Chapter NR 212

NR 212.065 History History: Cr. Register, May, 1986, No. 365, eff. 6-1-86.

NR 212.07 NR 212.07 Allocation for reserve capacity. The allocation for a reserve capacity for a particular stream segment shall be zero unless otherwise specified in ss. NR 212.40 to 212.70.

NR 212.07 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; am. Register, May, 1985, No. 353, eff. 6-1-85.

NR 212.08 NR 212.08 Allocation for margin of safety. The allocation for a margin of safety shall be zero unless otherwise specified in ss. NR 212.40 to 212.70.

NR 212.08 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; am. Register, May, 1985, No. 353, eff. 6-1-85.

NR 212.09 NR 212.09 Nonpoint source allocation. The allocation for nonpoint sources shall be zero unless otherwise specified in ss. NR 212.40 to 212.70.

NR 212.09 Note Note: For those stream conditions where the allocation of water quality related effluent limitations is necessary, nonpoint source effects on stream segments will normally be accounted for in the water quality model or other technical analysis used to determine the total maximum load. In unforeseen circumstances requiring the specific allocation of a portion of the total maximum load for contributions from nonpoint sources, s. NR 212.09 can be used. Direct control of contributions from nonpoint sources will be implemented through land management control practices and will not normally be included in a waste load allocation.

NR 212.09 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; am. Register, May, 1985, No. 353, eff. 6-1-85.

NR 212.10 NR 212.10 Point source allocations.

NR 212.10(1) (1) The water quality related effluent limitations for a point source discharge to a stream segment which is not impacted by any other point source shall be calculated by subtracting any allocations for reserve capacity, margin of safety or nonpoint sources from the total maximum loading.

NR 212.10(2) (2) The procedures for determining water quality related effluent limitations for point source dischargers to a stream segment affected by more than one discharger are found in ss. NR 212.40 to 212.70.

NR 212.10(3) (3) The department may permit point source water quality related effluent limitations to vary according to flow, temperature or other water quality conditions only when all of the following are met:

NR 212.10(3)(a) (a) The limitations shall result in the attainment of water quality standards; and

NR 212.10(3)(b) (b) During the term of the permit the discharger provides sufficient monitoring capability where such capability does not otherwise exist.

NR 212.10(4) (4) Water quality related effluent limits shall be expressed as daily maximum loads. Consistent with techniques established under ss. NR 212.40 through 212.70 effluent limits may be expressed as averages in conjunction with daily maximum limits if the permittee demonstrates that such limits would not increase the probability of water quality standards violations. The flow and temperature measurements of stream conditions for flow and temperature related permits may be based on averages in cases where averages better approximate actual river conditions.

NR 212.10 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; am. (2) and (4), Register, May, 1985, No. 353, eff. 6-1-85.

NR 212.11 NR 212.11 Modifications and temporary reallocation of point source allocations.

NR 212.11(1) (1) When a discharger to a publicly-owned point source covered by this chapter applies to receive a separate WPDES permit or when a person with a WPDES permit applies to terminate its direct discharge in order to contribute to a publicly-owned point source covered by this chapter, permit modification procedures contained in ss. 283.37 and 283.53 (2), Stats., shall apply. Any reallocation pursuant to such action shall only affect the applicant and the publicly-owned point source to which it discharges.

NR 212.11(2) (2) Procedures for temporary reallocation for individual stream segments are identified in ss. NR 212.40 through 212.70. Notwithstanding procedures identified in ss. NR 212.40 through 212.70, temporary reallocation of wasteload allocations may be allowed under the following conditions:

NR 212.11(2)(a) (a) Reallocations approved by the department shall be for at least one calendar year and shall expire at the end of the affected discharger’s WPDES permit term;

NR 212.11(2)(b) (b) Reallocations shall account for differences in waste characteristics and location of discharge as determined by the department and may not adversely affect a downstream segment’s wasteload allocation; and

NR 212.11(2)(c) (c) Reallocations may not affect baseline loads in affected stream segments but may result in an adjustment to total maximum daily loads identified in ss. NR 212.40 through 212.70.

NR 212.11(3) (3) Reallocations may not be approved by the department until the discharger applying for a reallocation demonstrates through the use of a toxicity test approved by the department that such reallocation will not result in toxicity in the receiving water.

NR 212.11(4) (4) Prior to department approval of a reallocation, all parties to the transfer shall waive all rights under s. 227.51, Stats., to retain any reallocation beyond the expiration date of the WPDES permit of the dischargers applying to receive a reallocation. The waiver shall be effectuated through incorporation into the WPDES permit of the affected discharger.

NR 212.11 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; r. and recr. Register, August, 1985, No. 356, eff. 9-1-85.

NR 212.115 NR 212.115 Transferable wasteload allocation.

NR 212.115(1) (1) Transfers of wasteload allocations between point source dischargers may be allowed through the permit issuance or modification process under the following conditions:

NR 212.115(1)(a) (a) The discharger applying to receive a transfer secures a legally binding agreement approved by the department, that the WPDES permit allocations for one or more existing dischargers shall be reduced by an amount sufficient to prevent the total maximum load under ss. NR 212.40 to 212.70 from being exceeded;

NR 212.115(1)(b) (b) The department shall consider the differences in waste characteristics and location of the affected point sources to determine amounts by which the existing point source allocations are reduced; and

NR 212.115(1)(c) (c) Transfer agreements approved by the department shall be for at least one wasteload allocation season and may not extend beyond the term of the seller’s discharge permit.

NR 212.115(1)(d) (d) Transfers may not be approved by the department until the discharger applying for an increased wasteload allocation demonstrates through the use of a toxicity test approved by the department that the transfer will not result in a failure, as defined by the department, of the toxicity test.

NR 212.115(2) (2) Prior to department approval of a transfer, the discharger applying for an increased wasteload allocation shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the department that the increase is needed due to:

NR 212.115(2)(a) (a) New production by a new discharger,

NR 212.115(2)(b) (b) Increased production which cannot be accommodated by the current treatment facility, or

NR 212.115(2)(c) (c) The inability of the current waste treatment facility to meet current wasteload allocations despite optimal operation and maintenance of the treatment facility.

NR 212.115(3) (3) Prior to department approval of a transfer, all parties to the transfer shall waive all rights under s. 227.51, Stats., to retain any transfer beyond the expiration date of the WPDES permit of the dischargers applying to receive a transfer. The waiver shall be incorporated into both the legally binding agreement in sub. (1) (a) and the WPDES permit of all parties to the agreement.

NR 212.115 History History: Cr. Register, March, 1986, No. 363, eff. 4-1-86.

NR 212.12 NR 212.12 Instream aeration.

NR 212.12(1) (1) Total maximum loads established under this chapter may be calculated based on the use of instream aeration techniques when WPDES permit applications meet both the following conditions:

NR 212.12(1)(a) (a) A cost-effectiveness analysis is submitted to the department which demonstrates that instream aeration is a satisfactory means of attaining water quality standards; and

NR 212.12(1)(b) (b) A demonstration is made to the satisfaction of the department that applicable water quality standards will be met and no environmental pollution as defined in s. 299.01 (4), Stats., will occur.

NR 212.12(2) (2) Instream aeration may not be used to accommodate new or increased discharges of pollutants either from new point sources or from the expansion of existing point sources, except that instream aeration may be available on a temporary basis to accommodate increased pollution loads due to the growth of a municipality when:

NR 212.12(2)(a) (a) The use of aeration for this purpose is restricted to residential or public sector growth;

NR 212.12(2)(b) (b) Adequate operation and maintenance of the publicly-owned point source exists;

NR 212.12(2)(c) (c) Excessive infiltration and inflow have been removed from the collection systems;

NR 212.12(2)(d) (d) No bypasses occur that are not approved by the department; and

NR 212.12(2)(e) (e) The municipality has taken all reasonable steps to obtain federal and state financing for its point source.

NR 212.12(3) (3) The use of instream aeration under sub. (2) shall be allowed for a period not to exceed 5 years, at which time the publicly-owned point source shall have sufficient treatment capability in place to meet the waste water treatment needs as required by an approved municipal waste water treatment facility plan developed under ch. NR 110.

NR 212.12 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; CR 15-085: am. (2) (d) Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

NR 212.13 NR 212.13 Flow reregulation.

NR 212.13(1) (1) Total maximum loads established under this chapter may be calculated based on the use of flow reregulation techniques when WPDES permit applicants meet all of the following conditions:

NR 212.13(1)(a) (a) A cost-effectiveness analysis is submitted to the department which demonstrates that flow reregulation is a satisfactory means of attaining water quality standards.

NR 212.13(1)(b) (b) A technical analysis is presented to the satisfaction of the department which determines the critical water quality conditions for the affected stream segment as a function of the flow reregulation technique.

NR 212.13(1)(c) (c) Legally binding assurances are provided to the satisfaction of the department that the entity responsible for reregulating flows on the affected stream segment will undertake the agreed-upon flow reregulation activities.

NR 212.13(1)(d) (d) The flow reregulation does not interfere with the uses for which the impoundment was authorized.

NR 212.13(2) (2) Flow reregulation may not be used to accommodate new discharges of pollutants either from new point sources or from the expansion of existing point sources.

NR 212.13(3) (3) Flow reregulation may not be accomplished by the construction of new impoundments built for the primary purpose of increasing flows to accommodate pollution loadings.

NR 212.13(4) (4) Flow reregulation may not be accomplished by flow augmentation practices which would increase the overall quantity of surface water in the basin. Prohibited practices include interbasin transfers or groundwater pumping.

NR 212.13 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81.

NR 212.40 NR 212.40 Determination of lower Fox river water quality related effluent limitations. Effluent limitations for point sources discharging BOD5 to the lower Fox river shall be calculated according to the procedures contained in this section. These limitations shall apply from May 1 to October 31 annually.

NR 212.40(1) (1) 

NR 212.40(1)(a) (a) The total maximum daily BOD5 loads which are available for allocation to point sources discharging to the lower Fox river between milepoints 40.0 and 32.4 are shown in Table 1-a.

NR 212.40(1)(b) (b) The total maximum daily BOD5 loads which are available for allocation to point sources discharging to the lower Fox river between milepoints 32.4 and 19.2 are shown in Table 1-b.

NR 212.40(1)(c) (c) The total maximum daily BOD5 loads which are available for allocation to point sources discharging to the lower Fox river between milepoints 7.2 and 0.0 are shown in Table 1-c. For the period June 1 through June 30 of each year, section A of the MAY-JUNE table shall be replaced with section A of the JULY-AUGUST table. The total maximum daily BOD5 loads shown in Table 1-c have been determined in accord with ss. NR 102.02 and 102.03 to maintain the dissolved oxygen criteria except for natural conditions and the historically altered hydraulic characteristics.

NR 212.40(2) (2) The department shall determine baseline loads for each point source subject to the wasteload allocation in accordance with all of the following:

NR 212.40(2)(a) (a) Publicly-owned point sources between milepoints 40.0 and 19.2. The baseline load expressed in pounds per day for each publicly-owned point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(2)(am) (am) Publicly-owned point sources between milepoints 7.2 and 0.0. The baseline load expressed in pounds per day for each publicly-owned point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(2)(b) (b) Nonpublicly-owned point sources between milepoints 40.0 and 19.2. The baseline load expressed in pounds per day for each nonpublicly-owned point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(2)(c) (c) Nonpublicly-owned point sources between milepoints 7.2 and 0.0. The baseline load expressed in pounds per day for each nonpublicly-owned point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(2)(d) (d) Mini-cluster adjustment. The baseline load for nonpublicly-owned point sources between milepoints 0.8 and 0.5, and 0.4 and 0.0 shall be adjusted by subtracting 10% of the contractual maximum daily BOD5 discharged to the publicly-owned point source located between milepoint 1.0 and 0.0. The 10% contractual maximum figure for both non-publicly-owned point sources shall be added to the baseline load for the publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 1.0 and 0.0.

NR 212.40(3) (3) 

NR 212.40(3)(a) (a) Determine the reserve capacity adjustment. The reserve capacity for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 40.0 and 19.2 shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(3)(b) (b) The reserve capacity for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 7.0 and 6.0 shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(3)(c) (c) The reserve capacity for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 1.0 and 0.0 shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(4) (4) Determine the adjustments to the baseline loads.

NR 212.40(4)(a) (a) The adjusted baseline load for each publicly-owned point source shall be equal to the baseline load for the source calculated in sub. (2) (a) or (am) plus the reserve capacity for the same source calculated in sub. (3), plus the mini-cluster adjustment, if any, calculated in sub. (2) (d).

NR 212.40(4)(b) (b) The adjusted baseline load for each nonpublicly-owned point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(4)(c) (c) The adjusted baseline load for publicly-owned and nonpublicly-owned point sources from milepoints 32.4 through 19.2 shall include an incremental addition as follows:

NR 212.40(4)(d) (d) The adjusted baseline load for nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoint 0.8 and 0.5 shall be reduced by 2500 pounds of BOD5 from the amount calculated in par. (b).

NR 212.40(5) (5) Determine the allocation for each point source. The allocation for each point source shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.40(6) (6) For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.40(6)(a) (a) For a point source discharging into the lower Fox river from milepoints 40.0 through 19.2, the sum of the actual daily discharges for any 7-consecutive-day-period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under sub. (5) for the same 7-consecutive-day-period; and

NR 212.40(6)(am) (am) For a point source discharging into the lower Fox river from milepoints 7.2 through 0.0, the sum of the actual daily discharges for any 7-consecutive-day-period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under sub. (5) for the same 7-consecutive-day-period; and

NR 212.40(6)(b) (b) For any one day period;

NR 212.40(6)(b)1. 1. For a point source discharging into the lower Fox river between milepoints 40.0 through 32.4, the actual discharge may not exceed 138% of the allocation for that day as calculated under sub. (5).

NR 212.40(6)(b)2. 2. For a point source discharging into the lower Fox river between milepoints 32.4 and 19.2, the actual discharge may not exceed 120.0% of the allocation for that day as calculated under sub. (5).

NR 212.40(6)(b)3. 3. For a point source discharging into the lower Fox river between milepoints 7.2 and 0.0, the actual discharge may not exceed 134% of the allocation for that day as calculated under sub. (5).

NR 212.40(7) (7) The flow and temperature conditions used to determine compliance with permit effluent limits shall be the representative measurements of the flow averaged over the previous 4 days and temperature of the previous day.

NR 212.40(8) (8) Reallocation of available wasteload allocations.