is no environmental basis for requiring a facility to treat
for an ammonia level which exceeds the level necessary to comply with applicable water
quality standards. The Board finds that the concept of seasonal effluent modified waters is not
supported by the record, and accordingly, we again decline to accept this proposal.
Federal Approval of the Amendments
12
This proposal was accepted by the Board pursuant to Section 28.2 as a required rule to
meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act. The Board is therefore required to adopt a rule
that fully meets the applicable federal law and is consistent with Illinois statutes.
In proposing the amendments, the Agency referenced the National Criteria Document
and the particular characteristics of the waterways and aquatic life in Illinois. The Agency also
sought input from USEPA on the proposed amendments.
The Board finds that the proposed amendments meet the requirements of the Clean
Water Act.
ORDER
The Board directs the Clerk to submit the proposed amendments to the rules JCAR,
pursuant to Second Notice requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.
TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
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
302.210
Other Toxic Substances
13
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
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 WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS
Section
302.501
Scope and Applicability
302.502
Dissolved Oxygen
302.503
pH
302.504
Chemical Constituents
302.505
Fecal Coliform
302.506
Temperature
302.507
Existing Sources on January 1, 1971
302.508
Sources under Construction But Not in Operation on January 1, 1971
302.509
Other Sources
SUBPART F: PROCEDURES FOR
DETERMINING WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
14
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
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 Section 27 of the Environmental
Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13 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; peremptory amendments at 10 Ill. Reg. 461, effective December 23, 1985; amended in
R87-27 at 12 Ill. Reg. 9911, effective May 27, 1988; amended in 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)
15
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 ________ Ill. Reg. _____________, effective
_________________________
BOARD NOTE: This Part implements the Illinois Environmental Protection Act as of July 1,
1994.
SUBPART B: GENERAL USE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Section 302.202 Purpose
The general use standards will protect the State's water for aquatic life (except as provided in
Section 302.213), wildlife, agricultural use, secondary contact use and most industrial uses and
ensure the aesthetic quality of the State's aquatic environment. Primary contact uses are
protected for all general use waters whose physical configuration permits such use.
(Source: Amended at 20 Ill. Reg. , effective )
Section 302.212 Total Ammonia Nitrogen and Un-ionized Ammonia
a)
Total ammonia Ammonia nitrogen (as N: STORET Storet Number
3161600610) shall in no case exceed 15 mg/lL.
b) If ammonia nitrogen is less than 15 mg/1 and greater than or equal to 1.5 mg/1,
then un-ionized ammonia (as N) shall not exceed 0.04 mg/1.
b)
Un-ionized ammonia nitrogen (as N: STORET Number 00612) shall not exceed
the acute and chronic standards given below subject to the provisions of Section
302.208(a) and (b), and Section 302.213 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) Ammonia nitrogen concentrations of less than 1.5 mg/1 are lawful regardless of
un-ionized ammonia concentration.
cd)
For purposes of this Ssection, the concentration of un-ionized ammonia nitrogen
as N and total ammonia nitrogen as N shall be computed according to the
following equations:
U = 1.0013N
(1+10
x
)
16
U =
N
[0.94412(1+10
x
) + 0.0559]
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/lL
T =
Temperature in degrees Celsius
de)
The following tables indicates the maximum total ammonia nitrogen
concentrations (mg/lL as N) allowable pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this
Section for certain combinations of pH and temperature:
AMMONIA NITROGEN
WATER QUALITY STANDARD (mg/l)
TEMP.
pH
0
C
(
0
F)
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
5
(41)
15
15
15
9.6
3.1
1.5
1.5
10
(50)
15
15
15
6.5
2.1
1.5
1.5
15
(59)
15
15
13.9
4.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
20
(68)
15
15
9.6
3.1
1.5
1.5
1.5
25
(77)
15
15
6.7
2.1
1.5
1.5
1.5
30
(86)
15
14.9
4.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
35
(95)
15
10.7
3.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1) Summer (April through October) Acute un-ionized ammonia 0.33 mg/L
pH
6.5
7.0
7.5
7.75
8.0
8.25
8.5
9.0
0
F
0
C
55
12.8
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
13.8
7.9
4.6
1.7
60 15.6 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 11.2 6.5 3.8 1.4
65
18.3
15.0
15.0 15.0 15.0 9.8 5.3 3.1 1.2
70
21.1
15.0
15.0
15.0
13.2
7.6
4.4
2.6
1.1
75
23.9
15.0
15.0
15.0
10.9
6.3
3.7
2.2
0.9
80
26.7
15.0
15.0
15.0
9.0
5.2 3.1 1.9
0.8
85
29.4
15.0
15.0
13.1
7.5
4.4
2.6 1.6
0.7
90
32.2
15.0
15.0
10.9
6.3
3.7
2.2
1.4
0.7
2) Summer (April through October) Chronic un-ionized ammonia 0.057 mg/L
17
pH
6.5
7.0
7.5
7.75
8.0
8.25
8.5
9.0
0
F
0
C
55
12.8
15.0
15.0
7.4
4.2
2.4
1.4
0.8
0.3
60
15.6
15.0
15.0
7.0
3.4
1.9
1.1
0.7
0.2
65
18.3
15.0
15.0
4.9
2.8
1.6
0.9
0.5
0.2
70
21.1
15.0
12.6
4.0
2.3
1.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
75
23.9
15.0
10.3
3.3
1.9
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.2
80
26.7
15.0
8.6
2.7
1.6
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.1
85
29.4
15.0
7.8
2.3
1.3
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.1
90
32.2
15.0
5.8
1.9
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
3) Winter (November through March) Acute un-ionized ammonia 0.14 mg/L
pH
6.5
7.0
7.5
7.75
8.0
8.25
8.5
9.0
0
F
0
C
32
0.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
9.2
5.2
1.7
35
1.7
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
14.1
8.0
4.5
1.5
40
4.4
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
11.3
6.4
3.7
1.3
45
7.2
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
9.0
5.1
2.9
1.0
50
10.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
12.8
7.3
4.1
2.4
0.9
55
12.8
15.0
15.0
15.0
10.3
5.9
3.4
2.0
0.7
60
15.6
15.0
15.0
14.8
8.4
4.8
2.7
1.6
0.6
4) Winter (November through March) Chronic un-ionized ammonia 0.025mg/L
pH
6.5
7.0
7.5
7.75
8.0
8.25
8.5
9.0
0
F
0
C
32
0.0
15.0
15.0
9.1
5.1
2.9
1.6
0.9
0.3
35
1.7
15.0
15.0
7.9
4.4
2.5
1.4
0.8
0.3
40
4.4
15.0
15.0
6.3
3.6
2.0
1.1
0.7
0.2
45
7.2
15.0
15.0
5.0
2.8
1.6
0.9
0.5
0.2
50
10.0
15.0
12.7
4.0
2.3
1.3
0.7
0.4
0.2
55
12.8
15.0
10.2
3.3
1.8
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.1
60
15.6
15.0
8.3
2.6
1.5
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.1
(Source: Amended at 20 Ill. Reg. , effective )
Section 302.213 Effluent Modified Waters (Ammonia)
a) Effluent modified waters are those waters or portions of waters that the Agency
has determined, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309: Subpart A, to have the
potential to exceed, and are therefore not subject to, the chronic ammonia
standards of Section 302.212(b) downstream of an effluent outfall and outside of
any allowable mixing zone. The Agency shall not identify a waterbody as an
effluent modified water if it:
18
1) has uses known to be adversely impacted by ammonia as designated
under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303.201 outside of any allowable mixing zone;
or
2)
exceeds the acute standard of Section 302.212(b) of this Part.
b) All effluent discharges to an effluent modified water must meet the requirements
of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.122(d) prior to dilution with the receiving water.
(Source: Added at 20 Ill. Reg. ________________, effective __________________)
PART 304
EFFLUENT STANDARDS
SUBPART A: GENERAL EFFLUENT STANDARDS
Section
304.101
Preamble
304.102
Dilution
304.103
Background Concentrations
304.104
Averaging
304.105
Violation of Water Quality Standards
304.106
Offensive Discharges
304.120
Deoxygenating Wastes
304.121
Bacteria
304.122
Total Ammonia Nitrogen (as N: STORET number 00610)
304.123
Phosphorus (STORET number 00665)
304.124
Additional Contaminants
304.125
pH
304.126
Mercury
304.140
Delays in Upgrading (Repealed)
304.141
NPDES Effluent Standards
304.142
New Source Performance Standards (Repealed)
SUBPART B: SITE SPECIFIC RULES AND
EXCEPTIONS NOT OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY
Section
304.201
Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharges of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
Greater Chicago
304.202
Chlor-alkali Mercury Discharges in St. Clair County
304.203
Copper Discharges by Olin Corporation
304.204
Schoenberger Creek: Groundwater Discharges
304.205
John Deere Foundry Discharges
304.206
Alton Water Company Treatment Plant Discharges
19
304.207
Galesburg Sanitary District Deoxygenating Wastes Discharges
304.208
City of Lockport Treatment Plant Discharges
304.209
Wood River Station Total Suspended Solids Discharges
304.210
Alton Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharges
304.211
Discharges From Borden Chemicals and Plastics Operating Limited Partnership
Into an Unnamed Tributary of Long Point Slough
304.212
Sanitary District of Decatur Discharges
304.213
UNO-VEN Refinery Ammonia Discharge
304.214
Mobil Oil Refinery Ammonia Discharge
304.215
City of Tuscola Wastewater Treatment Facility Discharges
304.216
Newton Station Suspended Solids Discharges
304.218
City of Pana Phosphorus Discharge
304.219
North Shore Sanitary District phosphorus Discharges
304.220
East St. Louis Treatment Facility, Illinois-American Water Company
304.221
Ringwood Drive Manufacturing Facility in McHenry County
304.222
Intermittent Discharge of TRC
SUBPART C: TEMPORARY EFFLUENT STANDARDS
Section
304.301
Exception for Ammonia Nitrogen Water Quality Violations (Repealed)
304.302
City of Joliet East Side Wastewater Treatment Plant
304.303
Amerock Corporation, Rockford Facility
Appendix A
References to Previous Rules
AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Section 27 of the Environmental
Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13 and 27].
SOURCE: Filed with the Secretary of State January 1, 1978; amended at 2 Ill. Reg. 30, p.
343, effective July 27, 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; amended at 4 Ill. Reg. 20, p. 53 effective May 7, 1980; amended at 6
Ill. Reg. 563, effective December 24, 1981; 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 7 Ill. Reg. 3020, effective March 4, 1983; amended at 7 Ill. Reg. 8111,
effective June 23, 1983; amended at 7 Ill. Reg. 14515, effective October 14, 1983; amended at
7 Ill. Reg. 14910, effective November 14, 1983; amended at 8 Ill. Reg. 1600, effective
January 18, 1984; amended at 8 Ill. Reg. 3687, effective March 14, 1984; amended at 8 Ill.
Reg. 8237, effective June 8, 1984; amended at 9 Ill. Reg. 1379, effective January 21, 1985;
amended at 9 Ill. Reg. 4510, effective March 22, 1985; peremptory amendment at 10 Ill. Reg.
456, effective December 23, 1985; amended at 11 Ill. Reg. 3117, effective January 28, 1987;
amended in R84-13 at 11 Ill. Reg. 7291 effective April 3, 1987; amended in R86-17(A) at 11
Ill. Reg. 14748, effective August 24, 1987; amended in R84-16 at 12 Ill. Reg. 2445, effective
January 15, 1988; amended in R83-23 at 12 Ill. Reg. 8658, effective May 10, 1988; amended
in R87-27 at 12 Ill. Reg. 9905, effective May 27, 1988; amended in R82-7 at 12 Ill. Reg.
20
10712, effective June 9, 1988; amended in R85-29 at 12 Ill. Reg. 12064, effective July 12,
1988; amended in R87-22 at 12 Ill. Reg. 13966, effective August 23, 1988; amended in R86-3
at 12 Ill. Reg. 20126, effective November 16, 1988; amended in R84-20 at 13 Ill. Reg. 851,
effective January 9, 1989; amended in R85-11 at 13 Ill. Reg. 2060, effective February 6,
1989; amended in R88-1 at 13 Ill. Reg. 5976, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R86-17B
at 13 Ill. Reg. 7754, effective May 4, 1989; amended in R88-22 at 13 Ill. Reg. 8880, effective
May 26, 1989; amended in R87-6 at 14 Ill. Reg. 6777, effective April 24, 1990; amended in
R87-36 at 14 Ill. Reg. 9437, effective May 31, 1990; amended in R 88-21(B) at 14 Ill. Reg.
12538, effective July 18, 1990; amended in R84-44 at 14 Ill. Reg. 20719, effective December
11, 1990; amended in R86-14 at 15 Ill. Reg. 241, effective December 18, 1990; amended in
R93-8 at 18 Ill. Reg. 11574, effective July 7, 1994; amended in R87-33 at 18 Ill. Reg. 11574,
effective July 7, 1994; amended in R95-14 at 20 Ill. Reg. 3528, effective February 8, 1996;
amended in R94-1(B) at 20 Ill. Reg. , effective
BOARD NOTE: This Part implements the Illinois Environmental Protection Act as of July 1,
1994.
SUBPART A: GENERAL EFFLUENT STANDARDS
Section 304.122 Total Ammonia Nitrogen (as N: STORET number 00610)
a)
No effluent from any source which discharges to the Illinois River, the Des
Plaines River downstream of its confluence with the Chicago River System or
the Calumet River System, and whose untreated waste load is 50,000 or more
population equivalents shall contain more than 2.5 mg/lL of total ammonia
nitrogen as N during the months of April through October, or 4 mg/lL at other
times.
b)
Sources discharging to any of the above waters and whose untreated waste load
cannot be computed on a population equivalent basis comparable to that used for
municipal waste treatment plants and whose total ammonia nitrogen as N
discharge exceeds 45.4 kg/day (100 pounds per day) shall not discharge an
effluent of more than 3.0 mg/lL of total ammonia nitrogen as N.
c)
In addition to the effluent standards set forth in subsections (a) and (b) of this
Section, all sources are subject to Section 304.105 unless the Agency determines
as part of the NPDES Permit Program under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309: Subpart A
that alternate effluent standards are applicable pursuant to subsection (d) of this
Section.
d)
All dischargers to effluent modified waters as defined at 35 Ill. Adm. Code
302.213, except for treatment works qualifying under Section 304.120(c), shall
have an effective NPDES permit with monthly average effluent limits of 1.5
mg/L total ammonia as N during the months of April through October, and 4.0
mg/L total ammonia as N at other times, as well as the following restrictions:
21
1)
Dischargers achieving lower ammonia concentrations than given above,
yet not meeting the chronic water quality standards of 35 Ill. Adm. Code
302.212(b), shall maintain their existing level of performance consistent
with the facility's expected organic and hydraulic loadings for the
duration of their NPDES permit.
2)
New or expanded discharges that increase ammonia loading to general
use waters and/or create effluent modified waters or portions of waters
must demonstrate compliance to the Agency with the nondegradation
requirements at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105.
(Source: Amended at 20 Ill. Reg. ____________, effective )
SUBPART C: TEMPORARY EFFLUENT STANDARDS
Section 304.301 Exception for Ammonia Nitrogen Water Quality Violations (Repealed)
a) Section 304.105 shall not apply to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.212 for any source
during the months of November through March; except that during the months
of November through March no source shall discharge an effluent containing a
concentration of ammonia nitrogen greater than 4.0 mg/1 if the discharge, alone
or in combination with other discharges, causes or contributes to a violation of
35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.212.
b) Compliance with the provisions of subsection (a) shall be achieved by March
31, 1979, or such other date as required by NPDES permit, or as ordered by the
Board Under Title VIII or Title IX of the Environmental Protection Act.
c) After July 1, 1991, the exemption provided in this Section shall terminate.
(Source: Repealed at 20 Ill. Reg. ______________, effective )
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Board Member K.M. Hennessey abstained.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that
the above opinion and order was adopted on the _____ day of ___________, 1996 by a vote of
______________.
___________________________________
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
22