[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 241 (Friday, December 16, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30952]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 16, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5123-1; NPDES No. FLG830000]
Reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit For Dewatering and Petroleum Fuel Contaminated
Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Final Rule--Reissuance of a NPDES General Permit to
the State of Florida.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IV is reissuing the
final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General
Permit No. FLG830000 to facilities within the political boundary of the
State of Florida. This final reissued NPDES general permit contains
effluent limitations, prohibitions, reporting requirements and other
conditions on facilities which discharge uncontaminated groundwater
associated with dewatering or treated groundwater and/or storm water
incidental to the groundwater cleanup operation which have been
contaminated by automotive gasoline, aviation and/or diesel fuels. This
permit authorizes discharges from facilities currently located in and
discharging to surface waters within the political boundary of the
State of Florida, and any new treatment facilities placed in operation
during the term of this permit. Reissuance of this final NPDES will
allow general dewatering and cleanup actions at petroleum contaminated
sites to begin without the delays of individual NPDES permit issuance
procedures.
For facilities seeking coverage for general dewatering discharges,
coverage under the general permit is automatic, upon the permittee's
receipt of acceptable groundwater screening values, as described in
Part I.A.3(c) of the general permit. The effluent from these general
dewatering activities shall be monitored within thirty (30) days after
commencement of the discharge and once every six months for the life of
the project to maintain coverage under the general permit.
Additionally, short-term pump tests, eight (8) hours in duration or
less, shall be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's
Notice of Intent (NOI) by EPA and the permittee will be responsible for
meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1 or A.2. DMRs shall be submitted
within thirty (30) days after completion of the pump test discharge.
Except for facilities meeting the above conditions, all other
facilities seeking coverage under the general permit by NOI requests
will be responded to by written notification of coverage by certified
mail from the Director, Water Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV.
This method of notification will be applicable to both new dischargers
applying for coverage for the first time and existing dischargers which
are seeking coverage under the reissued general permit. Facilities
which are currently discharging under the previous NPDES general permit
are required to submit another NOI requesting coverage under the
reissued general permit by February 14, 1995, in accordance with Part
II, Section F(b).
DATES: This general permit is effective on December 7, 1994, at 1:00
p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time.
Dates for coverage: (1) Dewatering Activity discharges are
authorized upon the permittee's receipt of acceptable groundwater
screening values listed in Part I.A.3. (2) Short-Term Pump Test
discharges, eight (8) hours in duration or less, are authorized upon
receipt of a complete NOI, as described in Part II, Section F(f). (3)
Petroleum Contaminated discharges, are only authorized after written
notification of coverage by certified mail from the Director, Water
Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV is received.
This action constitutes the Environmental Protection Agency's final
permit decision, in accordance with Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 124.72.
The administrative record, including draft NPDES general permit,
fact sheet, state certification, comments received, and additional
information are available by writing the EPA, Region IV, or for review
and copying at 345 Courtland St., N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365, between
the hours of 8:15 A.M. and 4:30 P.M., Monday through Friday. Copies
will be provided at a nominal charge per page. Additional information
concerning the permit may be obtained at the address and during the
hours noted above from Ms. Lena Scott, Public Notice Coordinator, 404/
347-3004.
ADDRESSES: Notifications required under this general permit should be
sent to: Director, Water Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, N.E. Atlanta,
Georgia 30365 Request for Coverage: Written notification of intent to
be covered by the general permit (if required) shall be provided as
described in the permit Part II Section F.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Cole, Environmental Engineer,
Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, Water Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta,
Georgia 30365, (404) 347-3012 ext. 2948.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On Thursday, August 25, 1988 (53 FR 32442), EPA, Region IV proposed
the issuance of the draft NPDES General Permit. During the 30-day
comment period, a request for an extension of the comment period was
received, and on Tuesday, October 25, 1988 (53 FR 43035), the comment
period was extended to November 15, 1988. On Monday, July 17, 1989 (54
FR 29986), EPA, Region IV issued the Final NPDES General Permit for
Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of
Florida.
On Friday, February 22, 1991 (56 FR 7379), EPA, Region IV published
a notice of a proposed modification to the NPDES General Permit for
Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida
(56 FR 7379) to include dewatering activities. On Thursday, August 29,
1991 (56 FR 42736), the final modification was issued. The general
permit expired on July 16, 1994. On Monday, September 19, 1994, EPA
Region IV published a notice concerning the reissuance of the general
permit (59 FR 47862) that is being issued in final form today.
The Region received comments from eight (8) commentors. All the
public comments received during the 30-day comment period are included
in the administrative record and were considered by Region IV in the
formulation of a final determination of the conditions of today's final
permit.
For reference, Region IV published a detailed fact sheet with the
proposed draft permit in 59 FR 47862. The Region is incorporating by
reference that fact sheet as part of the final fact sheet for today's
final permit. The discussions presented in the previous fact sheet
should be consulted in reviewing the applicability and scope of the
final permit conditions.
A formal hearing is available to challenge any NPDES permit issued
under 40 CFR 124.14 except for a general permit. Persons affected by a
general permit may not challenge the conditions of a general permit as
a right in further agency proceedings. They may instead either
challenge the general permit in court, or apply for an individual
permit under 40 CFR 122.21 as authorized at 40 CFR 122.28 and then
request a formal hearing on the issuance or denial of an individual
permit. Additional information regarding these procedures is available
by contacting Ms. Gwen Eason, Office of Regional Counsel, at the
address above or at (404) 347-2309.
II. Other Legal Requirements
A. Executive Order 12291
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
the review requirements of Executive Order 12291 pursuant to Section
8[b] of that order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities
in this final general permit under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
44 U.S.C. Sec. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements of
this permit have already been approved by the Office of Management and
Budget in submissions made for the NPDES permit program under the
provisions of the Clean Water Act.
C. State Certification Requirements
Section 301(b)(1)(c) of the Act requires that NPDES permits contain
conditions which ensure compliance with applicable State water quality
standards or limitations. Section 401 of the Act requires that States
certify that Federally issued permits are in compliance with State law.
This permit is for operations discharging to waters within the State of
Florida. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.53, EPA requested certification of the
permit on September 15, 1994. On October 27, 1994, the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection waived certification of the
general permit.
D. Effective Date
The final NPDES general permit issued today, December 6th, 1994, is
effective on December 7, 1994.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After review of the facts presented in this document, I hereby
certify, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 605(b), that this
NPDES general permit will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Moreover, the permit reduces a
significant administrative burden on regulated sources.
Patrick M. Tobin,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
Summary of Comments
Appendix A--Public Comments
Public notice of the draft permit reissuance was published at 59 FR
47862 (September 19, 1994). Additionally, the permit was publicly
noticed in five (5) major cities in the State of Florida on September
16, 1994, (Public Notice Number 94FL0167), to allow comments from
interested parties which would be considered in the formulation of a
final decision regarding reissuance of the proposed draft NPDES General
Permit No. FLG830000.
The following parties responded with written comments on reissuance
of the proposed NPDES general permit: Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP), Chevron Research & Technology Company,
Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Mobil Oil Corporation, Exxon Company, Walt
Disney World Company, Florida Chemical Industry Council and the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Comment 1: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP), Bureau of Waste Cleanup, submitted comments by letter dated
October 3, 1994, which commented on Part I.A.3 of the general permit.
The FDEP wanted clarification concerning the intent of Part I.A.3. FDEP
stated that the statement on Page two (2) of the introduction states
that `` Except for facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.3,
written notice of intent to be covered by the reissued NPDES general
permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing Authority prior to
initiation of discharge to waters of the United States,'' implies that
this includes subparts of Part I.3., including I.3.(a), (b), and (c).
FDEP stated that this implies that for discharges that are either
uncontaminated or are contaminated with petroleum only and are treated,
notification to EPA is not required. It was stated that this is not
consistent with the phrase under I.3(a) which states ``upon receipt of
written EPA notification of coverage that the Notice of Intent (NOI)
request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence.'' The
State mentioned that this implies that not only must prior notification
be given by EPA for the short-term discharges from sites contaminated
by petroleum only, but that the person responsible for the discharge
must wait for a reply from EPA, and this inconsistency should be
reconciled.
Response: EPA agrees that the referenced statement on page 2 of the
introduction is incorrect. It has been corrected to read, ``except for
facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.A.3(c), written NOI to be
covered by the reissued permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing
Authority.''
Comment 2: FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to wait for a
response from EPA in order to initiate a short-term discharge for the
following reasons: (1) Chapter 62-770, requires that a Remedial Action
Plan (RAP) be submitted to the FDEP within 2 months of approval of a
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR), and that it is routine to
require pump tests to design information for the RAP, plus identify
aquifer characteristics. FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to delay
the RAP by requiring prior approval from EPA of these simple 8 hour
pump tests. (2) Due to varying hydrogeological conditions in Florida,
local departments commonly perform dewatering activities in their
right-of-way of previous retail service stations, plus have no
information before commencing these activities on the existence of
petroleum contamination. FDEP stated that these construction projects
should not be delayed for an extended period to wait on response from
EPA, since mobile treatment units can be deployed and designed to meet
EPA's discharge limitations in the NPDES general permit. (3) During
dewatering for construction and replacement of underground storage
tanks, FDEP mentioned that it was not reasonable for the tank
installation to be delayed for an extended period of time; especially
since discharges from these operations only last for a few hours at a
time and mobile equipment used is very reliable in achieving EPA's
discharge standards.
Response: EPA concurs with FDEP reason No. 1 above which allows
short-term 8 hour pump tests at sites which have identified petroleum
contamination, to be covered upon receipt of the NOI by the Permit
Issuing Authority. Only short-term pump tests, 8 hours in duration or
less, designed to obtain information on aquifer characteristics, will
be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's NOI, and the
permittee will be responsible or meeting the discharge limitations of
Part A.1 or A.2. General Permit numbers will be assigned to these sites
and DMR's sent with a copy of the general permit and a letter
acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Intent.
EPA responds to reasons # 2 and # 3 as proposed by the FDEP, which
would allow coverage by simply submitting an NOI for local departments
dewatering projects or scheduled dewatering during gasoline tank
replacements. It is EPA's understanding that the construction
activities described in No. 2 and No. 3 are planned well in advance of
the initiation of the dewatering process. For this reason, EPA sees no
reason to exempt these sites from NOI requirements. Unless preliminary
groundwater assessments have been performed along the right-of-way
project prior to startup, even the local departments may be unaware of
an contaminated plume that may be encountered during the road widening,
or excavation projects. The potential problem EPA expects in waiving
NOI requirements for these activities, is the lack of sufficient data
to cover these operations. The better approach would be for the
permittee to survey potential problem areas well in advance of the
dewatering startup, identify the type of contamination and seek
discharge coverage under the NPDES general permit using the NOI
process, for those potentially contaminated groundwater discharge
areas.
Comment 3: FDEP also questioned whether the indicator criteria
values listed under Part I.A.3, should be analyzed using untreated
groundwater or treated groundwater. FDEP also stated that if the intent
of Part I.A.3 is to allow short term discharges from sites contaminated
with petroleum only, then the indicators should be applied to treated
recovered groundwater, because if these indicators were applied to
untreated groundwater, this would preclude discharges from sites
contaminated with petroleum only. However, FDEP stated that applying
these indicator values to the treated effluent may allow treatment
alternatives that are capable of removing the metals listed and become
eligible to discharge under the general permit, since the indicator
values were not exceeded (even if the source of contamination was not
petroleum in nature).
Response: EPA notes that the indicator values apply to untreated
representative groundwater samples from the vicinity of the proposed
produced groundwater discharge. These could be tests from monitoring
wells, recovery wells, or samples of produced groundwater taken prior
to any treatment and would not allow treatment alternatives capable of
removing metals to be covered by this general permit. It should be
emphasized that the intent of Part I.A.3 is to allow the discharge of
produced groundwater from an uncontaminated site activity. If the site
is contaminated with petroleum fuels, the permit refers back to Parts
I.A.1 or I.A.2.
Comment 4: FDEP requested EPA's determination on a particular issue
before the finalization of the general permit. FDEP stated that many
petroleum sites are located in urban areas, and other possible sources
of contamination may be located in the vicinity of the petroleum site.
In these situations commingling of plumes from non-petroleum sites may
occur. It was noted that many sites performing Contamination Assessment
Reports (CARs) had detected low levels of TCE or PCE for many sites
which had a dry cleaner in the vicinity. FDEP stated that since these
solvents had similar characteristics and were volatile, most treatment
system designs based on permit effluent requirements for the petroleum
compounds will easily remove the PCE or TCE to non-detectable levels
without any oversizing of equipment or additional treatment processes.
FDEP stated that other compounds in relatively low concentrations from
off site sources should not preclude eligibility of the general permit
for the overall cleanup, which is to remediate the petroleum plume and
requested EPA's determination on the issue.
Response: EPA in it's initial conception of the general permit,
only made specific reference to contamination from petroleum fuels and
referenced gasoline, aviation gas, diesel and jet-fuel. The intent in
issuing this general permit was to provide general permit coverage for
the discharge of treated petroleum contaminated groundwater. To cover
other sources of contamination will require additional research and
public participation. Because the general permit expired on July 16,
1994, EPA sees an urgency to reissue this permit; therefore, EPA may
consider this issue in the future through a permit modification. EPA,
after collecting sufficient information, may consider the inclusion of
other chemicals associated with dry cleaners in the near future, but
due to the lack of sufficient information, will not address it at this
time.
Comment 5: Chevron Research and Technology Company, by letter dated
October 4, 1994, requested a copy of the NPDES Best Management Practice
(BMP) Guidance Document.
Response: EPA sent the NPDES BMP Guidance document to Chevron on
October 13, 1994.
Comment 6: Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (ML&B), Counselors at Law, by
letter dated October 15, 1994, made two comments concerning the permit.
ML&B mentioned that all references to Florida Administrative Code
Chapter 17-770, 17-302, or any other ``17-'' should be changed to
Chapter ``62-770, or 62- 302, and mentioned that Chapter ``62-'' is
where the current law is found. ML&B also mentioned that the Fact Sheet
should contain some discussion of discharge to ``surface waters'', the
triggering event. ML&B also mentioned that the permittee should know
where to go in order look up the definition of ``surface waters'' or
discharges to surface waters. Mentioned that these issues and basic
guidance thereon may ensure that all facilities obligated under the
general permit actually apply for coverage and discussion of this
significant jurisdictional issue in the Fact Sheet or permit itself
seems appropriate.
Response: EPA refers the commentor to the Clean Water Act (CWA)
which requires that point source discharges of pollutants to waters of
the United States be covered by NPDES permits. The definition of
``point source'' and ``waters of the U.S.'' can be found at 40 CFR
Section 122.2. Additionally, all references that refer to Florida
Administrative Code Chapter ``17'' will be changed to Florida
Administrative Code Chapter ``62.''
Comment 7: Mobil Oil Corporation (MOC), by letter dated October 17,
1994, supported the reissuance of the general permit, since it is more
efficient and cost effective approach to permitting routine activity
than the individual permitting process. MOC raised several concerns on
the draft NPDES general permit concerning the new requirements of the
whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests. MOC stated that the need for WET
testing has not been established. It was stated that the Fact Sheet
cited that the chemical criteria was significantly more stringent than
Florida's water quality standards and MOC stated that meeting the
chemical criteria, coupled with the required treatment processes should
be more than adequate to protect aquatic life.
Response: In response to MOC comment, EPA notes that the chemical
specific discharge limitations mentioned do provide adequate protection
to meet Florida's chemical specific water quality standards. However,
since previous toxicity monitoring tests did indicate that a number of
effluents were toxic, which is also a violation of Florida
Administrative Code (FAC) Section 17-4.244(3)(a), WET limits were
incorporated into the permit.
Comment 8: MOC stated that if WET testing is required, the
procedure outlined in Part V should be modified. MOC stated that if the
compliance limit for WET testing is an LC50 > 100%, the requirement for
a full concentration test is not warranted and only a screening test
(control and 100% final effluent only) should be run to demonstrate
compliance.
Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the use of multiple
dilutions, per the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4- 90/027F)
cited in the September 19,1994 Federal Register notice, such dilutions
are recommended to assess NPDES compliance for all WET tests (pg. 47-
48). They provide more information about the dose-response of the test,
increase the statistical power of the test, and decrease the inherent
variability found in conducting a single test concentration with a
control.
Comment 9: MOC stated that there was no advantage to static-renewal
versus the static procedure for these discharges and recommended the
static procedure for these WET tests.
Response: Regarding Mobil's comment that static tests only be
conducted, the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4-90/027F) cited
in the Federal Register notice above mandates the use of static renewal
tests for all tests exceeding 48 hr (pg. 57, 61, 65, 69). Because the
acute WET tests specified in this notice are 96-hrs. in duration,
static renewals tests must be conducted.
Comment 10: MOC also recommended that the mandatory requirement
that recommended concurrent standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing
be removed, since this provides limited information on the quality of
the testing laboratory. MOC mentioned that requiring facilities to pay
for these studies, when they receive no benefit is inappropriate.
Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the required concurrent
standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing with each WET test, the
September 19,1994 Federal Register notice does allow for monthly SRT
results to be submitted in lieu of such concurrent tests. Regarding
Mobil's comment on requiring contract laboratories to conduct such SRT
testing, EPA does not currently have a national laboratory
certification program for WET. EPA does acknowledge that some states do
have such a certification program. Until a national certification
program is established, EPA must have some means to assess the quality
of a given laboratory's performance. The use of SRTs is one way of
making that assessment. EPA notes that permittees have the option of
using in-house capabilities to conduct such WET tests. However, when
permittees rely on outside laboratories to conduct WET tests for NPDES
compliance purposes, the use of SRTs is required. EPA disagrees with
Mobil's comment that such SRT tests have no benefit for the permittee.
On the contrary, such SRT testing serves to validate the quality and
precision of the WET tests conducted by the contract laboratory on
behalf of the permittee that are submitted to the permitting authority.
Comment 11: MOC mentioned that facilities covered by the existing,
but expired general permit may be required to perform another testing
requirement, such a EPA 624 and 625 although this sampling was
performed for the existing general permit.
Response: EPA does not agree that facilities already discharging
under the general permit be excluded from performing an additional test
analysis on the effluent using EPA methods 624 or 625 priority
pollutant scan. This requirement conforms with the reapplication data
necessary for individual permits in which a permittee is required to
retest the effluent to obtain accurate information which determine
possible changes in effluent characteristics. This priority pollutant
scan shall be performed within 60 days of startup of the produced water
discharge, or within 60 days after receipt of notification of coverage
from EPA for facilities currently discharging under the previous
general permit.
Comment 12: Exxon Company (EC), by letter dated October 20, 1994,
stated that some risk-based analysis is an important element in
establishing water quality criteria for certain processes, and that the
proposed 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit appears to be absent of any
risk-based approach. EC stated that scientific data does not warrant
the restrictive 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit for release into
surface water and is even more stringent than that required under
Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 17-302.530 for Class I potable water
supplies and recommended that the national limit of 5.0 ug/l be
substituted as the benzene effluent limit.
Response: EPA concurs that the 1.0 ug/l limit for benzene is more
stringent than Florida's water quality standards. The limitation for
benzene is based on the best treatment technology available and happens
to be more stringent than FAC 17-302.530(9)[4/25/94], Class I potable
water supplies which is 1.18 ug/l. The 1.0 ug/l limitation is also more
stringent than Florida Class III water quality standard, which requires
an annual average limitation of 71.28 ug/l for benzene. Therefore,
since technology has proven capable of consistently maintaining the 1.0
ug/l limitation for benzene and numerous permittees have consistently
designed treatment systems that meet the requirements of the NPDES
general permit, EPA will retain the benzene limit. In addition,
maintaining the 1.0 ug/l benzene limit complies with Section 402(o)(1)
of the Water Quality Act of 1987, which states that a permit may not be
renewed, reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations which
are less stringent than the comparable effluent limitations in the
previous permit except in compliance with Section 303 (d)(4).
Comment 13: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the acceptable pH for
treated effluent under the previous and proposed NPDES general permit
is 6.0-8.5 standard units (SUs), and mentioned that many lakes and
streams in Central and North Florida have a pH range of 5.0-6.0 SUs. EC
stated that many influent pH samples for remedial pump and treat
systems are also in this range and recommended reducing the allowed
lower limit from 6.0 to 5.5 SUs. Response: In response to EC comments,
the pH language in the current proposed draft permit does allow some
variation for pH depending on natural background of the receiving
water. However, this natural background data must be furnished to EPA
by the permittee in the initial NOI request; in order to be considered
in determining the pH range for the facility during the notification of
coverage request. It should be noted that the pH of the receiving
stream, not the influent or effluent, influences the pH permit limits.
Comment 14: Exxon Company (EC) commented on Part I.A.3 concerning
the screen for metals that would indicate contamination from sources
other than petroleum fuels. EC mentioned that it is unwarranted to
require screening for additional metals that are not ordinarily
considered constituents of petroleum fuels as a basis for securing a
NPDES general permit for petroleum fuel contamination. EC mentioned
that if there is a cause for this additional screening at a particular
site, the regulatory processes in place will generate the additional
site investigation and testing needed, instead of testing every site
whether justified or not and recommended that the screening for other
metals be removed as a requirement from the NPDES general permit. EC
mentioned that if additional metal testing is required, annual testing
is much more appropriate than semi-annual, especially for groundwater
remedial systems at underground storage tank cleanup sites.
Response: In response to Exxon Company (EC) comments, EPA clarifies
the misconception that contaminated petroleum fuel sites must perform
the Part I.A.3 testing requirements for metals; these discharges must
comply only with the requirements of Part I.A.1 or I.A.2. EPA refers to
the general applicability of Part I.A.3, that allows produced water
discharges from any noncontaminated site, which could include
dewatering for tank removals, construction activity, or aquifer pump
tests from water wells. Any point source discharge of pollutants to
waters of the U.S. requires an NPDES permit, regardless of whether the
site is contaminated or uncontaminated. EPA, in its approach to
covering dewatering of produced groundwater associated with any
activity, placed the burden for verification on the permittee for
determining that the site groundwater has not been contaminated with
sources other than petroleum fuels. Requiring all permittees to perform
this screening allows facilities performing dewatering activities to be
placed under the general permit, assuming that the screening reveals no
contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels.
Comment 15: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the Discharge
Monitoring Report forms should be revised and the reporting procedure
should be simplified. Also, mentioned that the quality of forms
initially received from EPA tend to become illegible when photocopied.
EC also requested that EPA retain the current level of bioassay testing
instead of increasing the frequency as proposed.
Response: EPA will send original Discharge Monitoring Reports to
the permittee so that more legible photocopies can be produced. EPA
recommends that these originals be maintained by the permittee for
copying purposes. In reference to the bioassay requirements, permittees
which have previously obtained coverage under this general permit,
which effluents have not demonstrated unacceptable toxicity (LC 50 < 100%),="" may="" continue="" to="" sample="" 1/year.="" all="" sampling="" procedures="" and="" test="" methods="" must="" comply="" with="" part="" v.="" it="" should="" be="" noted="" that="" the="" permit="" limit="" identified="" in="" part="" v="" is="" applicable="" to="" those="" facilities="" covered="" by="" this="" general="" permit="" under="" sections="" i.a.1="" and="" i.a.2.="" comment="" 16:="" walt="" disney="" world="" (wdw)="" company,="" by="" letter="" dated="" october="" 18,="" 1994,="" submitted="" comments="" on="" the="" reissuance="" of="" the="" npdes="" general="" permit="" for="" the="" state="" of="" florida.="" wdw="" made="" general="" comments="" concerning="" the="" proposed="" effluent="" limitations="" for="" (1)="" total="" organic="" carbon="" and="" (2)="" ph,="" for="" discharge="" of="" uncontaminated="" produced="" groundwater.="" wdw="" mentioned="" most="" of="" the="" uncontaminated="" groundwater="" below="" their="" property="" exceeds="" epa's="" proposed="" total="" organic="" carbon="" (toc)="" limitation="" solely="" because="" of="" its="" naturally="" ocurring="" properties.="" wdw="" indicated="" that="" only="" lakes="" on="" the="" property="" fall="" below="" the="" 10="" mg/l="" requirement="" and="" four="" isolated="" wetlands="" had="" toc="" values="" averaging="" better="" than="" 90="" mg/l="" or="" better,="" with="" all="" other="" toc="" values="" ranging="" between="" 10="" and="" 65="" mg/l.="" wdw="" mentioned="" that="" these="" organic="" compounds="" are="" naturally="" occurring="" and="" large;="" greater="" than="" 500="" molecular="" weight,="" most="" of="" which="" consist="" of="" humic="" acids="" which="" generally="" come="" from="" the="" decomposition="" of="" organic="" matter.="" response:="" epa="" concurs="" that="" some="" elevated="" toc="" levels="" are="" the="" result="" of="" naturally="" occurring="" conditions.="" therefore,="" epa="" will="" revise="" the="" language="" in="" part="" a.3="" to="" read="" as="" follows:="" if="" any="" of="" the="" analytical="" test="" results,="" (except="" toc,="" benzene="" or="" naphthalene),="" exceed="" the="" above="" screening="" values="" the="" discharge="" is="" not="" authorized="" by="" this="" general="" permit.="" for="" excessive="" benzene="" or="" naphthalene="" concentrations,="" see="" part="" a.3(a)="" below.="" for="" initial="" excessive="" toc="" values="" that="" may="" be="" caused="" by="" naturally-occurring,="" high="" molecular="" weight="" organic="" compounds,="" the="" permittee="" may="" submit="" additional="" information="" which="" describes="" the="" method="" used="" to="" prove="" that="" these="" compounds="" are="" naturally="" occurring="" compounds.="" this="" additional="" information="" shall="" be="" submitted="" to="" epa="" during="" the="" filing="" of="" the="" noi="" request="" for="" coverage="" under="" the="" general="" permit.="" epa="" will="" review="" this="" data="" and="" determine="" if="" coverage="" under="" the="" general="" permit="" is="" appropriate.="" comment="" 17:="" walt="" disney="" world="" (wdw)="" made="" comments="" concerning="" the="" ph="" limitation="" as="" proposed="" in="" the="" npdes="" general="" permit.="" wdw="" mentioned="" that="" the="" ph="" of="" the="" waters="" on="" the="" wdw="" property="" range="" between="" 3.7="" and="" 7.7="" standard="" units.="" wdw="" mentioned="" that="" the="" general="" permit="" should="" allow="" discharge="" of="" uncontaminated="" produced="" groundwaters="" into="" any="" receiving="" waters="" so="" long="" as="" the="" produced="" groundwater="" ph="" falls="" within="" the="" lower="" and="" upper="" background="" ph="" limits="" of="" the="" receiving="" waters="" as="" determined="" from="" sampling="" data="" submitted="" by="" the="" applicant="" in="" the="" notice="" of="" intent="" (noi)="" request.="" response:="" since="" the="" ph="" requirements="" as="" proposed="" are="" based="" on="" florida="" administrative="" code="" (fac)="" section="" 17-302.530(52)(c),="" epa="" will="" retain="" the="" language="" in="" the="" final="" npdes="" general="" permit.="" comment="" 18:="" the="" florida="" chemical="" industry="" council="" (fcic),="" by="" letter="" dated="" october="" 21,="" 1994,="" mentioned="" that="" the="" proposed="" permit="" requires="" all="" produced="" groundwater="" discharges="" to="" submit="" analytical="" results="" to="" epa,="" regardless="" of="" project="" size="" or="" duration="" even="" if="" contamination="" is="" undetected.="" fcic="" mentioned="" the="" permit="" should="" allow="" a="" de="" minimis="" limit,="" so="" that="" very="" small="" construction="" projects="" will="" not="" be="" required="" to="" report="" and="" would="" eliminate="" small="" projects="" that="" do="" not="" involve="" cleanup="" at="" uncontaminated="" sites.="" response:="" the="" clean="" water="" act="" (cwa)="" does="" not="" allow="" for="" exclusion="" based="" on="" the="" volume="" of="" the="" discharge.="" however,="" having="" all="" potential="" permittees="" perform="" the="" analytical="" screen="" for="" any="" produced="" groundwater="" discharge="" to="" surface="" waters="" of="" the="" u.s.,="" places="" the="" burden="" on="" the="" potential="" discharger="" to="" verify="" that="" the="" groundwater="" is="" uncontaminated="" prior="" to="" discharge="" regardless="" of="" the="" length="" of="" discharge.="" the="" cwa="" requires="" that="" all="" point="" source="" discharges="" of="" pollutants="" to="" waters="" of="" the="" u.s.="" be="" authorized="" by="" npdes="" permits.="" comment="" 19:="" the="" united="" states,="" fish="" and="" wildlife="" service="" (fws)="" submitted="" general="" comments="" on="" the="" npdes="" general="" permit="" no.="" flg830000.="" the="" fws="" recommended="" that="" the="" permit="" be="" denied="" unless="" it="" includes="" discharge="" limitations="" and="" other="" appropriate="" permit="" conditions="" that="" will="" assure="" the="" maintenance="" of="" natural="" pre-project="" habitat="" quality,="" including:="" (a)="" water="" quality,="" (b)="" sediment="" quality="" and,="" (c)="" vegetative="" species="" diversity="" and="" abundance,="" plus="" the="" best="" available="" technology="" and="" scientific="" data="" be="" utilized="" to="" avoid="" any="" adverse="" effects="" on="" fish="" and="" wildlife,="" their="" behavior,="" and="" the="" reproduction="" of="" any="" species.="" response:="" since="" some="" technology="" based="" limits="" in="" this="" general="" permit="" are="" more="" stringent="" than="" florida's="" water="" quality="" standards,="" and="" the="" water="" quality-based="" limits="" are="" based="" on="" florida's="" water="" quality="" standards,="" epa="" believes="" that="" the="" maintenance="" of="" pre-project="" water="" quality="" will="" be="" maintained.="" additionally,="" the="" requirement="" to="" perform="" acute="" toxicity="" testing="" on="" more="" sensitive="" organisms="" assures="" that="" adequate="" monitoring="" is="" in="" place="" to="" avoid="" potential="" adverse="" impacts="" on="" fish="" and="" wildlife.="" iii.="" other="" changes="" to="" final="" npdes="" general="" permit="" at="" issuance:="" 1.="" the="" word="" ``dewatering''="" was="" added="" to="" the="" title="" of="" the="" final="" issued="" permit="" to="" indicate="" that="" the="" permit="" covers="" general="" dewatering.="" 2.="" in="" part="" i.a.3="" the="" language="" was="" revised="" to="" read:="" the="" following="" are="" the="" minimum="" reporting="" requirements="" for="" all="" produced="" groundwater="" dischargers="" which="" have="" acceptable="" screening="" value="" results="" as="" described="" below:="" additionally,="" the="" language="" was="" revised="" to="" allow="" initial="" sampling="" to="" begin="" within="" thirty="" (30)="" days="" after="" commencement="" of="" discharge.="" 3.="" in="" part="" i.a.3(c)="" and="" in="" part="" ii,="" section="" f(g),="" the="" language="" was="" revised="" to="" allow="" the="" short="" summary="" and="" analytical="" results="" to="" be="" sent="" one="" (1)="" week="" after="" discharge="" begins.="" permit="" no.="" flg830000="" general="" permit="" to="" discharge="" under="" the="" national="" pollutant="" discharge="" elimination="" system="" in="" compliance="" with="" the="" provisions="" of="" the="" clean="" water="" act,="" as="" amended="" (33="" u.s.c.="" 1251="" et="" seq;="" the="" ``act''),="" discharges="" of="" uncontaminated="" groundwater="" from="" dewatering="" activities,="" treated="" groundwater="" and="" incidental="" storm="" water,="" which="" are="" contaminated="" with="" gasoline="" or="" aviation="" fuel,="" are="" authorized="" to="" discharge="" to="" waters="" of="" the="" united="" states="" within="" the="" state="" of="" florida="" in="" accordance="" with="" effluent="" limitations,="" monitoring="" requirements="" and="" other="" conditions="" set="" forth="" herein.="" this="" final="" permit="" consists="" of="" part="" i,="" part="" ii,="" part="" iii,="" part="" iv,="" and="" part="" v.="" this="" permit="" shall="" become="" effective="" on="" december="" 7,="" 1994.="" this="" permit="" and="" the="" authorization="" to="" discharge="" shall="" expire="" at="" midnight,="" eastern="" daylight="" savings="" time,="" on="" december="" 6,="" 1999.="" date="" issued:="" december="" 6,="" 1994.="" robert="" f.="" mcghee,="" acting="" director,="" water="" management="" division.="" part="" i="" a.="" effluent="" limitations="" and="" monitoring="" requirements:="" existing="" sources="" and="" new="" dischargers="" 1.="" during="" the="" period="" beginning="" on="" the="" effective="" date="" of="" the="" permit="" and="" lasting="" through="" the="" term="" of="" this="" permit,="" the="" permittee="" is="" authorized="" to="" discharge="" treated="" groundwater="" and="" storm="" water="" that="" has="" been="" contaminated="" by="" automotive="" gasoline.="" it="" is="" anticipated="" that="" these="" contaminated="" waters="" will="" be="" treated="" by="" air="" stripping,="" followed="" by="" activated="" carbon="" adsorption,="" if="" necessary,="" or="" equivalent="" treatment="" to="" meet="" the="" following="" effluent="" limitations.="" such="" discharges="" shall="" be="" limited="" and="" monitored="" by="" the="" permittee="" as="" specified="" below:="" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------="" discharge="" limitations="" monitoring="" requirements="" ---------------------------------------------------------------="" effluent="" characteristic="" measurement="" daily="" avg="" daily="" max="" frequency="" sample="" type="" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------="" flow,="" mgd.......................................="" report......="" report......="" continuous........="" flowmeter.="" benzene,="">g/l........................... ............ 1.0......... 1/month........... Grab.
*Total Lead, g/l....................... ............ 30.0........ 1/month........... Grab.
pH, standard units..............................
(1) See Below
Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................
(2) See Part V Grab. ......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.
An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less
will constitute a violation of Florida Administrative Code (FAC) (July
11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a) and the terms of this permit. The testing
for this requirement must conform with Part V of this permit.
For fresh waters and coastal waters, the pH of the effluent shall
not be lowered to less than 6.0 units for fresh waters, or less than
6.5 units for marine waters, or raised above 8.5 units, unless the
permittee submits natural background data in the NOI request confirming
a natural background pH outside of this range. If natural background of
the receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in
the NOI request, is determined to be less than 6.0 units for fresh
waters, or less than 6.5 units in marine waters, the pH shall not vary
below natural background or vary more than one (1) unit above natural
background for fresh and coastal waters. If natural background of the
receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in the
NOI request, is determined to be higher than 8.5 units, the pH shall
not vary above natural background or vary more than one (1) unit below
natural background of fresh and coastal waters. The acceptable pH range
will be included in the letter granting permit coverage and on the DMR.
The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or
continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4).
In accordance with FAC Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c)(4-25-93), the
discharge shall at all times be free from floating solids, visible
foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on
surface waters.
Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements
specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): Nearest
accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or
mixing with the receiving waters.
A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements: Existing Sources
and New Dischargers
2. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit
and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is
authorized to discharge treated groundwater and storm water that has
been contaminated by Aviation Gasoline, Jet Fuel or Diesel.
It is anticipated that these contaminated waters will be treated by
air stripping, followed by activated carbon adsorption, if necessary,
or equivalent treatment to meet the following effluent limitations.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as
specified below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discharge limitations Monitoring requirements
---------------------------------------------------------------
Effluent characteristic Measurement
Daily avg Daily max frequency Sample type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flow, MGD....................................... Report...... Report...... Continuous........ Flowmeter.
Benzene, g/l........................... ............ 1.0......... 1/month........... Grab.
Naphthalene, g/l....................... ............ 100.0....... 1/month........... Grab.
*Total Lead, g/l....................... ............ 30.0........ 1/month........... Grab.
pH, standard units (SUs)........................
(3) See Part I.A.1
Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................
(2) See Part V Grab. ......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.
An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less
will constitute a violation of FAC (July 11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a)
and the terms of this permit. The testing for this requirement must
conform with Part V of this permit.
The permittee shall comply with the same pH requirements for this
Part I.A.2 as in Part I.A.1.
The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or
continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4). In accordance with FAC
Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at all times be free from
floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such
amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.
Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements
specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): nearest
accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or
mixing with the receiving waters.
A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
3. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit
and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is
authorized to discharge produced groundwater from any noncontaminated
site activity which discharges by a point source to waters of the
United States, only if the reported values for the parameters listed
below do not exceed any of the screening values below. Before discharge
of produced groundwater can occur from such sites, analytical tests on
samples of the untreated proposed discharge water shall be performed to
determine if contamination exists from other sources.
The following are the minimum reporting requirements for all
produced groundwater dischargers which have acceptable screening value
results as described below:
The effluent shall be sampled at the final effluent within thirty
(30) days after commencement of discharge and once every six months for
the life of the project to maintain continued coverage under this
general permit. The effluent shall be sampled for the parameters listed
below and the analytical results obtained shall be submitted to EPA at
the address given in Part III.A.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter Daily maximum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Organic Carbon................................ Report, mg/l.
pH.................................................. Report, standard
units
Total Recoverable Mercury........................... Report, g/
l.
Total Recoverable Cadmium........................... Report, g/
l.
Total Recoverable Copper............................ Report, g/
l.
Total Recoverable Lead.............................. Report, g/
l.
Total Recoverable Zinc.............................. Report, g/
l.
Total Recoverable Chromium (Hex.)................... Report, g/
l.
Benzene............................................. Report, g/
l.
Naphthalene......................................... Report, g/
l.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reported analytical test results for the parameters listed above
exceeding any of the screening values listed below shall be considered
an indication of contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter
Indicator if discharge is into -----------------------------------
Fresh waters Marine waters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Organic Carbon................ 10.0 mg/l 10.0 mg/l
pH, SU's............................ 6.0-8.5 6.5-8.5
Total Recoverable Mercury........... 0.012 g/ 0.025 g/
l l
Total Recoverable Cadmium........... 9.3 g/l 9.3 g/l
Total Recoverable Copper............ 2.9 g/l 2.9 g/l
Total Recoverable Lead.............. 0.03 mg/l 5.6 g/l
Total Recoverable Zinc.............. 86.0 g/ 86.0 g/
l l
Total Recoverable Chromium 11.0 g/ 50.0 g/
(Hexavalent). l l
Benzene............................. 1.0 g/l 1.0 g/l
Naphthalene......................... 100.0 g/ 100.0 g/
l l
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If at any time during discharge, the effluent exceeds these
screening values, EPA may require the facility to cease discharge.
If any of the analytical test results, (except TOC, benzene or
naphthalene), exceed the above screening values, discharge is not
authorized by this permit. See paragraph I.A.(3)(b) for further
guidance.
For excessive benzene or naphthalene concentrations, see Part
A.(3)(a) below. For initial excessive TOC values that may be caused by
naturally-occurring, high molecular weight organic compounds, the
permittee may request to be exempted from the TOC requirement by
submitting additional information with the NOI which describes the
method used to exclude these naturally ocurring compounds.
In accordance with FAC 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at
all times be free from floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or
visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.
All discharges must comply with the following permit requirements:
(a) If analytical tests of Part I.A.3 reveal excessive benzene and
naphthalene concentrations indicative of contamination from petroleum
fuels, and the discharge will occur for thirty (30) days or less, the
permittee shall comply only with the applicable effluent limitations
and monitoring requirements in Part I.A.1 or I.A.2 for benzene, pH,
and/or naphthalene and total lead. The commencement of the Part V
biomonitoring program and Part I.B.3 EPA method 624 and 625 (one time
analysis) is not required for this short-term activity. One (1) grab
sample shall be analyzed per seven (7) days during the discharge
period, and the total volume discharged shall be recorded. For
discharges contaminated by petroleum fuels that last for less than a
week, daily monitoring will be required for the applicable parameters.
Upon receipt of written EPA notification of coverage that the NOI
request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence.
Discharge Monitoring Reports shall be submitted to EPA within thirty
(30) days after termination of the discharge.
(b) If contamination from sources other than petroleum
contamination does exist, as indicated by the results of the analytical
tests required by Part I. A.3 above, the discharge is not covered by
this general permit. The operator shall apply for an individual NPDES
permit at least one hundred and twenty (120) days prior to the date a
discharge to waters of the United States is expected. No discharge is
permissible without an effective NPDES permit.
(c) If analytical tests reveal no contamination exists from
petroleum fuels or sources other than petroleum contamination as a
result of the required analytical screening tests required in Part I.
A.3, the permittee can commence discharge immediately and is covered by
this permit without having to submit an NOI request for coverage to
EPA, Region IV. A short summary of the proposed activity and copy of
these analytical tests shall be sent to the same address specified in
Part III.A one (1) week after discharge begins. These analytical tests
shall be kept on site during discharge and made available to EPA, if
requested. Additionally, no Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms are
required to be submitted to EPA, Region IV.
B. Other Requirements
1. Any more frequent effluent discharge monitoring required by the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for the
parameters limited in this permit, or different parameters, shall be
reported to the Permit Issuing Authority in accordance with the
requirements of Part III of this permit.
2. Effluent limitations for combining contaminated groundwater
pumped to above-ground storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from
the site's recovery wells: The permittee shall notify FDEP of any
intent to combine contaminated groundwater pumped to above-ground
storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from the recovery well.
Approval of this combined effluent discharge by FDEP will constitute
approval to apply for coverage under this permit.
3. Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this permit or
startup of discharge the permittee shall also submit the results of the
following analyses. These analyses shall be performed on a
representative sample of the groundwater effluent discharge, taken
after final treatment.
Required analyses (one time only):
a. EPA Method 625--Acid and base/neutral extractable organics
b. EPA Method 624--Purgeable Organics
If such analyses required in Part B.3 above reveal toxic pollutants
other than those regulated in Part I.A. or subsequent Whole Effluent
Toxicity (WET) tests reveal an LC50 of 100% or less in a test of
96 hours duration or less, coverage under this general permit will be
reviewed for termination by EPA Region IV Enforcement Section.
4. If the pH is monitored continuously, the pH values shall not
deviate outside the required range more than 1% of the time in any
calendar month; and no individual excursion shall exceed 60 minutes. An
``excursion'' is an unintentional and temporary incident in which the
pH value of discharge wastewater exceeds the range set forth in this
permit.
C. Test Procedures
1. In performing the analysis for the dissolved constituents in the
surface water and groundwater, the permittee shall use the guidelines
recommended and described in FAC Sections 62-770.600(8)[a-d] of the
Petroleum Contamination Cleanup Criteria (PCCC), amended February 20,
1990, or the most current edition.
2. If the petroleum contamination is from a petroleum fuel in which
the source of contamination has not been identified, the groundwater
shall be analyzed (using the recommended methods) for the following
parameters as described in FAC Section 62.770.600(8)(c)1, of the PCCC,
amended February 20, 1990, or the most current edition:
a. Lead....................................... (EPA Method 239.2 or
Standard Method 304)
b. Priority Pollutant Volatile Organics....... (EPA Method 624)
c. Priority Pollutant Extractable Organics.... (EPA Method 625)
d. Non-Priority Pollutant Organics (with GC/MS (EPA Methods 624 and
Peaks greater than 10 ppb). 625)
D. Schedule of Compliance
1. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent
limitations specified for discharges in accordance with the following
schedule:
Permittees with Revoked Individual Permits:
Operational level attained--Upon Receipt of Notification of Coverage
New Dischargers:
Operational level attained--Upon Commencement of Discharge
2. No later than fourteen (14) calendar days after any date
identified in the above schedule of compliance the permittee shall
submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions
being required by identified dates, a written notice of compliance or
noncompliance. In the latter case, the notice shall include the cause
of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the probability of
meeting the next scheduled requirement.
Part II
Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits
Section A. General Conditions
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any
permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and
is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation
and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit renewal
application.
2. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
Any person who violates a permit condition is subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day of such violation. Any person who
willfully or negligently violates permit conditions is subject to a
fine of up to $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not
more than 1 year, or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit
conditions is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000 to 50,000 per day
of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Also,
any person who violates a permit condition may be assessed an
administrative penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation with the
maximum not to exceed $125,000. [Ref: CFR 122.41(a)].
3. Duty to Mitigate
The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or
prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which has a
reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the
environment.
4. Duty to Reapply
Where EPA is the Permit Issuing Authority (PIA), the terms and
conditions of this permit are automatically continued in accordance
with 40 CFR 122.6, only where the permittee has submitted a timely and
complete Notice of Intent 180 days prior to expiration of this permit,
and the PIA is unable through no fault of the permittee to issue a new
permit before the expiration date.
5. Permit Modification
After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be
modified, terminated, or revoked for cause (as described in 40 CFR
122.62 et seq) including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
b. Obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or failure to
disclose fully all relevant facts;
c. A change in any conditions that requires either temporary
interruption or elimination of the permitted discharge; or
d. Information newly acquired by the Agency indicating the
discharge poses a threat to human health or welfare.
If the permittee believes that any past or planned activity would
be cause for modification or revocation and reissuance under 40 CFR
122.62, the permittee must report such information to the Permit
Issuing Authority. The submittal of a new application may be required
of the permittee. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit
modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not
stay any permit condition.
6. Toxic Pollutants
Notwithstanding Paragraph A-4, above, if a toxic effluent standard
or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such
effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a)
of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and
such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for
such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be modified or revoked
and reissued to conform to the toxic effluent standard or prohibition
and the permittee so notified.
7. Civil and Criminal Liability
Except as provided in permit conditions on ``Bypassing'' Section B,
Paragraph B-3, nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the
permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
8. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the
institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is
or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.
9. State Laws
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the
institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any
applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section
510 of the Act.
10. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights of
any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury
to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any
infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.
11. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to
any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to
other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be
affected thereby.
12. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority, within
a reasonable time, any information which the Permit Issuing Authority
may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking
and reissuing, or terminating this permit or to determine compliance
with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Permit
Issuing Authority upon request, copies of records required to be kept
by this permit.
Section B. Operation and Maintenance of Pollution Controls
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all
facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related
appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve
compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and
maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate
quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed
by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve
compliance with the conditions of the permit.
2. Need to Halt or Reduce Not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action
that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted
activity in order to maintain compliance with the condition of this
permit.
3. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
a. Definitions
(1) ``Bypass'' means the intentional diversion of waste streams
from any portion of a treatment facility, which is not a designed or
established operating mode for the facility.
(2) ``Severe property damage'' means substantial physical damage to
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to
become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural
resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a
bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by
delays in production.
b. Bypass Not Exceeding Limitations
The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause
effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for
essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are
not subject to the provisions of Paragraphs c. and d. of this section.
c. Notice
(1) Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the
need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least
ten days before the date of the bypass; including an evaluation of the
anticipated quality and effect of the bypass.
(2) Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an
unanticipated bypass as required in Section D, Paragraph D-4 (24-hour
notice).
d. Prohibition of Bypass
(1) Bypass is prohibited and the Permit Issuing Authority may take
enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless:
(a) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal
injury, or severe and extensive property damage;
(b) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as
maintenance of sufficient reserve holding capacity, the use of
auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, waste
hauling, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime.
This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment should
have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment
to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment
downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(c) The permittee submitted notices as required under Paragraph c.
of this section.
(2) The Permit Issuing Authority may, within its authority, approve
an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the
Permit Issuing Authority determines that it will meet the three
conditions listed above in Paragraph d.(1) of this section.
4. Upsets
``Upset'' means an exceptional incident in which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology based permit
effluent limitations because of factors beyond the control of the
permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused
by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,
inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or
careless or improper operation. An upset constitutes an affirmative
defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology
based permit limitation if the requirements of 40 CFR 122.41(n)(3) are
met. (Note that this provision does not apply to water quality
requirements.)
5. Removed Substances
This permit does not authorize discharge of solids, sludge, filter
backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or
control of wastewaters to waters of the United States unless
specifically limited in Part 1.
Section C. Monitoring and Records
1. Representative Sampling
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be
representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. All
samples shall be taken at the monitoring points specified in this
permit and, unless otherwise specified, before the effluent joins or is
diluted by any other wastestream, body of water, or substance.
Monitoring points shall not be changed without notification to and the
approval of the Permit Issuing Authority.
2. Flow Measurements
Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to insure the
accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored
discharges. The devices shall be installed, calibrated and maintained
to insure that the accuracy of the measurements are consistent with the
accepted capability of that type of device. Devices selected shall be
capable of measuring flows with a maximum deviation of less than
10% from the true discharge rates throughout the range of
expected discharge volumes. Guidance in selection, installation,
calibration and operation of acceptable flow measurement devices can be
obtained from the following references:
(1) ``A Guide of Methods and Standards for the Measurement of Water
Flow'', U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS
Special Publication 421, May 1975, 97 pp. (Available from the U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Order by SD catalog
No. C13.10:421.)
(2) ``Water Measurement Manual'', U.S. Department of Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation, Second Edition, Revised Reprint, 1974, 327 pp.
(Available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20402. Order by catalog No. 127.19/2:W29/2, Stock No. S/N 24003-0027.)
(3) ``Flow Measurement in Open Channels and Closed Conduits'', U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS Special
Publication 484, October 1977, 982 pp. (Available in paper copy or
microfiche from National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
Springfield, VA 22151. Order by NTIS No. PB-273 535/5ST.)
(4) ``NPDES Compliance Flow Measurement Manual'', U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Enforcement,
Publication MCD-77, September 1981, 135 pp. (Available from the General
Services Administration (8BRC), Centralized Mailing Lists Services,
Building 41, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225.)
3. Monitoring Procedures
Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved
under 40 CFR Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified
in this permit.
4. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers
with, or knowingly renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method
required to be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be
punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 2 years per violation, or by both.
5. Retention of Records
The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information,
including all calibration and maintenance records and all original
strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation,
copies of all reports required by this permit, and records of all data
used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at
least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or
application. This period may be extended by the Permit Issuing
Authority at any time.
6. Record Contents
Records of monitoring information shall include:
a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
7. Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Permit Issuing Authority, or an
authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials and
other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept
under the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable time any facilities, equipment (including
monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated
or required under this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean
Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
Section D. Reporting Requirements
1. Change in Discharge
The permittee shall give notice to the Permit Issuing Authority as
soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to
the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one
of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a new source; or
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature
or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification
applies to pollutants which are subject neither to effluent limitations
in the permit, nor to notification requirements under Section D,
Paragraph D-10(a).
2. Anticipated Noncompliance
The permittee shall give advance notice to the Permit Issuing
Authority of any planned change in the permitted facility or activity
which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. Any
maintenance or facilities, which might necessitate unavoidable
interruption of operation and degradation of effluent quality, shall be
scheduled during noncritical water quality periods and carried out in a
manner approved by the Permit Issuing Authority.
3. Transfer of Ownership or Control
A permit may be automatically transferred to another party if:
a. The permittee notifies the Permit Issuing Authority of the
proposed transfer at least 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer
date;
b. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and
new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of permit
responsibility, coverage, and liability between them; and
c. The Permit Issuing Authority does not notify the existing
permittee of his or her intent to modify or revoke and reissue the
permit. If this notice is not received, the transfer is effective on
the date specified in the agreement mentioned in paragraph b.
4. Monitoring Reports
See Part III of this permit.
5. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than
required by this permit, using test procedures approved under 40 CFR
136 or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring
shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data
submitted in the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). Such increased
frequency shall also be indicated.
6. Averaging of Measurements
Calculations for limitations which require averaging of
measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise
specified by the Permit Issuing Authority in the permit.
7. Compliance Schedules
Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress
reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any compliance
schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later than 14 days
following each schedule date. Any reports of noncompliance shall
include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the
probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.
8. Twenty-Four Hour Reporting
The permittee shall orally report any noncompliance which may
endanger health or the environment, within 24 hours from the time the
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. A written submission
shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the permittee becomes
aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a
description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of
noncompliance, including exact dates and times; and if the
noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is
expected to continue, and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate,
and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. The Permit Issuing
Authority may verbally waive the written report, on a case-by-case
basis, when the oral report is made. The following violations shall be
included in the 24 hour report when they might endanger health or the
environment:
a. An unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in
the permit.
b. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit.
9. Other Noncompliance
The permittee shall report in narrative form, all instances of
noncompliance not previously reported under Section D, Paragraphs D-2,
D-4, D-7, and D-8 at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The
reports shall contain the information listed in Paragraph D-8.
10. Changes in Discharges of Toxic Substances
The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority as soon as
it knows or has reason to believe:
a. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result
in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of any toxic
substance(s) (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D, Table II and III) which
is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest
of the following ``notification levels'':
(1) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/l); or
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/l) for acrolein and
acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l) for 2, 4-
dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram
per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.
b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result
in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis, of a toxic
pollutant (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D. Table II and III) which is
not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of
the following ``notification levels'':
(1) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l); or
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.
11. Signatory Requirements
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Permit
Issuing Authority shall be signed and certified.
a. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the
purpose of this Section, a responsible corporate officer means:
(1) a president, secretary, treasurer or vice president of the
corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other
person who performs similar policy--or decision-making functions for
the corporation, or (2) the manager of one or more manufacturing
production or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or
having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in
second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been
assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate
procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner
or the proprietor, respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by
either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
b. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed by a person
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person.
A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described
above;
(2) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position
having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated
facility or activity, such as the position of plant manager, operator
of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having overall
responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly
authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any
individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Permit Issuing
Authority.
c. Certification. Any person signing a document under paragraphs
(a) or (b) of this section shall make the following certification:
``I certify under penalty of law that this document and all
attachments were prepared under the direction or supervision in
accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my
inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties
for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment for knowing violations.''
12. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under 40 CFR Part 2,
all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall
be available for public inspection at the offices of the Permit Issuing
Authority. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and
effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
13. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes
any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or
other document submitted or required to be maintained under this
permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or
noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 2
years per violation, or by both.
Section E. Definitions
1. Permit Issuing Authority
The Regional Administrator of EPA Region IV or his designee, unless
at some time in the future the State receives the authority to
administer the NPDES program and assumes jurisdiction over the permit;
at which time, the Director of the State program receiving
authorization becomes the issuing authority.
2. Act
``Act'' means the Clean Water Act (formerly referred to as the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act) Public Law 92-500, as amended by
Public Laws 95-217, 95-576, 96-483, 97-117, and Public Law 100-4, 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
3. Concentration Measurements
a. The ``average monthly concentration'', is the sum of the
concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a
calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled and measured,
divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured
during such month (arithmetic mean of the daily concentration values).
The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a
composite sample or in the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean
(weighted by flow value) of all the samples collected during the
calendar day.
b. The ``maximum daily concentration'', is the concentration of a
pollutant discharge during a calendar day. It is identified as ``Daily
Maximum'' under ``Other Limits'' in Part I of the permit and the
highest such value recorded during the reporting period is reported
under the ``Maximum'' column under ``Quality'' on the DMR.
4. Other Measurements
a. The effluent flow expressed as MGD is the 24 hour average flow
averaged monthly. It is the arithmetic mean of the total daily flows
recorded during the calendar month. Where monitoring requirements for
flow are specified in Part I of the permit the flow rate values are
reported in the ``Average'' column under ``Quantity'' on the DMR.
b. An ``instantaneous flow measurement'' is a measure of flow taken
at the time of sampling, when both the sample and flow will be
representative of the total discharge.
c. Where monitoring requirements for pH or dissolved oxygen are
specified in Part I of the permit, the values are generally reported in
the ``Quality or Concentration'' column on the DMR.
5. Types of Samples
a. Grab Sample: A ``grab sample'' is a single influent or effluent
portion which is not a composite sample. The sample(s) shall be
collected at the period(s) most representative of the total discharge.
6. Calendar Day
A calendar day is defined as the period from midnight of one day
until midnight of the next day. However, for purposes of this permit,
any consecutive 24-hour period that reasonably represents the calendar
day may be used for sampling.
7. Hazardous Substance
A hazardous substance means any substance designated under 40 CFR
Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
8. Toxic Pollutant
A toxic pollutant is any pollutant listed as toxic under Section
307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.
Section F. Application Requirements
a. For expired individual NPDES permits, dischargers desiring
coverage under this general permit are required to submit a notice of
intent (NOI) to the Permit Issuing Authority. The NOI shall include (1)
the name and address of the person that the permit will be issued to
(2) the name, and address of the operation, including county location,
(3) the applicable individual NPDES number(s), (4) the identification
of any new discharge location not contained in the expired permit, (5)
evidence that the operation has obtained approval of a Remedial Action
Plan (RAP) Order from the FDEP, (6) a map showing the facility and
discharge location (including latitude and longitude), (7) the name of
the receiving water, and (8) for discharges lasting over one (1) year a
pollution prevention plan. (See Part IV.2) Operators having several
individual permits are encouraged to consolidate requests for coverage
into one NOI for all individual permits. The previous submission of the
proper forms in the renewal application does not relieve the permittee
desiring coverage under the general permit of the requirement to file a
NOI.
b. All facilities continued by the previous general permit, will be
required to submit a NOI requesting continued coverage under the
reissued general permit by [insert date 60 calendar days after the date
of publication in the Federal Register]. The NOI shall contain the same
information specified in paragraph a above.
c. Dischargers with current individual NPDES permits that desire
coverage under this general permit are required to file an NOI to the
Permit Issuing Authority at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration
of their current permit(s). The NOI shall contain the same information
specified in paragraph a above. Permittees desiring to renew their
individual permit are required to submit the appropriate application
forms at least 180 days before expiration of their individual permit.
d. Dischargers who have not previously obtained an individual NPDES
permit are required to submit to EPA the FDEP approval order letter
approving the site RAP. The RAP approval order shall be attached to an
NOI to be covered by the general permit and shall contain the same
information specified in paragraph (a) above. The application for
coverage under the general permit must be made at least fourteen (14)
days before the discharge is to commence.
e. Dischargers seeking coverage under Part I A.3.a. will be
required to submit to EPA the date the discharge is expected to cease,
results of analytical data and the same information in paragraph a
above, except items (3), (4), (5) and (8). Notification of coverage to
discharge will be upon receipt of EPA's short-term coverage letter.
f. Notification of coverage will be given by the Permit Issuing
Authority by certified mail to the permittee (except for short-term
pump tests, 8-hours in duration or less), for dischargers seeking
coverage under Part I Sections A.1 and A.2, with the issuance date for
each facility being the effective date of coverage by the Permit
Issuing Authority.
Short-term pump tests, shall be covered automatically once the
permittee receives acceptable groundwater screening values, and the
permittee will be responsible meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1
or A.2. The DMR's for these pump tests shall be submitted to within
thirty (30) days after discharge ceases.
g. Dischargers meeting the conditions set forth in Part I A.3.c.
are not required to submit an detailed NOI as outlined above, but must
submit a copy of the analytical tests and a summary of the proposed
activity one (1) week after discharge begins. These dischargers are
covered upon receipt of the data, unless notified otherwise by EPA.
h. The coverage of the permit shall expire on December 6, 1999.
i. In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(a)(2) permittees who are
covered by this general permit who seek to be continued under this
general permit, shall submit an complete NOI in accordance with
paragraph a, to EPA 180 days before the expiration of this permit.
Section G. Additional General Permit Conditions
1. The Permit Issuing Authority may require any person authorized
by this permit to apply for and obtain an individual NPDES permit when:
a. The discharge(s) is a significant contributor of pollution;
b. The discharger is not in compliance with the conditions of this
permit;
c. A change has occurred in the availability of the demonstrated
technology of practices for the control or abatement of pollutants
applicable to the point sources;
d. Effluent limitation guidelines are promulgated for point sources
covered by this permit;
e. A Water Quality Management Plan containing requirements
applicable to such point source is approved; or
f. The point source(s) covered by this permit no longer:
(1) Involve the same or substantially similar types of operations;
(2) Discharge the same types of wastes;
(3) Require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions;
(4) Require the same or similar monitoring; and
(5) In the opinion of the RA, are more appropriately controlled
under an individual permit than under a general permit. The Regional
Administrator (RA) may require any operator authorized by this permit
to apply for an individual NPDES permit only if the operator has been
notified in writing that a permit application is required.
2. Any operator authorized to discharge by this permit may request
to be excluded from the coverage of this general permit by applying for
an individual permit. The operator shall submit an application together
with the reasons supporting the request to the RA.
3. When an individual NPDES permit is issued to an operator
otherwise subject to this general permit, the applicability of this
permit to the owner or operator is automatically terminated on the
effective date of the individual permit.
4. A source excluded from coverage under this general permit solely
because it already has an individual permit may request that its
individual permit be revoked, and that it be covered by this general
permit. Upon revocation of the individual permit, this general permit
shall apply to the source.
5. A petroleum contamination recovery operation may be excluded
from this general permit if it proposes discharges to receiving waters
that are classified as ``Special Protection, Outstanding Florida
Waters, Outstanding National Resource Waters'' as set forth by FAC 62-
302.700, dated April 25, 1993.
6. The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority within
30 days after the permanent termination of discharge from their
facility. This letter shall include the necessary Site Rehabilitation
Completion Order (SRCO) from Florida Bureau of Waste Cleanup which
constitutes final action on the State level for completion of cleanup
activities at the affected site. After review of the SRCO, EPA will
inactivate coverage of the general NPDES permit for the facility.
Dischargers covered under this general permit without RAP approval
shall submit a No Discharge Certification Form to EPA, within 30 days
after ceasing discharge.
Part III
Other Requirements
A. Reporting of Monitoring Results
Monitoring results obtained for each calendar month shall be
summarized and reported on a DMR Form (EPA No. 3320-1), one DMR for
each month. Unless otherwise required in Part V, these forms shall be
submitted after each calendar quarter and postmarked no later than the
28th day of the month following the completed calendar quarter. (For
example, data for January-March shall be submitted by April 28.)
Calendar quarters are January-March, April-June, July-September and
October-December. Signed copies of these and all other reports required
by Section D of Part II, Reporting Requirements, and Part V shall be
submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority at the following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Enforcement Section,
Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, 345 Courtland Street, N.E.,
Atlanta, GA 30365.
If no discharge occurs during the reporting period, sampling
requirements of this permit do not apply. The statement ``No
Discharge'' shall be written on the DMR form. If, during the term of
this permit, the facility ceases discharge to surface waters, the
Permit Issuing Authority shall be notified immediately upon cessation
of discharge.
B. Reopener Clause
This permit shall be modified, or alternatively revoked and
reissued to comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation
issued or approved under Sections 301(b)(2)(C), and (D), 304(b)(2), and
307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act (the Act), if the effluent standard or
limitation so issued or approved--
1. Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent
than any condition in this permit; or
2. Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit. The permit as
modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other
requirements of the Act then applicable.
Part IV
Best Management Practices and Pollution Prevention Conditions
Section A. General Conditions
1. BMP Plan
Preparation of a Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan shall be
prepared in conjunction with development of the Remedial Action Plan
required by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (See Part
II.F.c.). The permittee shall maintain the BMP plan at the facility and
shall make the plan available to the permit issuing authority upon
request. The ``NPDES Guidance Document'' can be used as a reference
which contains technical information on BMPs and the elements of the
BMP program. The permittee shall develop and implement a BMP plan which
prevents, or minimizes the potential for, the release of pollutants
from ancillary activities, including material storage areas; plant site
runoff; in-plant transfer, process and material handling areas; loading
and unloading operations, and sludge and waste disposal areas, to the
waters of the United States through plant site runoff; spillage or
leaks; sludge or waste disposal; or drainage from raw material storage.
The term pollutants refers to any substance listed as toxic under
Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, oil, as defined in Section
311(a)(1) of the Act, and substance listed as hazardous under Section
311 of the Act. Copies of the ``NPDES Guidance Document'' may be
obtained by submitting written requests to: Director, Water Management
Division, U.S. EPA Region IV, 345 Courtland St. N.E., Atlanta, Georgia
30365.
2. Pollution Prevention Plan
New permittees with long term treatment systems expected to
discharge one (1) year or more shall develop a Pollution Prevention
Plan for the site and submit it with the NOI. It shall contain the
following information:
(a) A Narrative of What Caused the Groundwater Contamination.
(b) Methods currently being deployed at the site to prevent
groundwater contamination from reoccurring.
(c) Other alternative treatment options which were considered in
reducing the groundwater contamination.
(d) Explanation of why long term treatment of discharge to Surface
Waters of the United States was chosen as opposed to:
(1) Reduction-Monitor Phase I--Using a combination of techniques to
significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be achieved
in three (3) months or less, with the objective of reaching a monitor-
only status.
(2) Reduction-Monitor Phase II--Using a combination of techniques
to significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be
achieved in six (6) months or less, with the objective of reaching a
monitor-only status.
In an effort to promote pollution prevention, the Permit Issuing
Authority may issue permits which include or require pollution
prevention activities.
Part V
Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Freshwater Language
As required by Part I of the permit, within 30-days after
commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to fresh waters,
which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the
surface is less than 1500 milligrams per liter, shall initiate the
series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent toxicity of
the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1) outfall exists,
separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All test species,
procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be in accordance
with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to
Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the most current
edition. The dilution/control water used will be moderately hard water
as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7, or the most current
edition. A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be
conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and
the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR).
Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted,
these results must be submitted with the DMR.
1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal
multi-concentration toxicity tests using the daphnid (Ceriodaphnia
dubia) and the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). All tests shall be
conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall be
conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution concentrations
at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.
b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test,
the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated.
A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not
exceed 10% for either species.
2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every
month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once
every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified
otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to
as ``routine'' tests.
3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less
occurs in either test species in any of the above-described tests
within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the
permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same
manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable
acute toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection
requirements and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1
above must be met for the test to be considered valid. The first test
shall begin within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and
shall be conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests
are completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the
toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.
b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable
acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test
was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of
completion of the second additional, valid test.
Part V
Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Saltwater Language
As required by Part I of this permit, within 30-days after
commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to marine waters,
which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the
surface is greater than or equal to 1500 milligrams per liter, shall
initiate the series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent
toxicity of the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1)
outfall exists, separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All
test species, procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be
in accordance with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of
Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the
most current edition. The dilution/control water and effluent used will
be adjusted to a salinity of 20 parts per thousand using artificial sea
salts as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7 (or the most current
edition). A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be
conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and
the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR).
Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted,
these results must be submitted with the DMR.
1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal
multi-concentration toxicity tests using the mysid shrimp (Mysidopsis
bahia) and the inland silverside (Menidia beryllina). All tests shall
be conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall
be conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution
concentrations at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.
b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test,
the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated.
A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not
exceed 10% for either species.
2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every
month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once
every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified
otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to
as ``routine'' tests.
3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less
occurs in either test species in any of the above- described tests
within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the
permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same
manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable
toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection requirements
and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1 above must be
met for the test to be considered valid. The first test shall begin
within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and shall be
conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests are
completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the
toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.
b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable
acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test
was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of
completion of the second additional, valid test.
[FR Doc. 94-30952 Filed 12-15-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
