Chapter NR 212

NR 212.60(2)(c)3.b. b. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 108.5% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow temperature regimes identified as Condition A in Table 8-m or 101.8% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 8-m or 113.0% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition C in Table 8-m.

NR 212.60(2)(c)4. 4. The allocation for publicly-owned point sources located between milepoints 265.0 and 271.1 shall be its baseline load as determined under sub. (1) (c).

NR 212.60(2)(d) (d) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 271.1 and 240.0 with best practicable waste treatment effluent limits of less than 500 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be its baseline load as determined under sub. (1) (d).

NR 212.60(2)(e) (e) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 271.1 and 258.5 with best practicable waste treatment effluent limits equal to or exceeding 500 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 2-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(e)1. 1. The sum of the actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under Table 2-m for the same 5-consecutive-day period.

NR 212.60(2)(e)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 101.8% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 2-m or 113.0% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition C in Table 2-m. No percentage adjustment shall be made for conditions identified as Condition A in Table 2-m.

NR 212.60(2)(f) (f) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 258.4 and 258.2 with best practicable waste treatment effluent limits equal to or exceeding 500 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 3-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(f)1. 1. The sum of the actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under Table 3-m for the same 5-consecutive-day-period.

NR 212.60(2)(f)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 108.5% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition A in Table 3-m or 101.8% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 3-m or 113.0% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition C in Table 3-m.

NR 212.60(2)(g) (g) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 258.19 and 249.0 with best practicable waste treatment effluent limits equal to or exceeding 500 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 4-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(g)1. 1. The sum of actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated for the same 5-consecutive-day period.

NR 212.60(2)(g)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 108.5% of the allocation for that day for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition A in Table 4-m or 101.8% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 4-m or 113.0% of the allocation calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition C in Table 4-m.

NR 212.60(2)(h) (h) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 248.9 and 240.0 with best practicable waste treatment effluent limits equal to or exceeding 500 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharges to levels appearing in Table 5-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(h)1. 1. The sum of the actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under Table 5-m for the same 5-consecutive-day period.

NR 212.60(2)(h)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 113.4% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition A in Table 5-m or 110.2% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 5-m or 113.0% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition C in Table 5-m.

NR 212.60(2)(i) (i) The allocation for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 341.4 and 305.9 shall be its baseline load as determined under sub. (1) (f).

NR 212.60(2)(j) (j) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 341.4 and 313.2 with best practicable waste treatment limits equal to or exceeding 550 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 6-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(j)1. 1. The sum of the actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under Table 6-m for the same 5-consecutive-day period.

NR 212.60(2)(j)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 106.5% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 6-m. No percentage adjustments shall be made for conditions identified as Condition A in Table 6-m.

NR 212.60(2)(k) (k) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 313.19 and 305.9 with best practicable waste treatment limits equal to or exceeding 550 pounds of BOD5 per day shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 7-m. For purposes of determining compliance with water quality related effluent limits, the following conditions shall be met:

NR 212.60(2)(k)1. 1. The sum of the actual daily discharges for any 5-consecutive-day period may not exceed the sum of the daily point source allocation values calculated under Table 7-m for the same 5-consecutive-day period.

NR 212.60(2)(k)2. 2. For any one day period, the actual discharge for the point source may not exceed 106.5% of the allocation for that day calculated for those flow/temperature regimes identified as Condition B in Table 7-m. No percentage adjustments shall be made for conditions identified as Condition A in Table 7-m.

NR 212.60(3) (3) The flow and temperature conditions used to determine compliance with permit effluent limits shall be the representative measurements of the flow and temperature of the previous day.

NR 212.60(4) (4) Reallocation of available wasteload allocations.

NR 212.60(4)(a) (a) Wasteload allocations may be reallocated under par. (c) when a previously issued wasteload allocated permit expires, is revoked or is voluntarily surrendered. Such reallocation may be accomplished for the following purposes:

NR 212.60(4)(a)1. 1. Provide for the wasteload needed due to the reactivation of a facility that had previously closed and caused the wasteload to become available.

NR 212.60(4)(a)2. 2. Provide for new production increases by existing dischargers.

NR 212.60(4)(a)3. 3. Provide for production by a new discharger.

NR 212.60(4)(a)4. 4. Provide for existing dischargers to raise their existing allocation in the appropriate stream segment towards categorical effluent limitation levels based upon a demonstration of need that the discharger’s treatment facility is incapable of meeting applicable wasteload allocations.

NR 212.60(4)(b) (b) Any reallocation shall include explicit reserve capacity for future new dischargers or future production increase by existing dischargers.

NR 212.60(4)(c) (c) Reallocations shall occur according to the following procedure:

NR 212.60(4)(c)1. 1. Upon notification by the department of the availability of a wasteload pursuant to s. NR 212.60 (4) (a), the designated management agency shall publish a notice of wasteload availability.

NR 212.60(4)(c)2. 2. A 6-month period shall be provided for persons to declare interest in available wasteload allocations.

NR 212.60(4)(c)3. 3. Within 60 days of the end of the 6 month period the designated management agency shall conduct a public meeting regarding the proposed reallocation.

NR 212.60(4)(c)4. 4. The designated management agency shall recommend a reallocation including an explicit reserve capacity to the department within 30 days of the public meeting.

NR 212.60(4)(c)5. 5. The department shall notify the designated management agency of acceptance or rejection of the recommendation within 6 months.

NR 212.60 History History: Cr. Register, September, 1981, No. 309, eff. 10-1-81; emerg. r. and recr. (1) (c) and (2) (c), eff. 8-5-83; r. and recr. (1) (c) and (2) (c), Register, November, 1983, No. 335, eff. 12-1-83; am. (1) (a) and (f), (2) (b) 2., cr. (4), Register, May, 1986, No. 365, eff. 6-1-86; am. (1) (c) to (e), (2) (c) 1., 2.a. and 3., (d), (e) 2., (f) 2., (g), (h) (intro.) and 2., cr., tables 1-c and 8-m, r. and recr. tables 2-m, 3-m, 4-m and 5-m, Register, March, 1987, No. 375, eff. 4-1-87; am. table 1-c, Register, April, 1988, No. 388, eff. 5-1-88; CR 15-085: am. (1) (intro.), (b), (d), (e), (g) Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

NR 212.70 NR 212.70 Determination of Peshtigo river water quality related effluent limitations. Effluent limitations for point sources discharging BOD5 to the Peshtigo river shall be calculated according to the procedures contained in this section. These limitations shall apply from May 1 to October 31 annually.

NR 212.70(1) (1) Determine baseline loads for each point source subject to the wasteload allocation.

NR 212.70(1)(a) (a) The baseline load for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 9.6 and 0.0 shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.70(1)(b) (b) The baseline load for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 12.0 and 9.7 shall be calculated as follows:

NR 212.70(2) (2) Determine the allocation for each point source.

NR 212.70(2)(a) (a) The allocation for each publicly-owned point source located between milepoints 9.6 and 0.0 shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 1-p.

NR 212.70(2)(b) (b) The allocation for each nonpublicly-owned point source located between milepoints 12.0 and 9.6 shall be a reduction in its discharge to levels appearing in Table 2-p.

NR 212.70(3) (3) The flow and temperature conditions used to determine compliance with permit effluent limits shall be the representative average measurements of the flow and temperature of the previous day.

NR 212.70 History History: Cr. Register, May, 1985, No. 353, eff. 6-1-85; CR 15-085: am. (1) (a), (b) Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

subch. III of ch. NR 212 Subchapter III — Development of Total Maximum Daily Loads and Effluent Limitations Developed Through Wasteload Allocations

NR 212.71 NR 212.71 Applicability. This subchapter establishes the procedures, methodologies, and requirements to be used for determining total maximum daily loads and water quality-based effluent limitations developed through wasteload allocations for pollutants except as provided in subch. II.

NR 212.71 History History: CR 15-085: cr. Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

NR 212.72 NR 212.72 Definitions. In addition to the definitions and abbreviations in ss. NR 205.03 and 205.04 the following definitions are applicable to the terms of this subchapter:

NR 212.72(1) (1) “EPA” means the United States environmental protection agency.

NR 212.72(2) (2) “Impaired water” has the meaning given in s. NR 151.002 (16m).

NR 212.72(3) (3) “Increased discharge” means any increase in the concentration or mass loading of a pollutant of concern that exceeds an effluent limitation that is in effect in a current permit.

NR 212.72(4) (4) “Load allocation” means the nonpoint source allocation as defined in s. NR 212.03 (14).

NR 212.72(5) (5) “Loading capacity” means the greatest amount of loading that a water can receive without violating water quality standards.

NR 212.72(6) (6) “Margin of safety” means a required component of the TMDL that accounts for the uncertainty in the response of the waterbody to loading reductions.

NR 212.72(7) (7) “Natural background load” means loads emanating from natural sources, including but not limited to forested and undeveloped lands and from natural processes such as weathering and dissolution, which would exist in the absence of measurable impacts from human activity or influence.

NR 212.72(8) (8) “New discharge” means a point source that discharges the pollutant of concern that commenced operation after the TMDL was approved by EPA and was not given a wasteload allocation in the TMDL.

NR 212.72(9) (9) “Pollutant of concern” means any pollutant discharged that has an applicable TBEL, a wasteload allocation from a TMDL or watershed analysis, or is identified as needing a WQBEL to meet water quality standards.

NR 212.72(10) (10) “TBEL” means technology-based effluent limitation.

NR 212.72(11) (11) “TMDL” means total maximum daily load and is the sum of the individual wasteload allocations for point sources, load allocations for nonpoint sources, natural background, and a margin of safety. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of mass per time, toxicity, or other appropriate measures that relate to a state water quality standard.

NR 212.72(12) (12) “Wasteload allocation” refers to the point source allocation as defined in s. NR 212.03 (22).

NR 212.72(13) (13) “WQBEL” means water quality-based effluent limitation.

NR 212.72 History History: CR 15-085: cr. Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

NR 212.73 NR 212.73 TMDL development requirements for impaired waters.

NR 212.73(1) (1) Purpose. This section establishes the procedure, methodologies, and requirements to be used for developing TMDLs.

NR 212.73(2) (2) Prioritization. The department shall create and maintain an impaired waters list of waters that fail to meet water quality standards and, therefore, require the development of TMDLs or alternative remediation plans. The impaired waters list shall include a priority ranking for the development of a TMDL for all listed waters. The priority ranking shall consider the severity of the pollution, the uses to be made of such waters, and whether implementing existing TBELs and WQBELs in permits are sufficient to achieve water quality standards. By April 1 of each even-numbered year, the Department shall submit to the EPA a prioritized ranking of waters on the impaired waters list targeted for TMDL development for a two-year period.  Impaired waters addressed by alternative remediation plans may be assigned a low priority for TMDL development on the impaired waters list.

NR 212.73 Note Note: The impaired waters listing and priority setting process is specified in the Wisconsin Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology (WisCALM).

NR 212.73 Note Note: Examples of remediation plans include, but are not limited to, lake protection and restoration plans, remedial action plans, environmental accountability projects, area-wide water quality management plans, adaptive management plans, and nine key element watershed plans. 

NR 212.73(3) (3) TMDL Development.

NR 212.73(3)(a) (a) The department shall establish TMDLs for impaired waters in accordance with the prioritization in sub. (1). TMDLs shall be established at levels necessary to attain and maintain applicable numeric and narrative water quality standards with seasonal variations and a margin of safety that takes into account any lack of knowledge concerning the relationship between effluent limitations and water quality. TMDLs shall take into account critical conditions for stream flow, loading, and water quality parameters.

NR 212.73(3)(b) (b) TMDLs shall be established to ensure attainment of all designated uses and applicable numeric and narrative water quality standards for the pollutant of concern including applicable numeric and narrative criteria under chs. NR 102 and 105.

NR 212.73(3)(c) (c) TMDLs may be established using a pollutant-by-pollutant or biomonitoring approach. In many cases both techniques may be needed. Site specific information should be used whenever possible.

NR 212.73(3)(d) (d) TMDLs shall include wasteload allocations for point sources and load allocations for nonpoint sources such that the sum of the allocations is not greater than the loading capacity of the water for the pollutants addressed by the TMDL, minus the sum of natural background loads, the reserve capacity and, if specified, an explicit margin of safety. Allocations shall meet the following requirements:

NR 212.73(3)(d)1. 1. Allocations shall be distributed to sources using a baseline loading condition that is defined in the TMDL.

NR 212.73(3)(d)2. 2. If allocations in the TMDL are expressed as a concentration, the TMDL shall also indicate the flows, including effluent flows, assumed in the analyses.

NR 212.73(3)(d)3. 3. If multiple EPA-approved TMDLs are prepared for impaired waters, and the TMDLs include allocations for the same pollutant for one or more of the same sources, then the applicable allocations that are protective of both immediate and downstream segments shall be used for TMDL implementation, including permitting.

NR 212.73(3)(d)4. 4. Pollutant degradation and transport may be considered when developing allocations.

NR 212.73(3)(d)5. 5. Natural background loads may be accounted for in a TMDL through an allocation to a single category or through individual allocations to applicable sources of natural background loads.

NR 212.73(3)(d)6. 6. Nonpoint sources may be accounted for in a TMDL through an allocation to a single category or through individual load allocations to various nonpoint sources.

NR 212.73(3)(d)7. 7. Point source dischargers covered through individual permits shall be assigned individual waste load allocations. Point source dischargers covered through general permits may be accounted for through an allocation to a single category or through individual wasteload allocations.

NR 212.73(3)(e) (e) TMDLs shall include a margin of safety sufficient to account for technical uncertainties in establishing the TMDL and shall describe the manner in which the margin of safety is determined and incorporated into the TMDL. The margin of safety may be provided explicitly by leaving a portion of the loading capacity unallocated, implicitly by using conservative modeling assumptions to establish wasteload allocations and load allocations, or a combination thereof. If a portion of the loading capacity is left unallocated to provide a margin of safety, the amount left unallocated shall be documented. If conservative modeling assumptions are relied on to provide a margin of safety, the specific assumptions providing the margin of safety shall be described.

NR 212.73(3)(f) (f) A portion of the TMDL may be allocated to a reserve capacity to account for new or increased discharges, or other sources not allocated in the TMDL. When such reserve allocations are not included in a TMDL, any increased loadings of the pollutant for which the TMDL was developed that are due to a new or expanded discharge may not be allowed unless the TMDL is revised to include an allocation for the new or expanded discharge or the new or expanded discharge is offset by a reduction of the pollutant in the watershed covered by the TMDL.

NR 212.73(4) (4) Monitoring data. Monitoring data shall be collected to support the development of the TMDL and track implementation of a TMDL. Monitoring data shall be used for all of the following:

NR 212.73(4)(a) (a) To demonstrate progress towards achieving water quality standards such as quantifying pollutant reductions made through implementation of the TMDL and evaluating the effectiveness of controls being used to implement the TMDL.

NR 212.73(4)(b) (b) To validate the assumptions and scientific analysis used to establish the TMDL or revise the TMDL, if necessary.

NR 212.73(5) (5) Reasonable assurance. A TMDL, implementation plan for a TMDL, or remediation plan shall provide reasonable assurances that water quality standards will be attained within a reasonable timeframe. Determining the reasonable period of time in which water quality standards will be met is a case-specific determination considering a number of factors including, but not limited to: receiving water characteristics including persistence, behavior, and ubiquity of pollutants of concern; the types of remedial activities necessary; and available regulatory and non-regulatory controls.

NR 212.73 History History: CR 15-085: cr. Register August 2016 No. 728, eff. 9-1-16.

NR 212.74 NR 212.74 Developing TMDLs for nearshore and open waters of the Great Lakes. This section describes requirements for deriving TMDLs for waters of the Great Lakes system as defined in s. NR 102.22 (5) and inland lakes within the Great Lakes system with no appreciable flow relative to their volumes. This section applies to TMDLs for all pollutants excluding the following: alkalinity, ammonia, bacteria, biochemical oxygen demand, chlorine, color, dissolved oxygen, dissolved solids, pH, phosphorus, salinity, temperature, total and suspended solids, turbidity, and whole effluent toxicity. In addition to the requirements specified in s. NR 212.73, TMDLs in this section shall also meet all of the following: