Bills · 2013-2014 Regular Session
Relating to: adaptive management plans for reducing discharges of phosphorus and total suspended solids to the waters of the state and a statewide variance to the water quality standard for phosphorus for certain dischargers. (FE)
Administration, department of — Agency and general functions Natural resources, department of — Environmental protection Water — Pollution Waterways and water power
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill provides for a variance to limits on the amount of phosphorus allowed
in discharges to water bodies that contain excessive amounts of phosphorus, if
conditions specified in the bill are met. The bill also authorizes the use of adaptive
management, explained below, to comply with water quality standards for
phosphorus and total suspended solids.
Water quality standards and effluent limitations
The federal Clean Water Act allows the federal Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to delegate responsibilities under the act, including issuing
wastewater discharge permits for point sources (factories and sewage treatment
plants, for example), to a state if the state's laws comply with requirements in the
act. EPA has delegated these responsibilities to this state.
Consistent with the Clean Water Act, current state law requires the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to promulgate rules setting water quality
standards for the waters of the state. The standards include criteria for specific
pollutants. A criterion may be narrative (describing the characteristics that the
water should have) or numeric (specifying the maximum concentration of a
pollutant).
Under current federal and state law, wastewater discharge permits include
restrictions, called effluent limitations, on the amount of various pollutants that may
be discharged. One type of effluent limitation is applicable without regard to the
quality of the receiving water body and is based on the level of control achieved using
treatment technology that is reasonably available (considering cost, among other
things) for limiting the discharge of a pollutant. If this kind of limitation (called a
technology based effluent limitation) is not sufficient to ensure that a water quality
standard for a pollutant will be met in a particular water body, permits for sources
that discharge into the water body must generally contain effluent limitations for the
pollutant that are more stringent than the technology based effluent limitation and
that are designed to ensure that the water quality standard will be met. This kind
of limitation is called a water quality based effluent limitation.
Current law allows DNR to grant a permittee a variance to a water quality
based effluent limitation if the permittee demonstrates that complying with the
effluent limitation is not feasible for one of several reasons, including that applying
the effluent limitation to the source would cause substantial and widespread adverse
social and economic impacts in the area where the source is located. The term of a
variance may not exceed five years. A variance may be renewed, but only for as long
as it remains infeasible for the source to comply with the water quality based effluent
limitation. Variances are subject to review and approval by EPA.
Phosphorus water quality rules
In 2010, DNR promulgated rules adding a numerical water quality criterion to
the water quality standard for phosphorus. Some water bodies in Wisconsin do not
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
Sponsors
Full history
- Jan 28, 2014 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Loudenbeck, Krug, Ballweg, Bies, Czaja, LeMahieu, Marklein, Spiros, Steineke, Tauchen, Thiesfeldt, Kulp and Kaufert; cosponsored by Senators Cowles, Farrow and Petrowski
- Jan 28, 2014 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Environment and Forestry
- Jan 30, 2014 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Jan 30, 2014 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Jan 31, 2014 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 7, 2014 · Assembly
Representative Strachota added as a coauthor
- Feb 13, 2014 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Loudenbeck
- Apr 8, 2014 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1