Title: "DER Adopts Rule Changes" from The Florida Specifier, July 1981
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004122/00001
 Material Information
Title: "DER Adopts Rule Changes" from The Florida Specifier, July 1981
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collections - "DER Adopts Rule Changes" from The Florida Specifier, July 1981 (JDV Box 54)
General Note: Box 17, Folder 5 ( Water Policy - 1981 ), Item 9
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004122
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text




YfER Adepts Rule Chan es


A i ri ,ioricd i-. Wi, t i, r F a-
II!PS rIlf Chaotrr Au
wLnicl h includes (omesCtc waste
.",o! r tr'itrnrment stand (r ds, dfid I
Ii paqe mnianual on lan nl a plica-
tion systerns. was adopt,'d by tlhe
Environmental Regualtion Com-
mission.
The rule, effective September
1. 1981. addresses domestic
( wastewater only and does not
affect existing rule provisions on
industrial waste treatment.
The rule generally applies to


new facilities for which construc-
t on permit applications are ap-
proved by DER after September 1.
However, if existing facilities are
modified, or treatment processes
are altered to affect effluent
quality, the facilities will be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis
for applicability under the rule.
Rule requirements may be applied
if existing facilities are violating
water quality standards or permit
conditions. Also, some existing
facilities may have to comply with


requirements involving public
health concerns.
Sections dealing with ocean
outfalls, sludge management and
underground injection control will
be added to the rule later after
public workshops.
Any domestic wastewater facil-
ity that has a design capacity of
2,000 gallons or less per average
daily flow is exempt. Also exempt
are septic tanks of the same
capacity that serve the complete
Continued on Page 3


wastewater disposal needs of a
single establishment such as a
dwelling, business building institu-
tion or condominium facility.
Also exempt is any individual
service connection that runs from
a single establishment to pretreat-
ment or collection system.
Operators of existing facilities
that do not meet standards must
provide a written report by May 28,
1982, dealing the provisions they
cannot comply with, as well as a
schedule showing the steps and
timetables necessary for full
compliance. This requirement
does not apply to operators of
Type III facilities with a capacity of
less than 100,000 gallons per day.


These may submit the report when
their permit comes up to renewal.
Slow-rate, rapid-rate, overland
flow, absorption field and other
land application systems which
potentially discharge in Class 1 -
groundwaters, generally must
meet secondary treatment stan-
dards as well as basic disinfection
and -pH levels prior to the
effluent's land application. How-
ever, under some conditions, less
stringent preapplication treatment
levels may be allowed for overland
flow and some underdrained slow-
rate land appllication systems if by
the time the effluent reaches the
receiving surface water, it meets
secondary treatment standards


(at mimimum), as well as basic
disinfection and pH control levels.
Effluent used to irrigate areas
accessible to the public such as
golf courses must be 'treated
beyond secondary levels.
The new rule maintains the
numerical limits of 5-5-3-1 for
advanced waste treatment. The
effluent may not contain more
than five milligrams per liter
(mg/1) of biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD), 5 mg/1 of total
suspended solids (TSS), 3 mg/1 of
total nitrogen and 1 mg/1 of total
phosphorous after disinfection
and prior to discharge into
"Wilson-Grizzle" surface water.
The requirement applies to certain
Florida west-central coastal water,
including waters in the Tampa Bay
area. The new rule says these
criteria must be met on an annual
basis. Also the rule allows the
permitted the option to demonstr-
ate to the Department that the
effluent may not have to meet
advanced "aste treatment levels


to meet water quality standards.
The new rule establishes these
design criteria for new facilities
and modifications of existing
facilities: 20 mg/1 BOD and 20
mg/1 TSS or 90 percent removal-
whichever is more stringent. The
compliance criterion for all se-
condary treatment facilities is the
20 mg/1 value. The new rule
addresses annual, monthly, weekly
and maximum permissible con-
centrations.
No effluent discharges will be
allowed in "Class II" shellfish
harvesting waters. Also, effluent
discharges into "Class I-A" potable
surface waters are allowable,
provided the effluent generally
meets community drinking water
standards (Chapter 17-22, F.A.C.).
Because of the "potentially
harmful effects of chlorine used in
conjunction with wastewater treat-
ment," the new. rule encourages
the use of alternative disinfection
methods such as ozone or
bromine compounds.









--t Liz. V 5 0::
Cancer-pollution =.--. (Z
-O~j~ If n

link challenged, ( -1
0~ ~ Q "

CHICAGO (AP) Pollution of the environment from 8! Z S
such sources A as automobiles and chemical wastes has not r1 &. o; "
,been shown to increase people's risk of developing cancer, 2 -2-.- E L.-,
a panel of doctors concludes in a report disputed by sev- "- P "
eral specialists. 0g 2 E 1 "".c
But there re rt, in the current issue of the Journal of e t. he o
,erian edical Associat distinguishes betweenthe
'x.orkplae and the general environment, and says that a 0 0 &
workplace and the ge ace M
carcinogens like asbestos and chromates in the wol~ ,* 0-
may account for a future increase in cancer. F3 1
The AMA's Council on Scientific Affairs, which wroteUA
the report, said there has been no significant increase "I V gg (' V
caner deaths to parallel the rise of pollution in the last 30 = Z 1,-, D v 0
years. 7^ Q ='o '? ,
.Butg some specialists called that conclusion premature c ~ = & ,
Butevi som .pcals E=.- -a E.:% =S ,
and said that several studies have shown that some envi- M V Z 5 =",
,ronmental pollutants -- including asbestos-- can increase 0 t 0 q I %
*the risk of cancer.
Dr. Richard Jones, a council member, said in a tele- C A -- <
phone interview that4a lot of people have implied auto w v~ 0" q
ution and all oth pollution. that may be contri- -
buting to the fouling of the environment are probably 2 o
causing all these cancers we have." W0m go q '
But he said that despite increased pollution, particular' -
Ity fr d e r v e fr o o ilm c p .. -r o -" CD : o o-
,y from the greater use of chemicals caceAe F;4 -.
-ducts, there has not been a significant increase in cancer a1 aM
over the last few decades.
The report notes that there is a latency period of about g- In ,, e
The report notes tI;]~ 33 ~
'0 years between exposure to a carcinogen and the ap- 0 5 ., -,
appearance of cancer. But Jones said that if the pollutants 0 "
WYere causing cancer, some signs should be appearing- a .
SHowever, he also said, "There are probably some W 0 -!4-
'things in the environment that may still be found to cause rD -% M (D,
Cancer." -' -
Robert Metcalf, a University of Illinois biology profes- 5"- =- e o -'
sor and a consultant to the World Health Organization, n0' '(D
::said it is premature to dismiss environmental pollutants e D ,.
,ks cancer-causing agents. "I don't see how anyone can say CD W 0-6 i .
we've had time to find out," he said C
:.. to W W D o
-3Q


~" ~ o,,
114 Q C 0 ?




2 d. 0 U7
00p' 0

M1+"
1 =. -. ..
a.-q
n etZ~ c
=r W. M r, = ZCI




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs