NOTICE OF HEARINGS

BACKGROUND
FIRST-NOTICE PROPOSAL
Draft Implementation Rules
Cyanide
ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS AND TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY OF THE PROPOSAL
CONCLUSION
ORDER
Section 309.157Permit Limits for Total Metals

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

October 17, 2002

IN THE MATTER OF:

WATER QUALITY TRIENNIAL

REVIEW: AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 302.105, 302.208(e)-(g),

302.504(a), 302.575(d), 309.141(h); and

PROPOSED 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 301.267,

301.313, 301.413, 304.120, and 309.157

)

R02-11

(Rulemaking - Water)

Proposed Rule. Second Notice.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by G.T. Girard, M.E. Tristano):

On November 9, 2001, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) filed a

rulemaking proposal (Prop.) to amend the Board’s water regulations at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

302.208(e)-(g), 302.504(a), 302.575(d), 303.444, 309.141(h) and to add new sections at 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 301.267, 301.313, 301.413, 304.120, and 309.157. The proposed rule will update

the Board’s regulations pursuant to the State’s triennial review of water regulations.

On December 6, 2001, the Board accepted this matter for hearing.

The Board held two hearings prior to first notice. Board Hearing Officer Marie Tipsord

conducted hearings on January 29, 2002, in Chicago, and on March 6, 2002, in Springfield.

those two hearings, the Agency, Galesburg Sanitary District, the Environmental Groups,

Illinois

Association of Wastewater Agencies (IAWA), and Rock River Water Reclamation District

testified. The Board received 21 public comments prior to first notice. On June 20, 2002, the

Board proceeded to first notice with the rule.

After first notice the Board held one additional hearing and received 7 public comments.

The hearing before Board Hearing Officer Tipsord was held on July 25, 2002, in Chicago,

with

testimony from the Agency and the Environmental Groups.

The transcript from the January 29, 2002 hearing in Chicago will be cited as “Tr.1” and the

transcript from the March 6, 2002 hearing held in Springfield will be cited as “Tr.2”.

Testimony and comments were offered on behalf of the Environmental Law and Policy Center,

Prairie Rivers Network, and Sierra Club. The Board will refer to them as “Environmental

Groups” when discussing the comments and testimony.

The July 25, 2002 hearing will be cited as “Tr.3”.

The Board today proposes for second notice amendments to the Board’s water rules. The

Board’s proposed rule is similar to the first-note proposal except for minor non-substantive

amendments. The following opinion will explain the proposal background, summarize the first-

notice proposal, present comments received during first notice, and, finally, discuss the

economic reasonableness and technical feasibility of the rule.

BACKGROUND

States are required to revise and update their water quality standards pursuant to the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387 (1987)) (Clean Water Act). Prop.

at 7. The update is necessary to ensure that the water quality standards protect public health and

welfare, enhance the quality of water, and promote the purposes of the Clean Water Act.

This process is called a triennial water quality standards review.

. citing 33 U.S.C.

§1313(c)(1). One element in the triennial water quality standards review is the refining of

numeric standards based on the best available current knowledge.

. The Agency filed a

proposal on November 9, 2001, which revised the water quality standards based on revised

federal policy and new scientific information collected over the years. Prop. at 8.

FIRST-NOTICE PROPOSAL

As a part of the triennial review, the Board sent to first notice a rule which proposed

changes in five areas of the State’s regulations. First, the proposed rule amends new aquatic life

acute and chronic numeric General Use Water Quality Standards and Lake Michigan Water

Quality Standards for benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene, and xylene (BETX). Second, the

proposed rule revises General Use Water Quality Standards for zinc, and nickel. Third, the

proposed rule changes the General Use Water Quality Standards for metals from total to

dissolved form. Fourth, the proposed rule corrects the Lake Michigan water rules adopted in

Conforming Amendments for the Great Lakes Initiative: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.101; 302.105;

302.Subpart E; 303.443 And 304.222, R97-25, (Dec. 18, 1997). Fifth, the proposed rule allows

the Agency to use five-day carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) instead of five-

day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) for measuring compliance with Section 304.120 (35

Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.

Three areas of concern emerged prior to first notice. Those three areas were: (1)

whether the Board should require the Agency to provide implementation rules regarding

hardness, reasonable potential testing, dissolved oxygen and the metals translator prior to

proceeding to first notice with the Agency’s proposal; (2) whether the Board should adopt the

revised cyanide standard proposed by the Agency; and (3) whether compliance with the BOD5

effluent limits in Section 304.120 should be determined by measuring CBOD5. After careful

consideration of the comments the Board addressed each of those concerns in the first-notice

opinion and order. The Board also asked that the parties provide additional comments on the

areas of concern during the first-notice comment period.

Draft Implementation Rules

The Board proceeded to first notice even though the Agency did not provide draft

implementation rules. The Board noted that in general, seeing implementation procedures for

the water quality standards would be important and the Board’s hearing officer had asked the

Agency to provide the Board with copies of the implementation rules as a part of the Agency’s

comments. Tr.2 at 149. While it would be helpful to know the implementation procedures in

developing comprehensive water quality regulations, in this proceeding the Board found that the

Agency has sufficient federal guidance and experience to develop implementation procedures

which ensure that water quality standards are protective of aquatic life. Water Quality Triennial

Review: Amendments To 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105, 302.208(e)-(g), 302.504(a), 302.575(d),

309.141(h); and Proposed 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.267, 301.313, 301.413, 304.120, and 309.157

R02-11 (June 20, 2002),

slip op.

7-8.

Cyanide

At first notice, the Board decided not to proceed with the revised cyanide standards

proposed by the Agency. The Agency proposed an acute standard of 49 μg/L and a chronic

standard of 9.9 μg/L

which is more liberal than the current acute standard of 22 μg/L and

chronic standard of 5.2 μg/L. The Board was convinced by the comments and testimony that

changing the cyanide standard was not warranted at this time. The Agency based the proposed

amendment of the cyanide standard on the assumption that Illinois does not have native cold-

water species of fish outside of Lake Michigan. However, the Illinois Department of Natural

Resources (IDNR) has indicated that stocked cold-water species have reproduced in Illinois.

This is information that the Agency did not have when considering the relaxation of the standard

for cyanide (

see

Tr.1 at 62). The Agency also testified that a cool-water species (a sculpin) is

present in Illinois, but those streams “are not now thought to contain significant amounts of

cyanide,” and the Board’s antidegradation rules can be used to evaluate the streams. Tr.2 at 141.

The Board noted in the first notice-opinion, that while antidegradation evaluations provide

additional protection to a water body in a permitting context, such an evaluation should not be

used as a justification to relax water quality standards. Water Quality Triennial Review:

Amendments To 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105, 302.208(e)-(g), 302.504(a), 302.575(d),

309.141(h); and Proposed 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.267, 301.313, 301.413, 304.120, And 309.157

R02-11 (June 20, 2002),

slip op.

The Board also expressed concern with the lack of information regarding mussels in

Illinois. At this time there are no studies that either the Agency or the participants are aware of

which review the effect of cyanide toxicity on mussels. The Agency, in proposing the change,

relied on the fact that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) did not use

mussel data. However, the Board opined that USEPA’s lack of information is not scientific

support for relaxing the standard. The Board stated that there are many endangered and

threatened species of mussels in Illinois and no evidence to establish that relaxation of the

standard will have no effect on those species. Furthermore, the Board noted that the relaxation

of the standard would not help any Illinois dischargers. Water Quality Triennial Review:

Amendments To 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.105, 302.208(e)-(g), 302.504(a), 302.575(d),

The Agency original proposal used the 9.9 μg/L number; however, in a subsequent comment

the Agency revised that number to 11 μg/L (see Exh. 8).

309.141(h); and Proposed 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.267, 301.313, 301.413, 304.120, And 309.157

R02-11 (June 20, 2002),

slip op.

CBOD5

The Board proceeded to first notice with a provision to allow the use of CBOD5 instead

of BOD5 for measuring compliance with Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in

NPDES permits. The Board noted that the Environmental Groups’ primary concern is that using

CBOD5 to measure the efficiency of wastewater treatment facilities may not be fully protective

of dissolved oxygen levels in Illinois waters, because CBOD5 does not measure nitrogenous

oxygen demand. However, the Board found that the evidence in the record (such as IAWA’s

Exhibits 14, 15 and 16) document that the BOD5 test in many cases does not accurately represent

wastewater treatment efficiency or the actual oxygen demand experienced in the receiving

stream. The Board further found that the record supported the Agency’s position that combined

effluent testing for CBOD5 and ammonia nitrogen provides a more representative measure of

treatment efficiency. Water Quality Triennial Review: Amendments To 35 Ill. Adm. Code

302.105, 302.208(e)-(g), 302.504(a), 302.575(d), 309.141(h); and Proposed 35 Ill. Adm. Code

301.267, 301.313, 301.413, 304.120, and 309.157, R02-11 (June 20, 2002),

slip op.

11.

SECOND NOTICE COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION

In the first notice opinion, the Board sought additional comments on: (1) whether the

Board should require the Agency to provide implementation rules regarding hardness, reasonable

potential testing, dissolved oxygen and the metals translator prior to proceeding to first notice

with the Agency’s proposal; (2) whether the Board should adopt the revised cyanide standard

proposed by the Agency; and (3) whether compliance with the BOD5 effluent limits in Section

304.120 should be determined by measuring CBOD5. During the first notice comment period,

the Board only received comments on two issues: (1) the Board’s decision not to amend the

cyanide standards, and, (2) the Board’s decision to allow the use of CBOD5 to measure

compliance with the BOD5 standard from Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in

NPDES permits.

The Agency submitted testimony and comments in support of the adoption of cyanide

standards as originally proposed by the Agency (PC 27). The Metropolitan Water Reclamation

District (MWRD) filed a comment in support of the Agency’s proposal to change the cyanide

standard (PC 23), while the IDNR filed a comment opposing a change to the cyanide standard

(PC 22). The Environmental Groups filed a comment supporting the Board’s first-notice

proposal declining to change the cyanide standard, but asking the Board to reexamine the issue

of using of CBOD5 to meet the BOD5 requirement from Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code

304.120) in NPDES permits (PC 25). The IAWA continued to support using CBOD5 to meet the

BOD5 requirement from Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in NPDES permits. No

additional comments were received regarding the Agency’s implementation procedures. The

following discussion will briefly summarize the comments regarding the two remaining issues

(cyanide and CBOD5).

Cyanide

The Agency continues to urge the relaxation of the cyanide standard. Tr.3, Exh. 17. The

Agency disagrees with the comments of IDNR and the Agency maintains that the Agency

conformed to USEPA methodology when deriving the standard for cyanide. Tr.3, Exh. 17 at 6.

The Agency also disagrees that the two instances of reproduction of a cold-water species in

Illinois is a sufficient basis to reject the cyanide standard.

. The Agency also argues that

mussel data is not used because there “are basic questions of science to be answered” and

USEPA Region Five management has “assured the Agency that mussel data should not enter the

derivation process as a driving factor” until the controversies are resolved. Tr.3, Exh. 17 at 8.

Regarding the Agency’s earlier assertion that there is no approved analytical method for

cyanide to test reliably below 5.2 μ/L (the current standard), the Environmental Groups

presented at hearing a new USEPA approved test method, OIA-1677, capable of testing for

cyanide below the current standard. Tr.3 at 21 and PC 25 at 3-4. While the Agency was not

aware of the new test method earlier in the proceeding, the Agency notes that it examined the

capabilities of the new method since the first notice hearing. PC 27 at 3.

Based on its review, the Agency states that the new method has sufficient benefits over

the current weak acid dissociable (WAD) test method, including less interference and lower

detection limit. PC 27 at 5. The Agency recommends that the new cyanide test method be

referenced along with the WAD test method in the Board’s cyanide standard. PC 27 at 5. The

Agency states that although most commercial laboratories in Illinois are not equipped to run the

new test, given an option to use the new test method, dischargers may begin to demand the

laboratories to use the new method instead of the WAD test method.

The MWRD also urged the Board to adopt the cyanide standard as proposed by the

Agency. PC 23. The MWRD maintains that the standard is based on sound science and proven

USEPA methodology.

At hearing and in subsequent comments, the Environmental Groups supported the

Board’s first-notice decision of not relaxing the cyanide standard. They stated that their concern

regarding the effect of cyanide on Illinois’ endangered mussels continues to exist, since no

toxicity testing information is available. PC 25 at 1. The IDNR echoes the Environmental

Groups’ concern regarding the protection of certain endangered aquatic species. The IDNR

argues, “an existing standard, one that may not currently be protective of an important group of

animals (many of them federally or state-listed threatened or endangered species), should not be

further loosened.” PC 22 at 2.

IDNR further commented that the testimony of Mr. Mosher “only reinforces the

concerns” of IDNR originally expressed to the Board prior to first notice. PC 22 at 1. IDNR

indicated that it is IDNR’s belief that the triennial review process was intended to “be an

incentive to both the regulated community and regulators to conduct additional toxicological

research to determine sensitivities of a broader range of species.”

. IDNR maintains that using

the lack of data as justification for weakening a standard “seems inconsistent” with the goals of

the Clean Water Act.

The Board is unconvinced by the additional comments of the Agency and the MWRD

that the relaxation of the cyanide standard should be proposed at this time. The Board finds that

there is insufficient evidence to support changing to an acute standard of 49 μ/L and a chronic

standard of 11 μ/L rather than the current acute standard of 22 μ/L and chronic standard of 5.2

μ/L for cyanide. However, regarding the new test method, the Board agrees with the

Environmental Groups and the Agency that the new test method has significant benefits over the

current WAD test method. However, the Board believes that there is no need to amend the water

quality regulations in order to encourage dischargers/laboratories to use the new test method to

show compliance with the cyanide water quality standard. In this regard, the Board notes that

the current analytical testing requirements for both the General Use waters, and the Lake

Michigan waters allow the use of test methods that are consistent with the USEPA's current

manual of practice or with other procedures acceptable to USEPA and the Agency.

See

35 Ill.

Adm. Code 301.104 and 302.550. Since the new cyanide test method, OIM-1677, has been

approved by the USEPA, the Agency may require the dischargers/laboratories to use the new

cyanide test method to show compliance or notify the dischargers/laboratories that the new

cyanide test method is the preferred method.

CBOD5

The Environmental Groups maintain that CBOD5 should not be used to measure

compliance with the BOD5 standard in Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in NPDES

permits. PC 25 at 3. The Environmental Groups assert that the dissolved oxygen standards are

being violated in Illinois waters. Tr.3, Exh. 20 at 2. The Environmental Groups do concede that

the cause for the violation of the standards is not known; however “many of the affected waters

receive significant discharge” from sewage treatment plants.

. The Environmental Groups do

not object to using CBOD5 rather than BOD5 as a test for determining whether sewage treatment

plants are meeting the secondary treatment requirements. PC 25 at 3. The Environmental

Groups argue that the proposal ratifies a decision to measure CBOD5 rather than BOD5 with

regard to dischargers covered by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120(b) and (c).

. According to the

Environmental Groups, these two provisions are the only mechanisms Illinois has established to

protect waters where secondary treatment is not adequate to protect water quality.

. The

Environmental Groups argue that because CBOD5 is less than BOD5 by definition, the proposal

has the effect of allowing more deoxygenating waste to be discharged than under current Board

rules. PC 25 at 3-4.

The Agency and IAWA both support the Board’s proposal on the use of CBOD5 rather

than BOD5 to measure compliance with Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in NPDES

permits. PC 27 at 1; PC 26. The IAWA indicates that the IAWA has been concerned with the

definition of BOD from the outset of these proceedings. PC 26 at 1. IAWA maintains that the

use of CBOD recognizes the current USEPA position that CBOD is a more accurate parameter

for determining the effectiveness of secondary treatment.

. The IAWA urges the Board to

proceed with the rule as proposed. PC 26 at 5.

The Board appreciates the additional comment on the issue of using CBOD5 rather than

BOD5 in NPDES permits. However, the Board finds that the additional comments are not

sufficient to warrant a change in the Board’s position. Therefore, the Board will not make any

changes to the first-notice proposal concerning the use of CBOD5 rather than BOD5 to measure

compliance with Section 304.120 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120) in NPDES permits.

ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS AND TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY OF THE

PROPOSAL

At first notice, the Board found that the rule was economically reasonable and technically

feasible. The Board has received no additional comments discussing economic reasonableness

and technical feasibility of the proposed rule. On March 12, 2002, pursuant to Section 27(b) of

the Act (415 ILCS 5/27(b) (2000)), the Board requested that the Department of Commerce and

Community Affairs (DCCA) conduct an economic impact study on the proposed rule. The

request letter referenced a letter, dated March 10, 2000, from DCCA. The March 10, 2000 letter

informed the Board that DCCA would not be doing economic impact studies. At the July 25,

2002 hearing the Board provided copies of the DCCA letter and the Board’s March 12, 2002

letter. The Board received no comments on the letter.

CONCLUSION

The Board today proposes for second notice amendments to the Board’s water rules. The

Board is adopting the proposed rule with only minor changes from the first-notice proposal.

ORDER

The Board directs that the following rule be filed with the Joint Committee on

Administrative Rules for second-notice review.

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

301.104 Analytical Testing

301.105

References to Other Sections

301.106

Incorporations by Reference

301.107 Severability

301.108 Adjusted Standards

301.200 Definitions

301.205 Act

301.210 Administrator

Artificial Cooling Lake

301.230 Basin

301.231

Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern

301.255 Combined Sewer

301.260

Combined Sewer Service Area

301.265 Construction

301.267 Conversion Factor

301.270 Dilution Ratio

301.275 Effluent

301.280 Hearing Board

301.285 Industrial Wastes

301.290 Institute

301.295 Interstate Waters

301.300 Intrastate Waters

301.301

Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan

301.305 Land Runoff

301.310 Marine Toilet

301.311

Method Detection Level

301.312 Minimum Level

301.313 Metals Translator

Pollutant Minimization Program

301.345 Population Equivalent

301.346

Preliminary Effluent Limitation

301.350 Pretreatment Works

301.355 Primary Contact

301.356

Projected Effluent Quality

301.360

Public and Food Processing Water Supply

301.365

Publicly Owned Treatment Works

301.370

Publicly Regulated Treatment Works

301.371 Quantification Level

301.372

Reasonable Potential Analysis

301.373

Same Body of Water

301.375 Sanitary Sewer

301.380 Secondary Contact

Standard of Performance

301.405 STORET

301.410 Storm Sewer

301.411

Total Maximum Daily Load

301.413 Total Metal

301.415 Treatment Works

301.420 Underground Waters

301.421 Wasteload Allocation

301.425 Wastewater

301.430 Wastewater Source

301.435 Watercraft

301.440 Waters

301.441

Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation

301.442

Wet Weather Point Source

301.443

Whole Effluent Toxicity

APPENDIX

References to Previous Rules

AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Section 27 of the Environmental

Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13 and 27].

SOURCE: Filed with the Secretary of State January 1, 1978; amended at 3 Ill. Reg. 25, p. 190,

effective June 21, 1979; amended at 5 Ill. Reg. 6384, effective May 28, 1981; codified at 6 Ill.

Reg. 7818; amended in R88-1 at 13 Ill. Reg. 5984, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-

21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2879, effective February 13, 1990; amended in R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg.

11277, effective August 26, 1999; amended in R02-11 at Ill. Reg. , effective

Section 301.106 Incorporations by Reference

a) Abbreviations. The following abbreviated names are used for materials

incorporated by reference:

"ASTM" means American Society for Testing and Materials

"GPO" means Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

"NTIS" means National Technical Information Service

"Standard Methods" means "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and

Wastewater", available from the American Public Health Association

"USEPA" means United States Environmental Protection Agency

b) The Board incorporates the following publications by reference:

American Public Health Association et al., 1015 Fifteenth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20005

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th

Edition, 1985

ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive,

West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959 (610) 832-9585 1976 Race Street,

Philadelphia, PA 19013 (215) 299-5400

ASTM Standard E 724-80 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static Acute

Toxicity Tests with Larvae of Four Species of Bivalve Molluscs",

approved 1980.

ASTM Standard E 729-80 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static Acute

Toxicity Tests with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates, and Amphibians",

approved 1980.

ASTM Standard E 857-81 "Standard Practice for Conducting Subacute

Dietary Toxicity Tests with Avian Species", approved 1981.

ASTM Standard E 1023-84 "Standard Guide for Assessing the Hazard of

a Material to Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses", approved 1984.

ASTM Standard E 1103-86 "Method for Determining Subchronic Dermal

Toxicity", approved 1986.

ASTM Standard E 1147-87 "Standard Test Method for Partition

Coefficient (n-Octanol/Water) Estimation by Liquid Chromatography",

approved February 27, 1987.

ASTM Standard E 1192-88 "Standard Guide for Conducting Acute

Toxicity Tests on Aqueous Effluents with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates and

Amphibians", approved 1988.

ASTM Standard E 1193-87 "Standard Guide for Conducting Renewal

Life-Cycle Toxicity Tests with Daphnia Magna", approved 1987.

ASTM Standard E 1241-88 "Standard Guide for Conducting Early Life-

Stage Toxicity Tests with Fishes", approved 1988.

ASTM Standard E 1242-88 "Standard Practice for Using Octanol-Water

Partition Coefficients to Estimate Median Lethal Concentrations for Fish

due to Narcosis", approved 1988.

ASTM Standard E 4429-84 "Standard Practice for Conducting Static

Acute Toxicity Tests on Wastewaters with Daphnia", approved 1984.

NTIS. National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road,

Springfield, VA 22161 (703) 487-4600

SIDES: STORET Input Data Editing System, January 1973, Document

Number PB-227 052/8.

Water Quality Data Base Management Systems, February 1984,

Document Number AD-P004 768/8.

USEPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health and

Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C. 20460

Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity Assessment for 1,3-Butadiene,

September 1985, Document Number EPA/600/8-85/004A.

c) The Board incorporates the following federal regulations by reference. Available

from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

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

Procedure 5.b.2 of Appendix F of 40 CFR 132 (1995)

40 CFR 136 (1996)

40 CFR 141 (1988)

40 CFR 302.4 (1988)

The Board incorporates the following federal regulations by reference, available

from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

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

USEPA 1996: The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total

Recoverable Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion. EPA 823-B-96-007

(1996)

e) This Section incorporates no future editions or amendments.

(Source: Amended at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

Section 301.267 Conversion Factor

“Conversion Factor” means the fraction of the total metal found as dissolved in the toxicity tests

used to derive the water quality standards of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302. The conversion factors are

used to convert total metals water quality standards to dissolved standards.

(Source: Added at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

Section 301.313 Metals Translator

“Metals Translator” means the fraction of total metal that is dissolved in the effluent or

downstream water. The metals translator calculates a total metal permit limit from a dissolved

metal water quality standard. In the absence of site-specific data for the effluent or receiving

water, the metals translator is the reciprocal of the conversion factor.

(Source: Added at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

Section 301.413 Total Metal

“Total Metal” means the dissolved fraction of metal in a solution plus the suspended fraction.

(Source: Added at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

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 Antidegradation

SUBPART B: GENERAL USE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

Section

302.201 Scope and Applicability

302.202 Purpose

302.203 Offensive Conditions

302.204 pH

302.205 Phosphorus

302.206 Dissolved Oxygen

302.207 Radioactivity

302.208 Numeric Standards for Chemical Constituents

302.209 Fecal Coliform

302.210 Other Toxic Substances

302.211 Temperature

302.212 Ammonia Nitrogen and Un-ionized Ammonia

302.213 Effluent Modified Waters (Ammonia)

SUBPART C: PUBLIC AND FOOD PROCESSING WATER SUPPLY STANDARDS

Section

302.301 Scope and Applicability

302.302 Algicide Permits

302.303 Finished Water Standards

302.304 Chemical Constituents

302.305 Other Contaminants

302.306 Fecal Coliform

SUBPART D: SECONDARY CONTACT AND INDIGENOUS AQUATIC LIFE

STANDARDS

Section

302.401 Scope and Applicability

302.402 Purpose

302.403 Unnatural Sludge

302.404 pH

302.405 Dissolved Oxygen

302.406 Fecal Coliform (Repealed)

302.407 Chemical Constituents

302.408 Temperature

302.409 Cyanide

302.410 Substances Toxic to Aquatic Life

SUBPART E: LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

Section

302.501 Scope, Applicability, and Definitions

302.502 Dissolved Oxygen

302.503 pH

302.504 Chemical Constituents

302.505 Fecal Coliform

302.506 Temperature

302.507 Thermal Standards for Existing Sources on January 1, 1971

302.508 Thermal Standards for Sources under Construction But Not in Operation on

January 1, 1971

302.509 Other Sources

302.510 Incorporations by Reference

302.515 Offensive Conditions

302.520 Regulation and Designation of Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern (BCCs)

302.521 Supplemental Antidegradation Provisions for BCCs

302.525 Radioactivity

302.530 Supplemental Mixing Provisions for BCCs

302.535 Ammonia Nitrogen

302.540 Other Toxic Substances

302.545 Data Requirements

302.550 Analytical Testing

302.553 Determining the Lake Michigan Aquatic Toxicity Criteria or Values - General

Procedures

302.555 Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity

Criterion (LMAATC): Independent of Water Chemistry

302.560 Determining the Tier I Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity

Criterion (LMAATC): Dependent on Water Chemistry

302.563 Determining the Tier II Lake Michigan Basin Acute Aquatic Life Toxicity Value

(LMAATV)

302.565 Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Criterion

(LMCATC) or the Lake Michigan Basin Chronic Aquatic Life Toxicity Value

(LMCATV)

302.570 Procedures for Deriving Bioaccumulation Factors for the Lake Michigan Basin

302.575 Procedures for Deriving Tier I Water Quality Criteria in the Lake Michigan Basin

to Protect Wildlife

302.580 Procedures for Deriving Water Quality Criteria and Values in the Lake Michigan

Basin to Protect Human Health – General

302.585 Procedures for Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Threshold

Criterion (LMHHTC) and the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health Threshold

Value (LMHHTV)

302.590 Procedures for Determining the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health

Nonthreshold Criterion (LMHHNC) or the Lake Michigan Basin Human Health

Nonthreshold Value (LMHHNV)

302.595 Listing of Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern, Derived Criteria and Values

SUBPART F: PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING WATER QUALITY CRITERIA

Section

302.601 Scope and Applicability

302.603 Definitions

302.604 Mathematical Abbreviations

302.606 Data Requirements

302.612 Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion for an Individual Substance –

General Procedures

302.615 Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Toxicity Independent of

Water Chemistry

302.618 Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Toxicity Dependent on Water

Chemistry

302.621 Determining the Acute Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Procedures for Combinations

of Substances

302.627 Determining the Chronic Aquatic Toxicity Criterion for an Individual Substance -

General Procedures

302.630 Determining the Chronic Aquatic Toxicity Criterion - Procedure for Combination

of Substances

302.633 The Wild and Domestic Animal Protection Criterion

302.642 The Human Threshold Criterion

302.645 Determining the Acceptable Daily Intake

302.648 Determining the Human Threshold Criterion

302.651 The Human Nonthreshold Criterion

302.654 Determining the Risk Associated Intake

302.657 Determining the Human Nonthreshold Criterion

302.658 Stream Flow for Application of Human Nonthreshold Criterion

302.660 Bioconcentration Factor

302.663 Determination of Bioconcentration Factor

302.666 Utilizing the Bioconcentration Factor

302.669 Listing of Derived Criteria

APPENDIX A References to Previous Rules

APPENDIX B Sources of Codified Sections

AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 13 and authorized by Sections 11(b) and 27 of the

Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13, 11(b), and 27]

SOURCE: Filed with the Secretary of State January 1, 1978; amended at 2 Ill. Reg. 44, p. 151,

effective November 2, 1978; amended at 3 Ill. Reg. 20, p. 95, effective May 17, 1979; amended

at 3 Ill. Reg. 25, p. 190, effective June 21, 1979; codified at 6 Ill. Reg. 7818; amended at 6 Ill.

Reg. 11161, effective September 7, 1982; amended at 6 Ill. Reg. 13750, effective October 26,

1982; amended at 8 Ill. Reg. 1629, effective January 18, 1984; peremptory amendments at 10 Ill.

Reg. 461, effective December 23, 1985; amended at R87-27 at 12 Ill. Reg. 9911, effective May

27, 1988; amended at R85-29 at 12 Ill. Reg. 12082, effective July 11, 1988; amended in R88-1 at

13 Ill. Reg. 5998, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2899, effective

February 13, 1990; amended in R88-21(B) at 14 Ill. Reg. 11974, effective July 9, 1990; amended

in R94-1(A) at 20 Ill. Reg. 7682, effective May 24, 1996; amended in R94-1(B) at 21 Ill. Reg.

370, effective December 23, 1996; expedited correction at 21 Ill. Reg. 6273, effective December

23, 1996; amended in R97-25 at 21 Ill. Reg. 1356, effective December 24, 1997; amended in

R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg. 11249, effective August 26, 1999; amended in R01-13 at 26 Ill. Reg. 3505,

effective February 22, 2002; amended in R02-19 at Ill. Reg. , effective

; amended in R02-11 at Ill. Reg. , effective .

SUBPART A: GENERAL WATER QUALITY PROVISIONS

Section 302.105 Antidegradation

The purpose of this Section is to protect existing uses of all waters of the State of Illinois,

maintain the quality of waters with quality that is better than water quality standards, and prevent

unnecessary deterioration of waters of the State.

a) Existing Uses

Uses actually attained in a surface water body or water body segment on or after

November 28, 1975, whether or not they are included in the water quality standards, must

be maintained and protected. Examples of degradation of existing uses of the waters of

the State include:

1) an action that would result in the deterioration of the existing aquatic

community, such as a shift from a community of predominantly pollutant-

sensitive species to pollutant-tolerant species or a loss of species diversity;

2) an action that would result in a loss of a resident or indigenous species

whose presence is necessary to sustain commercial or recreational

activities; or

3) an action that would preclude continued use of a surface water body or

water body segment for a public water supply or for recreational or

commercial fishing, swimming, paddling or boating.

b) Outstanding Resource Waters

1) Waters that are designated as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs)

pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303.205 and listed in 35 Ill. Adm. Code

303.206 must not be lowered in quality except as provided below:

A) Activities that result in short-term, temporary (i.e., weeks or

months) lowering of water quality in an ORW; or

B) Existing site stormwater discharges that comply with applicable

federal and State stormwater management regulations and do not

result in a violation of any water quality standards.

2) Any activity in subsection (b)(1)(A) or (b)(1)(B) that requires a National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or a Clean Water Act

(CWA) Section 401 certification must also comply with subsection (c)(2).

3) Any activity listed in subsection (b)(1) or any other proposed increase in

pollutant loading to an ORW must also meet the following requirements:

A) All existing uses of the water will be fully protected; and

B) Except for activities falling under one of the exceptions provided

in subsection (b)(1)(A) or (B) above:,

i) The proposed increase in pollutant loading is necessary for

an activity that will improve water quality in the ORW; and

ii) The improvement could not be practicably achieved

without the proposed increase in pollutant loading.

4) Any proposed increase in pollutant loading requiring an NPDES permit or

a CWA 401 certification for an ORW must be assessed pursuant to

subsection (f) to determine compliance with this Section.

c) High Quality Waters

1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d) of this Section, waters of

the State whose existing quality is better than any of the established

standards of this Part must be maintained in their present high quality,

unless the lowering of water quality is necessary to accommodate

important economic or social development.

2) The Agency must assess any proposed increase in pollutant loading that

necessitates a new, renewed or modified NPDES permit or any activity

requiring a CWA Section 401 certification to determine compliance with

this Section. The assessment to determine compliance with this Section

must be made on a case-by-case basis. In making this assessment, the

Agency must:

A) Consider the fate and effect of any parameters proposed for an

increased pollutant loading.

B) Assure the following:

i) The applicable numeric or narrative water quality standard

will not be exceeded as a result of the proposed activity;

ii) All existing uses will be fully protected;

iii) All technically and economically reasonable measures to

avoid or minimize the extent of the proposed increase in

pollutant loading have been incorporated into the proposed

activity; and

iv) The activity that results in an increased pollutant loading

will benefit the community at large.

C) Utilize the following information sources, when available:

i) Information, data or reports available to the Agency from

its own sources;

ii) Information, data or reports supplied by the applicant;

iii) Agency experience with factually similar permitting

scenarios; and

iv) Any other valid information available to the Agency.

d) Activities Not Subject to a Further Antidegradation Assessment

The following activities will not be subject to a further antidegradation assessment

pursuant to subsection (c) of this Section.

1) Short-term, temporary (i.e., weeks or months) lowering of water quality;

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

3) Response actions pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended,

corrective actions, pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA), as amended, or similar federal or State authority, taken to

alleviate a release into the environment of hazardous substances,

pollutants or contaminants which may pose a danger to public health or

welfare;

4) Thermal discharges that have been approved through a CWA Section

316(a) demonstration;

5) New or increased discharges of a non-contact cooling water:

A) without additives, except as provided in subsection (d)(5)(B),

returned to the same body of water from which it was taken, as

defined by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.104, provided that the discharge

complies with applicable Illinois thermal standards; or

B) containing chlorine when the non-contact cooling water is treated

to remove residual chlorine, and returned to the same body of

water from which it was taken, as defined in 35 Ill. Adm. Code

352.104, provided that the discharge complies with applicable

Illinois thermal and effluent standards at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302,

303, and 304;

6) Discharges permitted under a current general NPDES permit as provided

by 415 ILCS 5/39(b)

or a nationwide or regional CWA Section 404 permit

are not subject to facility-specific antidegradation review; however, the

Agency must assure that individual permits or certifications are required

prior to all new pollutant loadings or hydrological modifications that

necessitate a new, renewed or modified NPDES permit or CWA Section

401 certification that affects waters of particular biological significance.

Waters of particular biological significance may include streams listed in a

1991 publication by the Illinois Department of Conservation entitled

“Biologically Significant Illinois Streams”; or

Changes to or inclusion of a new permit limitation that does not result in

an actual increase of a pollutant loading, such as those stemming from

improved monitoring data, new analytical testing methods, new or revised

technology or water quality based effluent limits.

e) Lake Michigan Basin

Waters in the Lake Michigan basin as identified in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303.443 are also

subject to the requirements applicable to bioaccumulative chemicals of concern found at

Section 302.521 of this Part.

f) Antidegradation Assessments

In conducting an antidegradation assessment pursuant to this Section, the Agency must

comply with the following procedures.

1) A permit application for any proposed increase in pollutant loading that

necessitates the issuance of a new, renewed, or modified NPDES permit or

a CWA Section 401 certification must include, to the extent necessary for

the Agency to determine that the permit application meets the

requirements of this Section, the following information:

A) Identification and characterization of the water body affected by

the proposed load increase or proposed activity and the existing

water body’s uses. Characterization must address physical,

biological and chemical conditions of the water body.

B) Identification and quantification of the proposed load increases for

the applicable parameters and of the potential impacts of the

proposed activity on the affected waters.

C) The purpose and anticipated benefits of the proposed activity. Such

benefits may include:

i) Providing a centralized wastewater collection and treatment

system for a previously unsewered community;

ii) Expansion to provide service for anticipated residential or

industrial growth consistent with a community’s long range

urban planning;

iii) Addition of a new product line or production increase or

modification at an industrial facility; or

iv) An increase or the retention of current employment levels

at a facility.

D) Assessments of alternatives to proposed increases in pollutant

loading or activities subject to Agency certification pursuant to

Section 401 of the CWA that result in less of a load increase, no

load increase or minimal environmental degradation. Such

alternatives may include:

i) Additional treatment levels, including no discharge

alternatives;

ii) Discharge of waste to alternate locations, including

publicly-owned treatment works and streams with greater

assimilative capacity; or

iii) Manufacturing practices that incorporate pollution

prevention techniques.

E) Any additional information the Agency may request.

F) Proof that a copy of the application has been provided to the

Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

2) The Agency must complete an antidegradation assessment in accordance

with the provisions of this Section on a case-by-case basis.

A) The Agency must consider the criteria stated in Section

302.105(c)(2).

B) The Agency must consider the information provided by the

applicant pursuant to subsection (f)(1).

C) After its assessment, the Agency must produce a written analysis

addressing the requirements of this Section and provide a decision

yielding one of the following results:

i) If the proposed activity meets the requirements of this

Section, then the Agency must proceed with public notice

of the NPDES permit or CWA Section 401 certification

and include the written analysis as a part of the fact sheet

accompanying the public notice;

ii) If the proposed activity does not meet the requirements of

this Section, then the Agency must provide a written

analysis to the applicant and must be available to discuss

the deficiencies that led to the disapproval. The Agency

may suggest methods to remedy the conflicts with the

requirements of this Section;

iii) If the proposed activity does not meet the requirements of

this Section, but some lowering of water quality is

allowable, then the Agency will contact the applicant with

the results of the review. If the reduced loading increase is

acceptable to the applicant, upon the receipt of an amended

application, the Agency will proceed to public notice; or if

the reduced loading increase is not acceptable to the

applicant, the Agency will transmit its written review to the

applicant in the context of an a NPDES permit denial or a

CWA Section 401 certification denial.

3) The Agency will conduct public notice and public participation through

the public notice procedures found in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.109 or CWA

Section 401 certifications. The Agency must incorporate the following

information into a fact sheet accompanying the public notice:

A description of the activity, including identification of water

quality parameters for which there will be an increased pollutant

loading;

B) Identification of the affected surface water body or water body

segment, any downstream surface water body or water body

segment also expected to experience a lowering of water quality,

characterization of the designated and current uses of the affected

surface water body or water body segment segments and

identification of which uses are most sensitive to the proposed load

increase;

C) A summary of any review comments and recommendations

provided by Illinois Department of Natural Resources, local or

regional planning commissions, zoning boards and any other

entities the Agency consults regarding the proposal;

D) An overview of alternatives considered by the applicant and

identification of any provisions or alternatives imposed to lessen

the load increase associated with the proposed activity; and

E) The name and telephone number of a contact person at the Agency

who can provide additional information.

(Amended at ____ Ill. Reg. ________, effective ___________________________)

SUBPART B: GENERAL USE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

Section 302.208 Numeric Standards for Chemical Constituents

a) The acute standard (AS) for the chemical constituents listed in subsection (e) shall

not be exceeded at any time except as provided in subsection (d).

b) The chronic standard (CS) for the chemical constituents listed in subsection (e)

shall not be exceeded by the arithmetic average of at least four consecutive

samples collected over any period of at least four days, except as provided in

subsection (d). The samples used to demonstrate attainment compliance or lack

of attainment compliance with a CS must be collected in a manner that which

assures an average representative of the sampling period. For the metals that have

water quality based standards dependent upon hardness, the chronic water quality

standard will be calculated according to subsection (e) using the hardness of the

water body at the time the metals sample was collected. To calculate attainment

status of chronic metals standards, the concentration of the metal in each sample

is divided by the calculated water quality standard for the sample to determine a

quotient. The water quality standard is attained if the mean of the sample

quotients is less than or equal to one for the duration of the averaging period.

c) The human health standard (HHS) for the chemical constituents listed in

subsection (f) shall not be exceeded when the stream flow is at or above the

harmonic mean flow pursuant to Section 302.658 nor shall an annual average,

based on at least eight samples, collected in a manner representative of the

sampling period, exceed the HHS except as provided in subsection (d).

d) In waters where mixing is allowed pursuant to Section 302.102, the following

apply:

1) The AS shall not be exceeded in any waters except for those waters for

which the Agency has approved a zone of initial dilutions (ZID) pursuant

to Section 302.102.

2) The CS shall not be exceeded outside of waters in which mixing is

allowed pursuant to Section 302.102.

3) The HHS shall not be exceeded outside of waters in which mixing is

allowed pursuant to Section 302.102.

e) Numeric Water Quality Standards for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms

(trivalent, dissolved)

01025 01027 exp[A+Bln(H)]

{1.138672-

[(lnH)(0.041838)]}*, but

not to exceed 50 ug/L,

80357 01033 exp[A+Bln(H)]

01040 01042 exp[A+Bln(H)]

01049 01051 exp[A+Bln(H)]

Mercury (dissolved) 71890 71900

2.6 X 0.85*=2.2

1.3 X 0.85*=1.1

Nickel (dissolved) 01065

Zinc (dissolved) 01090

where: μg/L ug/L = microgram per liter,

exp[x] = base natural neutral logarithms raised to the x- power, and

ln(H) = natural logarithm of Hardness (STORET 00900), and .

* = conversion factor multiplier for dissolved metals

f) Numeric Water Quality Standard for the Protection of Human Health

where μg/L ug/L = micrograms per liter

g) Concentrations of the following chemical constituents shall not be exceeded

except in waters for which mixing is allowed pursuant to Section 302.102.

Nickel (total) mg/L 01067

Zinc (total) mg/L 01092

1.0

where: mg/L = milligram per liter and

μg/L ug/L = microgram per liter

(Source: Amended at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

SUBPART E: LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

Section 302.504 Chemical Constituents

The following concentrations of chemical constituents must not be exceeded, except as provided

in Sections 302.102 and 302.530:

a) The following standards must be met in all waters of the Lake Michigan Basin.

Acute aquatic life standards (AS) must not be exceeded at any time except for

those waters for which the Agency has approved a zone of initial dilution (ZID)

pursuant to Sections 302.102 and 302.530. Chronic aquatic life standards (CS)

and human health standards (HHS) must not be exceeded outside of waters in

which mixing is allowed pursuant to Section 302.102 and 302.530 by the

arithmetic average of at least four consecutive samples collected over a period of

at least four days. The samples used to demonstrate compliance with the CS or

HHS must be collected in a manner which assures an average representation of

(Trivalent, dissolved)

(Trivalent, dissolved)

(Weak acid dissociable)

Ethylbenzene 78113 μg/L 150 14 NA

Exp[x] = base of natural logarithms

raised to the x-power

ln(H) = natural logarithm of Hardness

(STORET 00900)

* = conversion factor multiplier for dissolved metals

b) The following water quality standards must not be exceeded at any time in any

waters of the Lake Michigan Basin, unless a different standard is specified under

subsection (c) of this Section.

Constituent STORET

Number

Unit

Water Quality Standard

Total Dissolved Solids

70300 mg/L

1000

c) In addition to the standards specified in subsections (a) and (b) of this Section, the

following standards must not be exceeded at any time in the Open Waters of Lake

Michigan as defined in Section 302.501.

Constituent STORET

Number

Unit

Water Quality Standard

Unit Water Quality Standard

Total Dissolved Solids

70300

mg/L

180.0

Oil (hexane solubles or

d) In addition to the standards specified in subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this

Section, the following human health standards (HHS) must not be exceeded in the

Open Waters of Lake Michigan as defined in Section 302.501 by the arithmetic

average of at least four consecutive samples collected over a period of at least

four days. The samples used to demonstrate compliance with the HHS must be

collected in a manner which assures an average representation of the sampling

Water Quality Standard

Water Quality Standard

For the following bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs), acute aquatic

life standards (AS) must not be exceeded at any time in any waters of the Lake

Michigan Basin and chronic aquatic life standards (CS), human health standards

(HHS), and wildlife standards (WS) must not be exceeded in any waters of the

Lake Michigan Basin by the arithmetic average of at least four consecutive

samples collected over a period of at least four days subject to the limitations of

Sections 302.520 and 302.530. The samples used to demonstrate compliance

with the HHS and WS must be collected in a manner that assures an average

representation of the sampling period.

Where: mg/L = milligrams per liter (10

-3

grams per liter)

g/L = micrograms per liter (10

-6

grams per liter)

ng/L = nanograms per liter (10

-9

grams per liter)

pg/L = picograms per liter (10

-12

grams per liter)

fg/L = femtograms per liter (10

-15

grams per liter)

NA = Not Applied

(Source: Amended at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

Section 302.575 Procedures for Deriving Tier I Water Quality Criteria and Values in the

Lake Michigan Basin to Protect Wildlife

The Lake Michigan Basin Wildlife Criterion (LMWC) is the concentration of a substance which

if not exceeded protects Illinois wild mammal and bird populations from adverse effects

resulting from ingestion of surface waters of the Lake Michigan Basin and from ingestion of

aquatic prey organisms taken from surface waters of the Lake Michigan Basin. Wildlife criteria

calculated under this Section protect against long-term effects and are therefore considered

chronic criteria. The methodology involves utilization of data from test animals to derive criteria

to protect representative or target species: bald eagle, herring gull, belted kingfisher, mink and

river otter. The lower of the geometric mean of species specific criteria for bird species or

mammal species is chosen as the LMWC to protect a broad range of species.

a) This method shall also be used for non-BCCs when appropriately modified to

consider the following factors:

1) Selection of scientifically justified target species;

2) Relevant routes of chemical exposure;

3) Pertinent toxicity endpoints.

b) Minimum data requirements:

1) Test dose (TD). In order to calculate a LMWC the following minimal

data base is required:

A) There must be at least one data set showing dose-response for oral,

subchronic, or chronic exposure of 28 days for one bird species;

and

B) There must be at least one data set showing dose-response for oral,

subchronic, or chronic exposure of 90 days for one mammal

species.

2) Bioaccumulation Factor (BAF) data requirements:

A) For any chemical with a BAF of less than 125 the BAF may be

obtained by any method; and

B) For chemicals with a BAF of greater than 125 the BAF must come

from a field measured BAF or Biota-Sediment Accumulation

Factor (BSAF).

c) Principles for development of criteria

1) Dose standardization. The data for the test species must be expressed as,

or converted to, the form mg/kg/d utilizing the guidelines for drinking and

feeding rates and other procedures in 40 CFR 132, incorporated by

reference at Section 302.510.

2) Uncertainty factors (UF) for utilizing test dose data in the calculation of

the target species value (TSV);.

A) Correction for intermittent exposure. If the animals used in a study

were not exposed to the toxicant each day of the test period, the no

observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) must be multiplied by the

ratio of days of exposure to the total days in the test period.

B) Correction from the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL)

to NOAEL (UFl). For those substances for which a LOAEL has

been derived, the UF1 shall not be less than one and should not

exceed 10.

C) Correction for subchronic to chronic extrapolation (UFs). In

instances where only subchronic data are available, the TD may be

derived from subchronic data. The value of the UFs shall not be

less than one and should not exceed 10.

D) Correction for interspecies extrapolations (UFa). For the

derivation of criteria, a UFa shall not be less than one and should

not exceed 100. The UFa shall be used only for extrapolating

toxicity data across species within a taxonomic class. A species

specific UFa shall be selected and applied to each target species,

consistent with the equation in subsection (d) below.

d) Calculation of TSV. The TSV, measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L), is

calculated according to the equation:

TSV = { [TD x Wt] / [UFa x UFs x UFl] } / { W +

[FTLi x BAFWLTLi] }

Where:

TSV = target species value in milligrams of substance per liter (mg/L).

TD = test dose that is toxic to the test species, either NOAEL or LOAEL.

UFa = the uncertainty factor for extrapolating toxicity data across species

(unitless). A species-specific UFa shall be selected and applied to each target

species, consistent with the equation.

UFs = the uncertainty factor for extrapolating from subchronic to chronic

exposures (unitless)

UFl = the uncertainty factor for extrapolation from LOAEL to NOAEL (unitless)

Wt = average weight in kilograms (kg) of the target species

W = average daily volume of water in liters consumed per day (L/d) by the target

species

FTLi = average daily amount of food consumed by the target species in kilograms

(kg/d) for trophic level i

BAFWLTLi = aquatic life bioaccumulation factor with units of liter per kilogram

(L/kg), as derived from in Section 302.570 for trophic level i

e) Calculation of the Lake Michigan Basin Wildlife Criterion. TSVs are obtained

for each target species. The geometric mean TSVs of all mammal species is

calculated and also of all bird species. The LMWC is the lower of the bird or

mammal geometric mean TSV.

(Source: Amended __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

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 Water

Reclamation 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

304.207

Galesburg Sanitary District Deoxygenating Wastes Discharges

304.208

City of Lockport Treatment Plant Discharges

304.209

Wood River Station Total Suspended Solid 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

PDV Midwest Refining, L.L.C. 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. 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 R86-17(B) 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 R88-21(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. 267, effective December 23,

1993; 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 21 Ill. Reg. 364, effective

December 23, 1996; expedited correction in R94-1(B) at 21 Ill. Reg. 6269, effective December

23, 1996; amended in R97-25 at 22 Ill. Reg. 1351, effective December 24, 1997; amended in

R97-28 at 22 Ill. Reg. 3512, effective February 3, 1998; amended in R98-14 at 22 Ill. Reg. 687,

effective December 31, 1998; amended in R02-19 at Ill. Reg. , effective

; amended in R02-11 at Ill. Reg. , effective .

BOARD NOTE: This Part implements the Illinois Environmental Protection Act of July 1,

1994.

SUBPART A: GENERAL EFFLUENT STANDARDS

Section 304.120 Deoxygenating Wastes

Except as provided in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 306.SubpartC Section 306.103, all effluents containing

deoxygenating wastes shall meet the following standards:

a) No effluent shall exceed 30 mg/L mg/l of five day biochemical oxygen demand

(BOD5) (STORET number 00310) or 30 mg/L mg/l of suspended solids

(STORET number 00530), except that treatment works employing three stage

lagoon treatment systems which are properly designed, maintained and operated,

and whose effluent has a dilution ratio no less than five to one or who qualify for

exceptions under subsection (c) shall not exceed 37 mg/L mg/l of suspended

solids.

b) No effluent from any source whose untreated waste load is 10,000 population

equivalents or more, or from any source discharging into the Chicago River

System or into the Calumet River System, shall exceed 20 mg/L mg/l of BOD5 or

25 mg/L mg/l of suspended solids.

c) No effluent whose dilution ratio is less than five to one shall exceed 10 mg/L mg/l

of BOD5 or 12 mg/L mg/l of suspended solids, except that sources employing

third-stage treatment lagoons shall be exempt from this subsection (c) provided

all of the following conditions are met:

1) The waste source qualifies under one of the following categories:

A) Any wastewater treatment works with an untreated waste load less

than 2500 population equivalents, which is sufficiently isolated

that combining with other sources to aggregate 2500 population

equivalents or more is not practicable.

B) Any wastewater treatment works in existence and employing third-

stage treatment lagoons on January 1, 1986, whose untreated waste

load is 5000 population equivalents or less and sufficiently isolated

that combining to aggregate 5000 population equivalents or more

is not practicable.

C) Any wastewater treatment works with an untreated waste load of

5000 population equivalents or less, which has reached the end of

its useful life by January 1, 1987, and is sufficiently isolated that

combining to aggregate 5000 population equivalents or more is not

practicable.

D) Any wastewater treatment works with an untreated waste load of

5000 population equivalents or less which has reached the end of

its useful life and which has received an adjusted standard

determination from the Board that it qualifies for a lagoon

exemption. Such a Board determination will only be made in an

adjusted standard proceeding, held in accordance with Section 28.1

of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/28.1 Ill. Rev.

Stat. 1987, ch. 111 ½, par. 1028.1) and applicable procedures set

forth by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 104106.

i) In an adjusted standard proceeding the Board may

determine that the petitioning wastewater treatment source

qualifies for a lagoon exemption if the wastewater

treatment works proves that it is so situated that a land

treatment system is not a suitable treatment alternative.

Factors relevant to a suitability finding may include the

following: cost; influent character; geographic

characteristics; climate; soil conditions; hydrologic

conditions; and the availability of irrigable land.

ii) For the purposes of this subsection (c)(i)(D), a land

treatment system is a wastewater treatment system which

does not directly discharge treated effluent to waters of the

State but instead uses the treated effluent to irrigate

terrestrial vegetation;.

2) The lagoons are properly constructed, maintained and operated; and

3) The deoxygenating constituents of the effluent do not, alone or in

combination with other sources, cause a violation of the applicable

dissolved oxygen water quality standard.

d) No effluent discharged to the Lake Michigan basin shall exceed 4 mg/L mg/l of

BOD5 or 5 mg/L mg/l of suspended solids.

e) Compliance with the numerical standards in this Section shall be determined on

the basis of the type and frequency of sampling prescribed by the NPDES permit

for the discharge at the time of monitoring.

f) For the purposes of this Section, useful life is the period of time during which it is

cost effective to operate and maintain a particular wastewater treatment works

under consideration. At a minimum, the following factors relating to a

wastewater treatment works shall be considered in a determination of its useful

life:

1) Structural and operational condition of components;

2) Past operations and maintenance record;

3) Cost for continued use; and

4) Description and costs of for treatment alternatives.

g) Compliance with the 5 day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) numerical

standard in this Part will be determined by the analysis of 5 day carbonaceous

biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) (STORET number 80082), unless federal

regulations require treatment works treating industrial wastes to comply with

more stringent requirements determined by the analysis of BOD5. Effluent from

the treatment works subject to the requirements of Section 304.120(a) shall not

exceed 25 mg/L CBOD5.

(Source: Amended at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________).

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE C: WATER POLLUTION

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PART 309

PERMITS

SUBPART A: NPDES PERMITS

Section

309.101 Preamble

309.102

NPDES Permit Required

309.103

Application - General

309.104 Renewal

309.105

Authority to Deny NPDES Permits

309.106

Access to Facilities and Further Information

309.107

Distribution of Applications

309.108

Tentative Determination and Draft Permit

309.109 Public Notice

309.110

Contents of Public Notice of Application

309.111 Combined Notices

309.112

Agency Action After Comment Period

309.113 Fact Sheets

309.114

Notice to Other Governmental Agencies

309.115

Public Hearings on NPDES Permit Applications

309.116

Notice of Agency Hearing

309.117 Agency Hearing

309.118

Agency Hearing File

309.119

Agency Action After Hearing

309.141

Terms and Conditions of NPDES Permits

309.142

Water Quality Standards and Waste Load Allocation

309.143 Effluent Limitations

309.144

Federal New Source Standards of Performance

309.145

Duration of Permits

309.146

Authority to Establish Recording, Reporting, Monitoring and Sampling

Requirements

309.147

Authority to Apply Entry and Inspection Requirements

309.148

Schedules of Compliance

309.149

Authority to Require Notice of Introduction of Pollutants into Publicly

Owned Treatment Works

309.150

Authority to Ensure Compliance by Industrial Users with Sections 204(b),

307 and 308 of the Clean Water Act

309.151

Maintenance and Equipment

309.152 Toxic Pollutants

309.153

Deep Well Disposal of Pollutants (Repealed)

309.154

Authorization to Construct

309.155

Sewage Sludge Disposal

309.156

Total Dissolved Solids Reporting and Monitoring

309.157

Permit Limits for Total Metals

309.181

Appeal of Final Agency Action on a Permit Application

309.182

Authority to Modify, Suspend or Revoke Permits

309.183

Revision of Schedule of Compliance

309.184

Permit Modification Pursuant to Variance

309.185

Public Access to Information

309.191 Effective Date

SUBPART B: OTHER PERMITS

Section

309.201 Preamble

309.202 Construction Permits

309.203

Operating Permits; New or Modified Sources

309.204

Operating Permits; Existing Sources

309.205

Joint Construction and Operating Permits

309.206 Experimental Permits

309.207

Former Permits (Repealed)

309.208

Permits for Sites Receiving Sludge for Land Application

309.221

Applications - Contents

309.222

Applications - Signatures and Authorizations

309.223

Applications - Registered or Certified Mail

309.224

Applications - Time to Apply

309.225

Applications - Filing and Final Action By by Agency

309.241

Standards for Issuance

309.242

Duration of Permits Issued Under Subpart B

309.243 Conditions

309.244

Appeals from Conditions in Permits

309.261

Permit No Defense

309.262

Design, Operation and Maintenance Criteria

309.263

Modification of Permits

309.264 Permit Revocation

309.265

Approval of Federal Permits

309.266 Procedures

309.281 Effective Date

309.282 Severability

Appendix A

References to Previous Rules

AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 13 and 13.3 and authorized by Section 27 of the

Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/13, 13.3 and 27].

SOURCE: Adopted in R71-14, at 4 PCB 3, March 7, 1972; amended in R73-11, 12, at 14 PCB

661, December 5, 1974, at 16 PCB 511, April 24, 1975, and at 28 PCB 509, December 20, 1977;

amended in R73-11, 12, at 29 PCB 477, at 2 Ill. Reg. 16, p. 20, effective April 20, 1978;

amended in R79-13, at 39 PCB 263, at 4 Ill. Reg. 34, p. 159, effective August 7, 1980; amended

in R77-12B, at 41 PCB 369, at 5 Ill. Reg. 6384, effective May 28, 1981; amended in R76-21, at

44 PCB 203, at 6 Ill. Reg. 563, effective December 24, 1981; codified at 6 Ill. Reg. 7818;

amended in R82-5, 10, at 54 PCB 411, at 8 Ill. Reg. 1612, effective January 18, 1984; amended

in R86-44 at 12 Ill. Reg. 2495 effective January 13, 1988; amended in R88-1 at 13 Ill. Reg.

5993, effective April 18, 1989; amended in R88-21(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 2892, effective February

13, 1990; amended in R91-5 at 16 Ill. Reg. 7339, effective April 27, 1992; amended in R95-22 at

20 Ill. Reg. 5526, effective April 1, 1996; amended in R99-8 at 23 Ill. Reg. 11287, effective

August 26, 1999; amended in R02-11 at Ill. Reg. , effective

SUBPART A: NPDES PERMITS

Section 309.141 Terms and Conditions of NPDES Permits

In establishing the terms and conditions of each issued NPDES Permit, the Agency shall apply

and ensure compliance with all of the following, whenever applicable:

a) Effluent limitations under Sections 301 and 302 of the CWA;

b) Standards of performance for new sources under Section 306 of the CWA;

c) Effluent standards, effluent prohibitions, and pretreatment standards under

Section 307 of the CWA;

d) Any more stringent limitation, including those:

1) necessary to meet water quality standards, treatment standards, or

schedules of compliance, established pursuant to any Illinois statute or

regulation (under authority preserved by Section 510 of the CWA),

2) necessary to meet any other federal law or regulation, or

3) required to implement any applicable water quality standards,; such

limitations to include any legally applicable requirements necessary to

implement total maximum daily loads established pursuant to Section

303(d) of the CWA and incorporated in the continuing planning process

approved under Section 303(e) of the CWA and any regulations or

guidelines issued pursuant thereto;

e) Any more stringent legally applicable requirements necessary to comply with a

plan approved pursuant to Section 208(b) of the CWA;

f) Prior to promulgation by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency of applicable effluent standards and limitations pursuant to Sections 301,

302, 306 and 307 of the CWA, such conditions as the Agency determines are

necessary to carry out the provisions of the CWA;

g) If the NPDES Permit is for the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters from

a vessel or other floating craft (except that no NPDES Permit shall be issued for

the discharge of pollutants from a vessel or other floating craft into Lake

Michigan), any applicable regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the

Department in which the Coast Guard is operating, establishing specifications for

safe transportation, handling, carriage, storage and stowage of pollutants; and

h) If the NPDES Permit is for the discharge of pollutants from other than wet

weather point sources into the Lake Michigan Basin as defined at 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 303.443:

1) Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Waste Load Allocation

(WLA) will be established through either the LaMP or a RAP for an Area

of Concern. If a LaMP or RAP has not been completed and adopted,

effluent limits shall be established consistent with the other provisions of

this Section, including, but not limited to, Additivity, Intake Pollutants,

Loading Limits, Level of Detection/Level of Quantification and

Compliance Schedules. When calculation of TMDLs or a WLA Waste

Load Allocation is incomplete and it is expected that limits established

through other provisions will be superseded upon completion of the

TMDL or WLA Waste Load Allocation process, those limits shall be

identified as interim and the permit shall include a reopener clause

triggered by completion of a TMDL or WLA determination. Any new

limits brought about through exercise of the reopener clause shall be

eligible for delayed compliance dates and compliance schedules consistent

with Section 39(b) of the Act [415 ILCS 5/39(b)], 35 Ill. Adm. Code

309.148, and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.Subpart H.

2) 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.590 establishes an acceptable additive risk level of

one in 100,000 (10

(-5)) for establishing Tier I criteria and Tier II values

for combinations of substances exhibiting a carcinogenic or other

nonthreshold toxic mechanism. For those discharges containing multiple

nonthreshold substances application of this additive standard shall be

consistent with this subsection (h).

A) For discharges in the Lake Michigan Basin basin containing one or

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

substituted dibenzofurans, the tetrachloro dibenzo-p-dioxin

2,3,7,8-(TCDD) toxicity equivalence concentration (TECTCDD)

shall be determined as outlined in subsection (h)(2)(B).

B) The values listed in the following Table 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

C) Any combination of carcinogenic or otherwise nonthreshold toxic

substances shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis. The Agency

shall only consider such additivity for chemicals that exhibit the

same type of effect and the same mechanism of toxicity, based on

available scientific information that supports a reasonable

assumption of additive effects.

Conversion factors for determining the dissolved concentration of metals

from the total recoverable concentration.

The numeric standards for certain metal parameters in 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 302.504 are established as dissolved forms of the substance

since the dissolved form more closely relates to the toxicology

literature utilized in deriving the standard. However, most

discharge monitoring data used in deriving a PEQ will be from a

total recoverable analytical method and permit limits if and when

established will be set at total recoverable to accommodate the

total recoverable analytical method. The Agency will use a

conversion factor to determine the amount of total metal

corresponding to dissolved metal for each metal with a water

quality standard set at dissolved concentration. In the absence of

facility specific data the following default conversion factors will

be used for both PEQ derivation and establishing WQBELs. The

conversion factor represents the portion of the total recoverable

metal presumed to be in dissolved form. The conversion values

given in the following table are multiplied by the appropriate total

recoverable metal concentration to obtain a corresponding

dissolved concentration that then may be compared to the acute or

chronic standard. A dissolved metal concentration may be divided

by the conversion factor to obtain a corresponding total metal

value that will generally be the metal form regulated in NPDES

permits.

Metal Conversion

Factor

Acute Standard Chronic Standard

Arsenic

1.000 1.000

Cadmium 0.850 0.850

Chromium (Trivalent) 0.316 0.860

Chromium (Hexavalent)

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 (h)(3)(A).

3 4) Reasonable potential to exceed.

A) The first step in determining if a reasonable potential to exceed the

water quality standard exists for any particular pollutant parameter

is the estimation of the maximum expected effluent concentration

for that substance. That estimation will be completed for both

acute and chronic exposure periods and is termed the PEQ. The

PEQ shall be derived from representative facility specific data to

reflect a 95 percent confidence level for the 95th percentile value.

These data will be presumed to adhere to a lognormal distribution

pattern unless the actual effluent data demonstrates a different

distribution pattern. If facility specific data in excess of 10 data

values is available, a coefficient of variation that is the ratio of the

standard deviation to the arithmetic average shall be calculated by

the Agency. The PEQ is derived as the upper bound of a 95

percent confidence bracket around the 95th percentile value

through a multiplier from the following table applied to the

maximum value in the data set that has its quality assured

consistent with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.410 as appropriate for acute

and chronic data sets.

PEQ = (maximum data point)(statistical multiplier)

Coefficient of Variation

No.

Samples

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3

12.6 15.5 18.7 22.3 26.4

1.3 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.1 3.8 4.6 5.4 6.4 7.4 8.5 9.7

10.9

1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.6 5.2 5.8 6.5 7.2

1.2 1.4 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.7 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.5

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.5

1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 3.9

1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.5

1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2

1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.9

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2

1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1

1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0

1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9

1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9

1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8

1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7

1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4

1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

60 or

greater

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

i) If the PEQ is less than or equal to the water quality

standard, there is no reasonable potential and no limit will

be established in the permit.

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

Agency will proceed to consideration of dilution and

mixing pursuant to subsection (h)(45).

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

alternative PEQ shall be derived using the table in subsection

(h)(34)(A) assuming a coefficient of variation of 0.6, applied to the

maximum value in the data set that has its quality assured

consistent with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.410.

i) If the PEQ is less than or equal to the water quality

standard, there is no reasonable potential and no limit will

be established in the permit.

ii) If the PEQ exceeds the water quality standard, an

alternative PEQ will be calculated using the maximum

value in the data set and a multiplier of 1.4. If the

alternative PEQ also exceeds the water quality standard,

the Agency will proceed to consider dilution and mixing

pursuant to subsection (h)(45).

iii) If the PEQ exceeds the water quality standard but the

alternative PEQ is less than or equal to the standard, the

Agency will either proceed to consider dilution and mixing

pursuant to subsection (h)(45), 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 water

quality based effluent limitations (WQBELs). The Agency shall

use daily effluent data values to determine whether a potential

exists to exceed acute aquatic life water quality standards.

D) The Agency may apply other scientifically defensible statistical

methods for calculating PEQ for use in the reasonable potential

analysis as provided for in Procedure 5.b.2 of Appendix F to 40

CFR 132, incorporated by reference at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.106.

E) Regardless of the statistical procedure used, if the PEQ for the

parameter is less than or equal to the water quality standard for that

parameter, the Agency shall deem the discharge not to have a

reasonable potential to exceed, and a water quality based effluent

limit (WQBEL) shall not be required unless otherwise required

under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.430.

4 5) If the PEQ for a parameter is greater than the particular water quality

standard, criteria or value for that parameter, the Agency will assess the

level of treatment being provided by the discharger. If the discharger is

providing (or will be providing) a level of treatment consistent with the

best degree of treatment required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.102(a), the

PEQ derived under subsection (h)(34) 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) Bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs):

i) No mixing shall be allowed for new discharges of BCCs

commencing on or after December 24, 1997. The PEL will

be set equivalent to the water quality standard.

ii) Mixing shall be allowed for discharges of BCCs which

existed as of December 24, 1997 in accordance with the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.530.

C) 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.

5 6) Preliminary effluent limitations calculations.

(A) The preliminary effluent limitation (PEL) is calculated in a simple

mass balance approach reflecting the dilution allowance

established in subsection (h)(45):

WQS = [(Qe)(PEL) + (Qd)(Cd)] / [Qe + Qd] or

PEL = [WQS(Qe + Qd) - (Qd)(Cd)] / Qe

WHERE:

WQS = applicable water quality standard, criteria or value

Qe = effluent flowrate

Qd = allowable dilution flowrate

Cd = background pollutant concentration in dilution water

B) The representative background concentration of pollutants to

develop TMDLs and WLAs calculated in the absence of a TMDL

shall be established as follows:

i) "Background" represents all pollutant loadings, specifically

loadings that flow from upstream waters into the specified

watershed, water body, or water body segment for which a

TMDL or WLA in the absence of a TMDL is being

developed and enter the specified watershed, water body,

or water body segment through atmospheric deposition,

chemical reaction, or sediment release or resuspension.

(ii) When determining what available data are acceptable for

use in calculating background, the Agency shall use its best

professional judgment, including consideration of the

sampling location and the reliability of the data through

comparison, in part, to detection and quantification levels.

When data in more than 1 of the data sets or categories

described in subsection (h)(56)(B)(iii) exists, best

professional judgment shall be used to select the data that

most accurately reflects or estimates background

concentrations. Pollutant degradation and transport

information may be considered when using pollutant

loading data to estimate a water column concentration.

(iii) The representative background concentration for a

pollutant in the specified watershed, water body, or water

body segment shall be established on a case-by-case basis

as the geometric mean of: acceptable water column data;

water column concentrations estimated through use of

acceptable caged or resident fish tissue 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, commonly accepted statistical techniques shall be

used to evaluate the data. 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.

6 7) Water quality based effluent limitations.

A) If the PEQ is less than or equal to the PEL, it will be concluded

that there is no reasonable potential to exceed. Under such

circumstances a permit limit for that contaminant will not be set

unless otherwise justified under one or more provisions of 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 352.430.

B) If the PEQ is equal to or greater than the PEL, and the PEQ was

calculated using a data set of more than 10 values, a water quality

based effluent limitation (WQBEL) will be included in the permit.

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

10 values, and the alternative PEQ calculated under subsection

(h)(4)(B) also exceeds the PEL, a WQBEL will be included in the

permit.

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

10 values, and the PEQ is greater than the PEL but the alternative

PEQ is less than the PEL, the Agency will either establish a

WQBEL in the permit or incorporate a monitoring requirement and

reopener clause to reassess potential to exceed within a specified

time schedule, not to exceed one year. In determining which of

these options to use in any individual application, the Agency shall

consider the operational and economic impacts on the permittee

and the effect, if any, deferral of a final decision would have on an

ultimate compliance schedule if a permit limit were subsequently

determined to be necessary.

D) The WQBEL will be set at the PEL, unless the PEL is

appropriately modified to reflect credit for intake pollutants when

the discharged water originates in the same water body to which it

is being discharged. Consideration of intake credit will be limited

to the provisions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 352.425.

E) The reasonable potential analysis shall be completed separately for

acute and chronic aquatic life effects. When WQBELs are based

on acute impacts, the limit will be expressed as a daily maximum.

When the WQBEL is based on chronic effects, the limit will be

expressed as a monthly average. Human health and wildlife based

WQBELs will be expressed as monthly averages. If circumstances

warrant, the Agency shall consider alternatives to daily and

monthly limits.

(Source: Amended at __________ Ill. Reg. _______________, effective ________________)

Section 309.157 Permit Limits for Total Metals

The NPDES permit limits for metals must be expressed in total metals form even

though the water quality standards for metals specified in Sections 302.208(e),

302.504(a), and 304.105 are in their dissolved form. The total metals permit limit

shall be determined by multiplying the dissolved metals concentration and the

appropriate metals translator.

The Agency shall adopt procedures for determining site-specific metals translator

in accordance with “The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total

Recoverable Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion,” incorporated by reference

at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 301.106.

Except as otherwise specified in subsection (d) of this Section, the reciprocal of

the conversion factor multiplier used for obtaining the dissolved metals standards

at Sections 302.208(e), and 302.504(a) becomes the metals translator and the

resulting total metals value becomes the NPDES permit limit.

A permittee may request the Agency, in accordance with the procedures adopted

pursuant to subsection (b) of this Section, to calculate a total metals permit limit

based on a site-specific metals translator. Upon review and approval of the

information submitted by the permittee, the Agency will calculate a total metals

permit limit that is protective of the dissolved metals water quality standard.

(Source: Added at ________ Ill. Reg. ________________, effective ____________)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board

adopted the above opinion and order on October 17, 2002, by a vote of 6-0.

Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board