TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION

CHAPTER II: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

PART 352

PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING WATER QUALITY BASED PERMIT

LIMITATIONS FOR NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION

SYSTEM DISCHARGERS TO THE LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN

SUBPART A: INTRODUCTION

Section

352.100 Introduction

352.101 Scope

352.102 Applicability

352.103 Purpose

352.104 Definitions

352.105 Incorporations by Reference

352.106 Relationship to Other Regulations

SUBPART B: DISCHARGES TO WATERS NOT CURRENTLY MEETING WATER

QUALITY STANDARDS, CRITERIA, OR VALUES

352.200 Procedures for Establishing Permit Limitations for Discharges to

Waters Not Currently Meeting Water Quality Standards, Criteria,

or Values

SUBPART C: ASSESSING HUMAN HEALTH IMPACTS OF MULTIPLE TOXIC

SUBSTANCES INCLUDING ADDITIVITY PROCEDURES FOR CHLORINATED

DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS AND CHLORINATED DIBENZOFURANS

352.300 Additivity for Combinations of Substances

352.302 Values for 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxicity Equivalence Concentrations

352.303 Criteria for Consideration of Additivity for Nonthreshold Toxic

Substances

SUBPART D: ASSESSMENT OF REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO EXCEED WATER

QUALITY STANDARDS, CRITERIA, AND VALUES

352.401 Applicability and Exclusions

352.410 Data Requirements

352.412 Conversion Factors for Dissolved and Total Metals

352.421 Estimation of Projected Effluent Quality

352.422 Dilution Allowance

352.423 Calculation of Preliminary Effluent Limitation

352.424 Determination of Reasonable Potential

352.425 Intake Credits

352.430 Instances Requiring Effluent Limits, Other Conditions, or

Additional Data

352.440 Special Provisions for Noncontact Cooling Water

SUBPART E: APPLICATION OF WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY REQUIREMENTS

352.500 Procedures for Establishing Permit Limits and Special Provisions

for the Potential to Exceed Determination

352.520 Whole Effluent Toxicity Data

352.530 Estimation of Projected Effluent Quality (PEQ)

352.540 Calculation of Preliminary Effluent Limitation (PEL)

352.550 Establishing Whole Effluent Toxicity Conditions

SUBPART F: MASS LOADING LIMITS

352.600 Mass Loading Limits

SUBPART G: EFFLUENT LIMITS BELOW THE LEVEL OF QUANTIFICATION

352.700 Water Quality Based Effluent Limits Below Detection or

Quantification

SUBPART H: COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES

352.800 Compliance Schedules

SUBPART I: ANTIDEGRADATION PROVISIONS FOR BIOACCUMULATIVE

CHEMICALS OF CONCERN

352.900 Antidegradation Provisions For Bioaccumulative Chemicals of

Concern (BCCs)

AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Sections 11(b) and

39(b) of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/11(b), 13 and 39(b)]

SOURCE: Adopted at 22 Ill. Reg. 4356, effective February 20, 1998.

NOTE: In this Part, superscript number or letters are denoted by

parentheses; subscript are denoted by brackets; and SUM means the summation

series or sigma function as used in mathematics.

SUBPART A: INTRODUCTION

Section 352.100 Introduction

This Part 352 contains Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois

EPA or Agency) rules for the application of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board (Illinois PCB) rules for the Lake Michigan Basin at 35 Illinois Adm.

Code 302.Subparts A and E to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES) permit program administered for discharges to the Lake

Michigan Basin within the State of Illinois. These rules are required

pursuant to the Final Guidance for the Great Lakes System, 60 FR 15366

adopted on March 23, 1995 by the United States Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA) to implement Section 118(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act (33

U.S.C. 1268) as amended by the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of 1990

(P. L. 101-596, 104 Stat. 3000). That guidance identifies minimum water

quality standards, antidegradation policies and implementation procedures

that states must establish for the Great Lakes System to protect human

health, aquatic life and wildlife. The water quality standards, criteria

and value derivation procedures, variance and site specific rulemaking

procedures and antidegradation policies required under the Great Lakes

Guidance and applicable to the Lake Michigan Basin, are contained in

Illinois Pollution Control Board Rules. The implementation procedures

required by that guidance are contained in this Part 352.

Section 352.101 Scope

The regulations in this Part 352 contain the procedures used by the

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to determine effluent limits and

other conditions in NPDES permits. These regulations are cumulative with

conditions, effluent limitations and other requirements established under

the Illinois Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5], regulations of the

Illinois Pollution Control Board, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act

(33 U.S.C. 1251) as now or hereafter amended, and regulations pursuant

thereto, and schedules for achieving compliance therewith at the earliest

reasonable date.

Section 352.102 Applicability

The regulations in this Part 352 apply only to dischargers to the Lake

Michigan Basin, as that term is defined at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303.443.

These regulations do not apply to a Wet Weather Point Source as that term

is defined at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.104.

Section 352.103 Purpose

The purpose of this Part 352 is to establish implementation procedures that

are consistent with (as protective as) Appendix E and Procedures 3, 4, 5,

6, 7, 8, and 9 of Appendix F to 40 CFR 132 (1996).

Section 352.104 Definitions

Terms used in this Part have the meanings specified in 35 Ill. Adm. Code

301.200 through 301.444 and 302.501. The following terms have the meanings

specified:

"Agency" means the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.

"Area of Concern" or "AOC" is an area specially designated for

remediation efforts.

"Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern" or "BCC" means a chemical

or class of chemicals meeting the definition at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

302.501.

"Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan" or "LaMP" is a plan to

manage the Illinois portion of Lake Michigan as approved by USEPA.

"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.

"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.

"Outlier" is a test value that is not statistically valid under

tests approved in 40 CFR 136.

"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.

"Pollutant Minimization Program" means a plan to achieve or

maintain the goal of reducing contaminant discharges to below

water quality based effluent limits.

"Preliminary Effluent Limitation" or "PEL" is an estimate of an

allowable discharge taking into consideration mixing or dilution.

"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.

"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.

"Same Body of Water" means that, for purposes of evaluating intake

toxic substances consistent with Section 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.

"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.

"USEPA" means the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

"Waste Load Allocation" or "WLA" is the portion of a 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 EPA 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.

"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.

"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.

"Whole Effluent Toxicity" or "WET" means a test procedure that

determines the effect of an effluent on aquatic life.

Section 352.105 Incorporations by Reference

a) The Agency incorporates the following publications by reference.

Available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington D.C. 20402. (202)783-3238:

40 CFR 122.26(b)(8) (1996)

40 CFR 122.26(b)(14) (1996)

40 CFR 130.2(h) (1996)

40 CFR 130.2(i) (1996)

40 CFR 130.7 (1996)

Table 6 of 40 CFR 132 (1996)

Procedure 3.A of Appendix F of 40 CFR 132 (1996)

Procedure 5.b.2 of Appendix F of 40 CFR 132 (1996)

40 CFR 136 (1996)

b) This Section incorporates no future editions or amendments.

Section 352.106 Relationship to Other Regulations

Appendix F to 40 CFR 132 requires 9 specific permit procedures for which

Great Lakes states must adopt consistent provisions. Procedures 1 and 2 of

the Appendix requires procedures for site-specific modifications to

standards, criteria and values and procedures for variances from water

quality standards, criteria and values for point sources. These

requirements are within the authority of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, not Illinois EPA, and therefore not contained in this Part. These

procedures are at 35 Ill. Adm. Code:Subtitle A, Chapter 1. Procedures 3

through 9 of the Appendix require specific procedures for permit issuance

and are contained in Subparts B through H of this Part. Subpart I contains

Agency permitting procedures related to the special antidegradation

provision for bioaccumulative chemicals of concern at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

305.521.

SUBPART B: DISCHARGES TO WATERS NOT CURRENTLY MEETING WATER QUALITY

STANDARDS, CRITERIA, OR VALUES

Section 352.200 Procedures for Establishing Permit Limitations for

Discharges to Waters Not Currently Meeting Water Quality Standards,

Criteria, or Values

Discharges tributary to any water body segment within the Lake Michigan

Basin that contains a parameter that is known to exceed the ambient water

quality standards and resulting in that water body being identified and

listed on the Agency's list of impaired waters required by Section 303(d)

of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1313(d)) and 40 CFR 130.7(b)(6) shall

have limitations and conditions established by the Agency as follows:

a) All specific provisions and limitations contained within the most

recent adopted and USEPA approved Lake Michigan Lakewide

Management Plan (LaMP) that apply to any discharge covered by the

permit shall be considered for incorporation into the permit

consistent with subsection (e) below.

b) All requirements of a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for an Area of

Concern (AOC) applicable to the subject discharge shall be

considered for incorporation into the permit consistent with

subsection (e) below.

c) Discharge limitations established through an approved Response

Action pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, shall be

considered for incorporation into the permit consistent with

subsection (e) below.

d) Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Waste Load Allocations (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 Part, 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 though other provisions will be superseded

upon completion of the TMDL or Waste 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 Subpart H of this Part.

e) Any provisions or limitations referred to in subsection (a), (b),

(c), or (d) will be subject to public participation procedures

under State and federal law for TMDLs, certified by the Agency as

meeting the requirements of sections B through F of Procedure 3 of

Appendix F to 40 CFR 132, and approved by USEPA before being

incorporated into the permit. Appeal or judicial review

procedures will be the same as with any other permit terms.

SUBPART C: ASSESSING HUMAN HEALTH IMPACTS OF MULTIPLE TOXIC SUBSTANCES

INCLUDING ADDITIVITY PROCEDURES FOR CHLORINATED DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS AND

CHLORINATED DIBENZOFURANS

Section 352.300 Additivity for Combinations of Substances

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 Sections 352.302 and 352.303.

Section 352.302 Values for 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxicity Equivalence

Concentrations

a) For discharges in the Lake Michigan basin containing one or more

2,3,7,7,8-substituted chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins or

2,3,7,8-substituted dibenzofurans, the 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 0.05

OCDD 0.001 0.01

2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 0.8

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 0.08

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 0.01

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01 0.4

OCDF 0.001 0.02

Section 352.303 Criteria for Consideration of Additivity for Nonthreshold

Toxic Substances

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.

SUBPART D: ASSESSMENT OF REASONABLE POTENTIAL TO EXCEED WATER QUALITY

STANDARDS, CRITERIA, AND VALUES

Section 352.401 Applicability and Exclusions

The need for a WQBEL is based on the potential of a given parameter to

cause or contribute to a violation of the applicable water quality

standard, criteria, or value. In certain circumstances, this may entail

application of a mixing zone to the discharge before comparing the effluent

concentration of a substance to the water quality standard, criteria, or

value. The Agency shall conduct an analysis of the reasonable potential for

a given effluent to exceed or contribute to excursions above water quality

standards that may occur in the receiving body during the NPDES permit

review. This reasonable potential analysis is based on statistical analysis

of the effluent and the following factors:

a) Reasonable potential analysis is conducted on a

parameter-by-parameter basis. In instances where a reasonable

potential to exceed a water quality standard for a substance does

exist, it does not imply that a reasonable potential for all

parameters present in the effluent exists or that WQBELs for all

parameters are required.

b) The assignment of values for WQBELs is dependent on the

application of dilution or mixing zones. The process used for

permit review will be conducted in a stepwise approach with the

first step being a direct comparison of the Projected Effluent

Quality (PEQ) to the applicable water quality standard, criteria

or value. If the PEQ is less than or equal to the applicable

standard, criteria or value, the Agency will conclude that no

potential to exceed exists, that the analysis for that parameter

is completed and no WQBEL will be established in the permit unless

otherwise warranted under Section 352.430. If the PEQ exceeds the

applicable standard, criteria or value, the analysis shall proceed

to consideration of mixing and dilution pursuant to Section

352.422.

c) Exclusions from reasonable potential analysis. This procedure is

a statistically based evaluation of the need for WQBEL for toxic

substances based on the scientific approaches to toxicity

assessment contained within 40 CFR 9, 122, 123, 131, and 132.

This procedure is either not amenable to or appropriate for

certain pollutants and parameters included in the Lake Michigan

Basin water quality standards at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.Subpart E.

Therefore this procedure shall not be used to establish permit

limits for the following substances:

Alkalinity

Ammonia

Bacteria

Chlorine

Color

Dissolved Oxygen

Dissolved Solids

pH

Phosphorus

Temperature

Total and Suspended Solids

Turbidity

Sulfate

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

Radioactivity

Boron

Section 352.410 Data Requirements

For a particular application, reasonable potential analysis is primarily

based on the effluent quality demonstrated by self-monitoring data, as

required by the NPDES permit, or Agency-generated data, such as effluent

sampling, facility-related stream studies, or whole effluent toxicity (WET)

testing. Effluent data used in derivation of Projected Effluent Quality

(PEQ) shall be selected to best represent the concentration and variability

of the pollutant in the discharge anticipated for the applicable period of

the NPDES permit. Data shall be collected and analyzed in accordance with

USEPA or Agency approved sampling and analytical methods. The following

criteria will be followed in data selection:

a) The most recent five years of data shall be used unless the Agency

determines that an alternative period better represents the time

period for which effluent quality is being projected. Such

alternative time periods may include but are not limited to

shorter periods that reflect changed discharge characteristics

resulting from changes in manufacturing activities or wastewater

treatment systems.

b) Data outliers and other anomalies resulting from collection,

analysis or recording errors or non-repeatable plant operation or

discharge conditions may be eliminated from the data.

Section 352.412 Conversion Factors for Dissolved and Total Metals

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 which 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.

Conversion Factor

Metal 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

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.

Section 352.421 Estimation of Projected Effluent Quality

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

Section 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

1 1.4 1.9 2.6 3.6 4.7 6.2 8.0

2 1.3 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.1 3.8 4.6

3 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.5 3.0 3.5

4 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.9

5 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.6

6 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.4

7 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2

8 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.1

9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0

10 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9

11 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8

12 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

13 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

14 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6

15 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

16 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

17 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5

18 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5

19 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5

20 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4

30 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2

40 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

50 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

60 or greater 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Coefficient of Variation

0.8    0.9     1.0    1.1     1.2    1.3

10.1 12.6 15.5 18.7 22.3 26.4

5.4 6.4 7.4 8.5 9.7 10.9

4.0 4.6 5.2 5.8 6.5 7.2

3.3 3.7 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.5

2.9 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.5

2.6 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 3.9

2.4 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.5

2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2

2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.9

2.0 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7

1.9 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3

1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2

1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1

1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0

1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9

1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9

1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8

1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7

1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4

1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

1) 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.

2) If the PEQ is more than the water quality standard, the

Agency will proceed to consideration of dilution and mixing

pursuant to Section 352.422.

b) If facility-specific data of 10 or less data values is available,

an alternative PEQ shall be derived using the table in Section

352.421(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 Section 352.410.

1) 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.

2) 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 PEL, the Agency will proceed to consider dilution

and mixing pursuant to Section 352.422.

3) 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 Section 352.422, 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 at the 95(th) percentile value for use

in the reasonable potential analysis as provided for in Procedure

5.b.2 of Appendix F to 40 CFR 132.

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 Section 352.430.

Section 352.422 Dilution Allowance

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 Section 352.421 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:

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.

Section 352.423 Calculation of Preliminary Effluent Limitation

a) The PEL is calculated in a simple mass balance approach reflecting

the dilution allowance established in Section 352.422:

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:

1) "Background" represents all pollutant loadings, specifically

loadings that:

A) 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.

B) Enter the specified watershed, water body, or water body

segment through atmospheric deposition, chemical

reaction, or sediment release or resuspension.

2) 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 susection (3) 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.

3) 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.

Section 352.424 Determination of Reasonable Potential

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 Section

352.430.

b) If the PEQ is 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

the PEQ was calculated using a data set of less than or equal to

10 values, and the alternative PEQ calculated under Section

352.421(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 Section 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.

Section 352.425 Intake Credits

a) 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.105 provides that no effluent may cause or

contribute to a violation of a water quality standard but Section

304.103 provides that it is not the intent of 35 Ill. Adm. Code

304 to clean up contamination caused by upstream sources or

incidental traces of contaminants. If a discharge contains a

toxic substance solely due to its presence in intake water from

the same water body receiving the discharge, the Agency may

determine there is no reasonable potential for that discharge to

cause or contribute to an exceedance for that substance and

therefore not establish a WQBEL in the permit. Agency application

of such intake credits will be restricted to the following

conditions:

1) 100% of the water comprising the discharge is withdrawn from

the same body of water that receives the discharge.

2) The permitee does not contribute any additional mass of the

identified intake toxic substance to its discharge.

3) The permitee does not alter the identified intake pollutant

chemically or physically in a manner that would cause adverse

water quality impacts to occur that would not occur if the

substance were left in the water body.

4) The discharge does not result in an increase above the intake

concentration at any applicable point below the discharge

outside a mixing zone unless such increase does not cause an

excursion above the applicable water quality standard,

criteria or value.

5) The timing and location of the discharge would not cause

adverse impacts to occur that would not occur if the

substance were left in the water body.

b) If the source water contains a pollutant at a concentration in

excess of an applicable water quality standard, criteria or value

and there is some net addition of that parameter due to activities

or operations of the permittee or source tributary to the

discharge, the Agency will restrict intake credits to the

following circumstances:

1) The Agency will establish permit limits allowing no greater

discharge than the concentration and mass present in the

intake water as a "no net increase limit".

2) Intake credit will only be allowed for that portion of intake

pollutant loading present in source water withdrawn from the

same body of water receiving the discharge. If any of the

intake pollutant is removed through a water treatment process

prior to utilization by the permittee, intake credit will be

restricted to the concentration and mass emerging from the

water treatment process.

3) Any permits incorporating "no net increase" provisions must

include notice to the permittee that current federal guidance

prohibits allowance of such limits after March 23, 2007. The

permit need not include an expiration date at the time of

issuance but must give fair warning that continuation in

future permit renewals is questionable due to anticipated

federal requirements. The sunset of "no net increase"

allowances after March 23, 2007 is mandated in USEPA's Water

Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System, 60 FR 15366,

March 23, 1995. The preamble to this guidance contains a

commitment from USEPA to reconsider this requirement by March

23, 2002 with the possibility of extending or deleting this

deadline.

4) If a facility's treatment system under proper operation and

maintenance results in removal of the intake pollutant of

concern to a discharge level that is below the level in the

intake water, the Agency will establish effluent limits that

reflect the lower mass and concentration of the pollutant

achievable and feasible by such treatment.

5) The issuance of a permit incorporating "no net increase"

provisions shall not affect or modify the requirement of 35

Ill. Adm. Code 304.103, that effluent standards in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 304 must be complied with without subtracting

background concentrations, except that compliance with those

standards is not required when effluent concentrations for

the facility in excess of the standard result entirely from

evaporation or incidental traces of materials not utilized or

produced in the activity.

c) When, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.425(a), the Agency

declines to establish a WQBEL that would otherwise be warranted

under other provisions of this Part, the permit shall contain

requirements sufficient to demonstrate that the terms of

subsection (a) of this Section are being maintained. Appropriate

permit requirements may include influent, effluent and ambient

monitoring, and a reopener clause authorizing modification or

revocation and reissuance if new information demonstrates that

intake credit is no longer justified.

Section 352.430 Instances Requiring Effluent Limits, Other Conditions, or

Additional Data

The Agency will consider the following factors when determining whether

further data needs to be gathered in order to decide if a reasonable

potential to exceed water quality standards exists. These factors may also

warrant inclusion of a permit limit for a substance or substances that do

not display a reasonable potential to exceed through the analysis of

Sections 352.420 through 352.425.

a) The facility's effluent is subject to federal categorical limits

under 40 CFR 405 through 471 for the substance.

b) A substance(s) is present in the raw wastewater in significant

quantities such that treatment at the facility is designed to

remove that substance.

c) A substance is discharged in quantities that are sufficient to

warrant limits in the permit due to batch or highly variable waste

generation processes wherein substances are potentially discharged

infrequently or sporadically and therefore may avoid detection by

intermittent sampling of the final effluent.

d) The facility has a record of spill events involving certain

substances and there is evidence that those substances are

discharged in quantities that are sufficient to merit inclusion of

permit limits.

e) Historical information or the knowledge of Agency field inspectors

indicate that a potential for discharge of a substance exists and

there is evidence that the substance would be discharged in

quantities sufficient to merit inclusion of permit limits.

f) For each pollutant listed in Table 6 to 40 CFR 132 (1996) which a

permittee reports as known or believed to be present in its

discharge and for which data sufficient to calculate tier II

values for noncancer human health and acquatic life do not exist

all of the following provisions apply:

1) The Agency shall use all available, relevant toxicity

information to estimate ambient screening values for the

pollutant that will protect humans from noncancer health

effects and aquatic life from acute and chronic effects.

2) Using the provisions specified in Section 352.423, the Agency

shall develop a PEL based on the estimated ambient screening

value as determined in subsection (f)(1) of this Section, and

compare the PEL with the PEQ. If the PEQ exceeds the PEL,

then the Agency shall generate the minimum data necessary to

derive tier II values for noncancer human health and aquatic

life.

3) The data generated in accordance with subsection (f)(2) of

this Section shall be used to calculate water quality values.

The values shall be used in calculating a PEL pursuant to

Section 352.423 for the purpose of determining whether a

WQBEL must be included in the permit. If the Agency finds

that the PEQ exceeds the PEL, the Agency shall follow the

procedures under Section 352.424 to determine whether a WQBEL

must be established in the permit.

Section 352.440 Special Provisions for Noncontact Cooling Water

Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Part, the Agency will not

impose WQBELs for a discharge consisting solely of once through noncontact

cooling water withdrawn entirely from the same body of water receiving the

discharge, except in accordance with the following:

a) The Agency may require a WQBEL based on an acute aquatic criterion

for a substance of acute whole effluent toxicity when information

is available indicating that such a limit is necessary to protect

aquatic life, unless the discharger is able to demonstrate that

the presence of the substance or WET is due solely to its presence

in the intake water.

b) If a substance is present at elevated levels in the noncontact

cooling water wastestream due to improper operation or

maintenance of the cooling system, and this substance is or may be

discharged at a level that will cause or contribute to an

excursion above a numeric standard, criterion or value for a toxic

substance as determined under this Part, a WQBEL shall be

established for that substance.

c) If the permitee uses or proposes to use additives in the

noncontact cooling water, the additives shall be evaluated using

the reasonable potential procedures of this Part to determine

whether WQBELs are necessary for the wastestream.

d) If the noncontact cooling water is blended with other wastestreams

prior to final discharge, the provisions of this Section are

restricted to the noncontact cooling wastestream and any permit

limitations on the other commingling wastestreams shall include

internal monitoring points or other appropriate methods to assess

compliance prior to blending.

SUBPART E: APPLICATION OF WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY REQUIREMENTS

Section 352.500 Procedures for Establishing Permit Limits and Special

Provisions for the Potential to Exceed Determination

35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.540 prohibits the presence of a substance or

combination of substances that produces an acute or chronic aquatic life

toxic condition at any applicable location within any water body of the

Lake Michigan Basin. The "combination of substances" terminology includes

effluent discharges. Except as provided through the mixing zone regulations

of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.102 this toxicity standard applies at all points

within the Lake Michigan Basin. The Agency shall apply the aquatic life

toxicity standard to whole effluents as follows:

a) No effluent shall cause an exceedance of 0.3 acute toxicity unit

(TU[a]) outside a Zone of Initial Dilution (ZID) issued pursuant

to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.102(e); except that no acute whole

effluent toxicity permit limit shall be more restrictive than 1.0

TU[a] at the point of discharge.

b) No effluent shall cause an exceedance of 1.0 chronic toxicity unit

(TU[c]) in any waters of the Lake Michigan Basin except as

provided in mixing zone provisions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.102

and 302.530.

Section 352.520 Whole Effluent Toxicity Data

When assessing reasonable potential to exceed, WET data shall be

characterized consistent with the following:

a) When multiple acute toxicity values for individual species are

available for a single day, those values shall be averaged to

represent one daily value. The maximum of all representative

daily values for the most sensitive species tested shall be used

for determination of potential to exceed the acute toxicity

standard.

b) When multiple chronic toxicity values for individual species are

available for a single calendar month, those values shall be

averaged to represent one monthly value. The maximum of all

representative monthly values for the most sensitive species

tested shall be used for determination of reasonable potential to

exceed the chronic toxicity standard.

c) When there is insufficient WET data to adequately characterize the

toxicity of the effluent to aquatic life, in lieu of a WET limit

the Agency will include one or both of the following provisions in

the permit:

1) WET testing requirements to generate sufficient data to

adequately characterize the toxicity of the effluent;

2) A permit reopener clause which authorizes the Agency, based

upon the results of the WET tests required under subsection

(c)(1), to establish toxicity reduction evaluation

requirements, or WET limits, or both, if necessary to meet

the toxicity standard, and a compliance schedule if

appropriate.

Section 352.530 Estimation of Projected Effluent Quality (PEQ)

A minimum of five representative toxicity tests is necessary to calculate a

PEQ. If less than five test results are available and there is evidence

that effluent toxicity may exist, additional toxicity testing shall be

required consistent with Section 352.520(c). Whenever sufficient data

exists, the PEQ is estimated to be the maximum representative value

determined from Section 352.520(a) and (b), expressed in terms of acute and

chronic toxicity units (TU[a] & TU[c]) increased by a multiplying factor

from the table in Section 352.421. If more than 10 facility specific data

values are available, and the PEQ is more than either 1.0 TU[a] or 1.0

TU[c], the Agency will proceed to consideration of dilution and mixing

under Section 352.540 for the relevant effect (acute, chronic, or both).

If less than 10 facility specific data values are available, and the PEQ is

more than either 1.0 TU[a] or 1.0 TU[c], the Agency will follow the process

set forth in Section 352.421(b) to determine whether to proceed to Section

352.540. If the PEQ is less than or equal to 1.0 TU[a] or less than or

equal to 1.0 TU[c], no WET limit will be established in the permit for the

relevant standard.

Section 352.540 Calculation of Preliminary Effluent Limitation (PEL)

If the PEQ is more than either 1.0 TU[a] or 1.0 TU[c], or as otherwise

provided in Section 352.530, the Agency will determine eligibility for a

dilution allowance consistent with Section 352.422. The preliminary

effluent limitation (PEL) expressed in terms of acute and chronic toxicity

units (TU[a] and TU[c]) shall be calculated pursuant to Section 352.423.

Unless there is data indicating otherwise, the pollutant concentration in

the background water (Cd) will be assumed to be zero.

Section 352.550 Establishing Whole Effluent Toxicity Conditions

a) If the PEQ derived from Section 352.530 is less than or equal to

the PEL calculated in Section 352.540, it will be concluded that

there is no reasonable potential to exceed. Under such

circumstances a permit limit will not be set unless otherwise

justified under one or more provisions of Section 352.430.

b) If the PEQ is greater than the PEL, and more than 10 facility

specific data values were used in deriving the PEQ, either a whole

effluent toxicity limit will be incorporated into the permit or

the causative toxic substances will be limited consistent with

Subpart D of this Part.

c) If 10 or fewer data values were used in deriving the PEQ, the

Agency will calculate an alternative PEQ, using the method

specified in Section 352.421(b). If the alternative PEQ is

greater than the PEL, appropriate limits will be incorporated into

the permit, as in the situation where more than 10 data values are

available. If the alternative PEQ is less than or equal to the

PEL, the Agency will either establish appropriate limits in the

permit or 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.

d) It is the preference of the Agency to limit the individual toxic

substances producing the toxicity whenever they can be identified.

Therefore whole effluent toxicity limits will not be imposed

whenever the toxicity can be resolved by regulating individual

substances. If, however, a WET limit is necessary, the limit will

be set at the PEL calculated pursuant to Section 352.540. If

compliance cannot be achieved upon permit issuance, the permit may

also include requirements for a toxicity reduction evaluation

program, interim discharge limits and a compliance schedule.

SUBPART F: MASS LOADING LIMITS

Section 352.600 Mass Loading Limits

Whenever a water quality based effluent limitation (WQBEL) is established

in a permit, the WQBEL shall be expressed as both a concentration value and

a corresponding mass loading rate.

a) Both mass and concentration limits shall be based on the same

permit averaging periods such as daily or monthly averages, or in

other appropriate permit averaging periods.

b) The mass based WQBEL shall be calculated using effluent flow rates

that are the same as those used in establishing the

concentration-based WQBEL.

c) Mass load limits are not required for parameters which cannot be

appropriately expressed in terms of mass as listed below:

pH

temperature

radiation

bacteria

dissolved oxygen

d) Discharges that are subject to substantial flow variation such as

wet weather flows or varied production schedules may have mass

limits established in a tiered fashion coinciding with different

flow regimes. Typically two tiered mass limits will be

established. One set shall be based on dry-weather effluent

flowrate and the appropriate stream design flow. The second mass

limit shall be based on effluent and stream flowrates

representative of wet weather conditions.

SUBPART G: EFFLUENT LIMITS BELOW THE LEVEL OF QUANTIFICATION

Section 352.700 Water Quality Based Effluent Limits Below Detection or

Quantification

a) When a WQBEL for a toxic substance is calculated to be less than

the quantification level, the permit shall include a discharge

limit, method and quantification level consistent with the

following:

1) The permit shall include the WQBEL as calculated.

2) The permit shall specify the most sensitive applicable

analytical method adopted by the Board and contained in or

approved under 40 CFR 136, or other appropriate method

adopted by the Board if one is not available under 40 CFR

136. The analytical method adopted by the Board and specified

in the permit shall be the method used for compliance

assessment including enforcement actions.

3) The permit shall also identify the quantification level that

can be achieved with the method specified pursuant to

subsection (a)(2). That quantification level shall be the

minimum level (ML) specified in or approved under 40 CFR 136

for the selected method for the toxic substance. If no such

ML exists, or if the method is not specified or approved

under 40 CFR 136, the quantification level shall be the

lowest quantifiable level practicable. In determining the

practicability of a method, the Agency shall consider

achievability of the identified detection level by competent

commercial laboratories.

4) A higher quantification level may be established if

demonstrated to be appropriate due to effluent-specific

matrix interference. The Agency may consider alternative

methods adopted by the Board for deriving quantification

levels if those methods are demonstrated to be scientifically

defensible.

b) The permit shall include a condition requiring the permittee to

develop and conduct a pollutant minimization program (PMP) for

each pollutant with a WQBEL below the quantification level, unless

the permittee can demonstrate that an alternative technique is

adequate to assess compliance with the WQBEL. The goal of the PMP

shall be to attain and maintain the discharge at or below the

WQBEL. The PMP shall include but is not limited to the following:

1) An annual review of potential sources of the toxic substance;

2) Periodic monitoring as necessary in order to assess progress

toward the goal of the PMP;

3) Implementation of appropriate cost-effective control measures

at the earliest practicable time after sources are

identified; and

4) Submittal of an annual, unless otherwise specified in the

permit, status report containing all minimization program

monitoring results of the reporting period, a listing of

potential sources of the toxic substance, a summary of all

actions and control measures taken to reduce or eliminate the

identified sources of the toxic substance and an overview of

anticipated future steps in the PMP.

c) The permit may contain a condition requiring fish tissue

monitoring, other bio-uptake sampling, facility sludge monitoring,

or a combination of such sampling as necessary to assess the

progress of the PMP.

d) The permit shall contain a reopener clause providing for

subsequent modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit

as warranted by the results of the PMP pursuant to subsection (b),

or the availability of new or alternative analytical methods. Such

modification or reissuance may accommodate more or less frequent

monitoring, a new alternative analytical method or quantification

level, or both if appropriate and consistent with subsection

(a)(3), or modification or removal of the PMP.

SUBPART H: COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES

Section 352.800 Compliance Schedules

Section 39(b) of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/39(b)] and 35

Ill. Adm. Code 309.148 authorize the Agency to establish schedules of

compliance in NPDES permits for a number of circumstances, including a

discharge that is not in compliance with applicable water quality

standards. NPDES permits with compliance schedules within the Lake Michigan

Basin shall be issued according to the following procedures:

a) No delayed compliance dates may be included for new discharges

within the basin. Permits issued on or after February 20, 1998

that contain a water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL) shall

require compliance with the WQBEL upon commencement of the

discharge.

b) Any existing permit reissued or modified after February 20, 1998

that contains a new or more restrictive WQBEL shall allow a

reasonable period of time, up to five years after the date of

permit issuance or modification, for the permitee to comply with

that limit.

c) If the compliance schedule established under subsection (b)

extends beyond one year after the date of permit issuance or

modification, the schedule shall set forth interim requirements

and dates for their achievement as appropriate.

d) Whenever a WQBEL for a toxic substance based on a Tier II value

derived pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.563 or 302.565(b) is

included in a reissued or modified permit for an existing

discharge, the permit shall provide a reasonable period of time,

up to two years, to acquire additional data necessary to develop a

Tier I criteria or to modify the Tier II value. In such cases,

the permit shall require compliance with the Tier II limitation

within a reasonable period of time, consistent with subsections

(e) and (f) below and contain a reopener clause consistent with

subsection (e).

e) The reopener clause referenced in subsection (d) shall authorize

permit modifications if additional data become available during

the time allowed which demonstrates that a revised WQBEL is

appropriate. The revised WQBEL shall be incorporated through

permit modification and a reasonable time period, up to five years

after the date of permit modification, shall be allowed for

compliance. If incorporated prior to the compliance date of the

original Tier II limitation, any such revised limit shall not be

considered less stringent for purposes of the anti-backsliding

provisions of Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act.

f) If a revised WQBEL is not demonstrated to be appropriate during

the time period allowed to collect additional data and derive a

Tier I criteria or revised Tier II value, the Agency may provide

a reasonable additional period of time, not to exceed five years

after the end of the data collection period, to achieve compliance

with the original effluent limitation.

SUBPART I: ANTIDEGRADATION PROVISIONS FOR BIOACCUMULATIVE CHEMICALS OF CONCERN

Section 352.900 Antidegradation Provisions for Bioaccumulative Chemicals

of Concern (BCCs)

Whenever a new or increased loading of any BCC is proposed from an existing

or new facility or activity, either point or nonpoint source, that is

subject to NPDES permitting, Clean Water Act Section 401 water quality

certification, or Lake Michigan dredge and fill permits under Section 39(n)

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/39(n)], the Agency

shall require an antidegradation demonstration.

a) Exceptions

1) Changes in loading of a BCC within the existing capacity and

processes that are covered by the existing permit including

but not limited to:

A) Normal operational variability including but not limited

to intermittent increased discharges due to wet weather

conditions;

B) Changes in intake water pollutants not caused by the

discharger;

C) Increasing the production hours of the facility;

D) Increasing the rate of production.

2) New limits for an existing permitted discharge or activity

that are not the result of changes in pollutant loading, and

will not allow an increase in pollutant loading, including

new limits that are a result of the following:

A) New or improved monitoring data;

B) New or improved analytical methods;

C) New or modified water quality criteria or values;

D) New or modified effluent limitations guidelines,

pretreatment standards, or control requirements for

POTWs.

3) Those actions listed in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.512(c), if

determined to be exempt by the Agency, including:

A) Short term, temporary consisting of weeks or months

lowering of water quality;

B) Bypasses that are not prohibited at 40 CFR 122.41(m);

and

C) Response actions pursuant to the comprehensive

Environmental Response 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

which may pose an imminent and substantial danger to

public welfare.

b) Antidegradation Demonstrations

1) An entity seeking new or increased loading allowance for a

BCC into the Lake Michigan Basin must complete and submit an

antidegradation demonstration adequate to substantiate the

important economic or social development expected to result

and to specify the pollutant minimization plan to accompany

any allowable increase in BCC loading for Agency review. The

Agency will consult with such entities regarding the scope of

the demonstration if requested. A demonstration will address

the following elements pertaining to anticipated important

economic and social development:

A) The extent to which employment will be increased in the

area;

B) The extent to which production levels will increase in

the area;

C) The extent to which the proposed change will avoid

otherwise anticipated reduction in employment or

production levels;

D) The extent to which the activity will be providing

economic or social benefit to the area;

E) The extent to which the activity will be correcting an

environmental or public health problem.

2) The demonstration must also address the sources of the BCC

and include a comprehensive assessment of pollution

prevention alternatives and alternative or enhanced treatment

techniques. This analysis and any other relevant information

will form the basis for a pollutant minimization plan to

accompany any permissible increased loading allowance.

3) If the Agency tentatively determines that increased BCC

loading is allowable pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code

302.520(a), such determination, including any conditions of

the allowance such as but not limited to pollutant

minimization steps, monitoring and reporting requirements,

and special restrictions on operation, shall be fully

described and subject to the public notice provisions of 35

Ill. Adm. Code 309 for NPDES permits, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 395

and the federal procedures established for the issuance of

Clean Water Act Section 404 permits, or the procedures of

Section 18 of the Rivers, Lakes and Streams Act [615 ILCS

5/18] for permits under Section 39(n) of the Illinois

Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/39(n)]. Final

action that would approve increased BCC loading shall not be

taken until completion of the public participation process.

Back to top