ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
December 30,
1982
AMENDMENTS TO THE
R79
6
WATER POLLUTION REGULATIONS
)
Opinion and Order of the Board
(by J,D.
Dumelle):
On March
1,
1979 the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency (Agency)
filed
a petition for amendments
to the Board’s
Water Pollution Regulations.
Unlike most proposals for regulatory
change the petition did not request any present changes in the
standards,
but rather requested that hearings be held at which
the Agency would “present the conceptual approach to its proposed
method of establishing water quality standards based on the actual
and anticipated uses of all the stream segments in Illinois”
(Pet.,p.1).
On December
6,
1982,
Eugene Seebald,
Manager of the
Agency’s Division of Water Pollution Control sent a letter to the
Board indicating that the Agency has no objection to the dismissal
of this proceeding and subsequent docketing of individual basin
standards revisions.
The Board authorized the petition for hearing and publication
on March 29,
1979,
and hearings in the nature of inquiry hearings
were held on June 13,
1979
(Chicago), June 15,
1979 (Springfield),
February 11,
1980 (Chicago)
and February 15,
1980 (Springfield).
On May 10,
1979 the Board consolidated proceedings in R79—8
(a site—specific proposal filed by Modine Manufacturing Company
requesting water quality standard amendments) with this docket.
However, on April
29,
1982 the Board dismissed the R79—8
portion of this docket upon Modine’s motion.
Therefore,
all that
remains is the “conceptual approach” upon which the hearings
have been held.
To date no specific standards have been proposed
based upon that approach, although the Agency has indicated that
proposals will be filed in the near future.
(See Seehald letter.)
In 1972 the Board adopted a comprehensive set of water quality
standards.
These standards have been amended from time to time,
but the essential structure of the rules has remained unchanged.
General
Use Water Quality Standards, established to protect
aquatic
life, agricultural use, primary and secondary contact
uses and most industrial uses and to ensure the aesthetic quality,
are presently set out in 35 Ill.Adm.Code 302.201 through 302.212.
Public and Food Processing Water Supply Standards,
which are gen-
erally more stringent than, and cumulative with, the general use
standards,
and which were established to ensure
the safety of the
water for these uses, are set out in 35 Ili.Adm.Code 302.301
through 302.305.
Secondary Contact and Indigenous Aquatic Life
Standards, which are less stringent than the other standards since
the waters are not used
for all general use purposes, are set out
in
35 Ill.Adm.Code 302.401 through 302.410.
Finally,
Lake Michi-
50-213
—2—
gan Water Quality Standards,
which are the most stringent and arc
intended to protect that lake’s present high quality and unique
aquatic biota,
are set out in 35 Ill.Adm.Code 302.501 through
302.509
(R.13).
As can be
seen, this structure makes some attempt to base
standards uporT the use of the waters, but it imposes strict
general use standards upon the large majority of the waters
to
ensure that the most sensitive aquatic species native to Illinois
waters as well as a full range of recreational uses are pro-
tected (R.14).
James
Park,
Supervisor of the Agency’s Technical Standards
Unit, testified that due to the great variety of waters included
under the definition of “waters of the State” and the concomitant
variety of uses and aquatic
life,
water quality “standards
become most effective when they are tailored to the specific
uses desired by the people affected by that water”
(R.
14—15).
When the Board adopted its standards, however,
insufficient
data had been collected to enable the Board to do anything more
than the broadest “tailoring” described above.
However, prior
to filing its petition in this matter the Agency had embarked
on an “extensive study effort to develop the necessary tools”
for the development of more soundly based standards
(R.
15).
This was done in response to Section 208 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(P.L 92—500) and
Train v.
Natural Resources Defense Council,
Inc., etal.,
43 L.W.
4467
(4/75).
As a result of an interdisciplinary project including the
Agency, the Institute of Natural Resources,
(now the Department
of Energy and Natural Resources),
and a study group of respected
experts from various fields,
a procedure was developed for estab-
lishing “water use oriented” standards which consists of a water
model
for prediction of water quality under various control
strategies,
a matrix equating uses with necessary water quality and
an adequate data base
(R.
15—23).
This procedure is purported
to result in predictions of the most cost-effective combination
of control strategies,
as applied to particular stream segments
to be studied
(R.
25).
For example, whereas general
stream standards currently in
effect establish pollutant limitation for protection of sensitive
fish species, limitations within certain stream segments other
than pollutant levels may preclude survival of those species
(R.
33).
As
a result a cost is imposed with no intended benefit.
The Agency’s procedures should culminate in the proposal of
regulations which avoid such non—beneficial consequences.
The Agency proposes to study approximately 600 stream seg-
ments which comprise most of the waters of the State.
These
will be completed on a basin by basin basis.
The Agency has
indicated that the first basin proposal
(the Sangamon River
50-214
—3—
Basin)
should be ready for submission to the Board by February of
1983.
Completion of all proposals may take as
long as five years
thereafter.
To include all of these proposals in a single docket would
be cumbersome and confusing at best.
The Board,
therefore,
finds that separate dockets should be established
for each basin
proposal
as it is submitted.
This will serve to keep the records
better organized and should also serve to minimize confusion
as the Board considers,
and ultimately adopts, basin by basin
rules.
Thus,
docket R79-6,
which simply concerns procedures for
development of future proposals,
no longer serves any useful
purpose,
and should be dismissed.
Of course, any portions of
that record which may be relevant to future dockets may be
incorporated,
as may future records developed on a basin by
basin basis.
The dismissal of this action in no way indicates a change
in the Agency’s commitment to basin—specific standards review
and revision, nor does it indicate any rejection by the Board of
this process.
On the contrary, the Board finds that the Agency’s
approach to such review and revision appears sound and should
result in considerably improved water quality standards.
The Department of Energy and Natural Resources has funded
an economic impact study
(EcIS)
for this proceeding.
It is the
Board’s understanding that that study addresses methodologies for
assessing the economic benefits of improvements in water quality
standards.
As such it may well contain information useful
to the
Agency and the Board.
However, inasmuch as that study does not
concern the economic impact of any rule proposed for adoption
there is no necessity to hold economic impact hearings
to consider
it.
If any participant desires to have the EcIS introduced
as part of the record
for any future dockets considering basin—
spceific standards,
it may,
of course, be offered at hearings
scheduled to consider future proposals.
Finally, the Board expects that basin-specific proposals
will be expeditiously filed.
If they are proposed as they are
completed, beginning in early 1983,
the Board can schedule hearings
for prompt and orderly consideration of them.
ORDER
Proceedings
in R79—6 are hereby dismissed.
I, Christan
L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Boaçd,
hereby certify that the above Order was adopted
on the~b~’..
day of
\â
i4.si~
___
,
1982
by a vote of
~
Christan L. Mof~ekJ~JClerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
50-215