Section NR 207.04 - Fish and aquatic life waters(1) APPLICATION INFORMATION. Persons proposing a new or increased discharge to fish and aquatic life waters shall provide documentation for the following: (a) An assessment of existing treatment capability which demonstrates: 1. Any of the following: a. The permittee's discharge equals or exceeds 85% of any mass permit limitation.b. The permittee's monthly average discharge equals or exceeds 85% of a monthly average effluent limitation established in a permit for 3 consecutive months;c. The permittee's weekly average discharge equals or exceeds 85% of a weekly average effluent limitation established in a permit for 4 consecutive weeks.d. The permittee's daily discharge equals or exceeds 85% of a daily maximum effluent limitation established in a permit 5 or more times during a calendar year;e. There are exceedances of any daily maximum, weekly average or monthly average effluent limitation for a parameter in a permit; orf. A municipal permittee's compliance maintenance annual report point total, as required in ch. NR 208, is 70 or greater;2. The treatment facilities were maintained in good working order;3. The treatment facilities were operated and maintained as efficiently as possible; and4. The conditions documented in subd.1. were not due to temporary upsets. (b) Effluent quality data and background water quality data for indicator parameters so a determination will be made on whether or not a significant lowering of water quality will occur under s. NR 207.05.(c) If the proposed new or increased discharge is found to result in any lowering of water quality or if the person proposing the new or increased discharge has waived the procedure in s. NR 207.05(2) (a) to (d), the permit applicant shall demonstrate the following: 1. The proposed new or increased discharge will accommodate important economic or social development in any of the following ways: a. The discharger will be increasing its employment.b. The discharger will be increasing its production level.c. The discharger will be avoiding a reduction in its employment level.d. The discharger will be increasing its efficiency.e. There will be industrial, commercial or residential growth in the community.f. The discharger will be providing economic or social benefit to the community.g. The discharger will be correcting an environmental or public health problem.(d) If the new or increased discharge is found to result in a significant lowering of water quality or if the person proposing the new or increased discharge has waived the procedure in s. NR 207.05(2) (a) to (d), the permit applicant shall demonstrate the following: 1. The proposed significant lowering of water quality cannot be prevented in a cost effective manner by the following types of pollution control alternatives: a. Use of conservation measures.b. Use of recycling measures.c. Use of other applicable wastewater treatment process or operational changes.d. Use of source reduction measures.e. Use of other pollution minimization alternatives.2. For proposals involving the expansion of a wastewater treatment plant, whether or not there are alternative wastewater treatment technologies which: a. Have documented performance levels for similar wastewater composition,b. Have capital costs less than 110% of the capital costs (or present worth less than 115% of the related total present worth value) for alternatives achieving the water quality based effluent limitations or the effluent limitations determined pursuant to chs. NR 200 to 297, as appropriate, andc. Would prevent a significant lowering of water quality.3. Whether or not there are other discharge locations or alternatives which would meet the conditions of subd. 2. b. and c.4. Any other information required by the department or believed by the applicant to be necessary to complete review of the application. Note: It is the intent of the department that, where possible, an applicant may use applicable information contained in a facility plan approved by the department to meet the requirements of s. NR 207.04(1) (a) 1. a. to f..
(2) DEPARTMENT DETERMINATIONS. (a) If the department determines that the existing wastewater treatment facilities have treatment capability to treat any proposed new or increased discharge and maintain treatment levels sufficient to meet existing effluent limitations as documented under sub.s(1) (a), effluent limitations will remain unchanged.(b) If the department determines that the existing treatment facilities do not have treatment capability to treat any proposed new or increased discharge and maintain treatment levels sufficient to meet existing effluent limitations, effluent limitations will be developed using the following procedures: 1. If the proposed new or increased discharge will not significantly lower water quality as determined under s. NR 207.05(4) and will accommodate important economic and social development as documented under sub. (1) (c), water quality based effluent limitations will be determined based on applicable procedures and criteria in chs. NR 102, 103, 105 and 106 or on categorical effluent limitation procedures pursuant to chs. NR 200 to 297 as appropriate.2. If the proposed new or increased discharge will not significantly lower water quality as determined under s. NR 207.05(4) and will not accommodate important economic and social development as documented under sub. (1) (c), water quality based effluent limitations for substances in the new or increased discharge will be set equal to the existing levels of these substances upstream of, or adjacent to, the discharge site.3. If the proposed new or increased discharge will significantly lower water quality as determined under s. NR 207.05(4), or the applicant has chosen to waive the procedure in s. NR 207.05(2) (a) to (d), and the proposed discharge will not accommodate important economic and social development as documented under sub. (1) (c), water quality based effluent limitations for substances in the new or increased discharge will be set equal to the existing levels of these substances upstream of, or adjacent to, the discharge site.4. If the proposed new or increased discharge will significantly lower water quality as determined under s. NR 207.05(4), or the applicant has chosen to waive the procedure in s. NR 207.05(2) (a) to (d), and the proposed discharge will accommodate important economic and social development as documented under sub. (1) (c), effluent limitations for the proposed new or increased discharge will be determined using the procedure in par. (c).Note: When assessing existing treatment capabilities, it is the intent of the department to consider projected increases in a permittee's discharge due to a planned water conservation project.
(c) The department shall use the following procedures to determine water quality based effluent limitations or effluent limitations determined pursuant to chs. NR 200 to 297 as appropriate, for each substance in the proposed new or increased discharge for which the existing levels upstream of, or adjacent to, the discharge site are of better quality than applicable water quality criteria or secondary values derived according to ch. NR 102, 103 or 105: 1. If there are no applicable pollution control alternatives or alternative discharge locations which meet the conditions of sub. (1) (d) 2. or 3., effluent limitations will be determined for the new or increased portion of the discharge based on applicable procedures and criteria or secondary values derived according to chs. NR 102, 103, 105 and 106 or based on effluent limitations pursuant to chs. NR 200 to 297, as appropriate.2. If there are applicable pollution control alternatives or alternative discharge locations which meet the conditions of sub. (1) (d)2. or 3., water quality based effluent limitations will be determined for the new or increased portion of the discharge based on the applicable pollution control alternative or alternative discharge site which prevents the significant lowering of water quality.3. For an increased discharge not involving expansion of a wastewater treatment plant: a. If there are no demonstrated, cost effective pollution control alternatives which would prevent significant lowering of water quality as demonstrated under sub. (1) (d) 1., effluent limitations shall be determined pursuant to chs. NR 102 and 106 or chs. NR 200 to 297, as appropriate.b. If there are demonstrated, cost effective pollution control alternatives which would prevent the significant lowering of water quality as demonstrated under sub. (1)(d) 1., water quality based effluent limitations will be determined for the new or increased portion of the discharge based on the cost effective pollution control alternative which prevents the significant lowering of water quality. (d) The department shall determine water quality based effluent limitations using the water quality criteria or secondary values derived according to ch. NR 102, 103, 104 or 105 for substances in the proposed new or increased discharge whose levels in the receiving water are of lesser quality than the water quality criteria or secondary values for the receiving water upstream of, or adjacent to, the discharge site.(e) In addition to the provisions of pars. (a) to (c), if the department determines that a proposed new or increased discharge will result in lowering of water quality in downstream outstanding resource waters or a proposed new discharge would result in lowering of water quality in exceptional resource waters, other than for the reasons specified in s. NR 207.03(2) (a), water quality based effluent limitations for substances in the new or increased portion of the discharge will be set to prevent the lowering of water quality in the downstream outstanding or exceptional resource water. Whenever s. NR 207.03(2) (a) applies, effluent limitations shall be established using the procedures in this section. Wis. Admin. Code Department of Natural Resources NR 207.04
Cr. Register, February, 1989, No. 398, eff. 3-1-89; renum. (1) (a) 1. a. to d. to be (1) (a) 1. b. and d. to f., cr. (1) (a) 1. a., c. and (d) 1. e., am. (2) (c) (intro.), 1. and (d), Register, August, 1997, No. 500, eff. 9-1-97.