Title: Federal Register / Vol 54, No 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices - Final NPDES General Permit for Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004328/00001
 Material Information
Title: Federal Register / Vol 54, No 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices - Final NPDES General Permit for Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Federal Register / Vol 54, No 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices - Final NPDES General Permit for Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida (JDV Box 95)
General Note: Box 20, Folder 1 ( EPA (Federal Register) ), Item 6
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004328
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

- a


Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17T1989 / NtdfFes' -


5- IllB~ Ba_--_--~P-


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL-3616-7; NPDES No. FLG040001]
Final NPDES General Permit for
Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/
Storm Waters In the State of Florida
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Final National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Permit.
SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator
of Region IV is today issuing a final
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) General
Permit No. FLG040001 to facilities within
the political boundary of the State of
Florida. This NPDES general permit
establishes effluent limitations,
prohibitions, reporting requirements and
other conditions on facilities which
discharge treated groundwater and/or
stormwater incidental to the
groundwater cleanup operation which
have been contaminated by automotive
gasoline, aviation and/or diesel fuels.
This final general permit authorizes
discharges from facilities currently
located in and discharging to surface
waters, or to tributaries/conveyances
thereof, within the political boundary of
the State of Florida, and any new
treatment facility placed in operation
during the term of the permit. Issuance
of this final.permit will allow cleanup
actions at contaminated sites to begin
without the delays of individual NPDES
permit issuance procedures. This
general permit will potentially cover
more than 2000 sites.
DATES: This permit shall be effective on
July 17, 1989 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern
Daylight Savings Time. Notification of
coverage by the general permit will be
by certified mail from the Director,
Water Management Division, EPA,
Region IV. This method of notification
will be applicable to both new
dischargers and existing dischargers
that submit notices of intent for general
permit coverage. Existing dischargers
must also request that current individual
permits be revoked upon notification of
coverage by the general permit. The
date for coverage under the general
permit will be the date the applicant
receives the assigned NPDES number
under the general permit.
In accordance with 40 CFR 23.2, the
Region hereby specifies that this permit
shall be considered the final agency
action for purposes of judicial review at
1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time
on the date of this notice. In order to
-L-- assist Region IV to correct any


typographical errors, incorrect cross
references, and similar administrative
errors, comments of a nonsubstantive
nature on the final permit be submitted
on or before August 28, 1989.
The administrative record, including
application, final permit, fact sheet,
public notice, comments received, and
additional information are available by
writing the EPA, Region IV, or for
review and copying at 345 Courtland
Street NE., 3rd Floor, 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 minimal
charge per page. Additional information
concerning the permit may be obtained
at the address and during the hours
noted above from Ms. Dianne Brown,
Public Notice Coordinator, (404) 347-
3004.
ADDRESS: Notifications required under
this permit should be sent to: Director,
Water Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV, 345 Courtland Street NE.,
Atlanta, George 30365.
Request For Coverage: Written
notification of intent to be covered by
the general permit shall be provided as
described in the permit, Part II.F.
Request for coverage must contain
evidence that the operation has been
approved for Initial Remedial Actions
(IRA), or has obtained a Site
Rehabilitation Initiation Order and an
approved Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
from the State of Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roosevelt Childress, Chief, South Areas
NPDES Permits Unit, or Larry Cole,
Environmental Engineer, Facilities
Performance Branch, Water
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345
Courtland Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia
30365, (404) 347-3012.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On August 25, 1988, EPA Region IV
published a notice of the draft general
permit (53 FR 32442) that is being issued
in final form today. The Region received
materials from fourteen (14) commenters
on the proposed permit, plus a request
for an extension of the public comment
period. On October 25, 1988 (53 FR
43035), the public comment period was
extended until November 15, 1988. All
the public comments received during
this 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.
The Region published a detailed fact
sheet with the draft permit in 53 FR
32442. The Region is incorporating by
reference that fact sheet and
supplementary information as part of
the final fact sheet for today's final .
permit. The discussions presented in
these sections should be consulted in
reviewing the applicability and scope of
the final permit conditions.

I. Other Legal Requirements
A. Executive Order 12291
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this action from the
requirements of Executive Order 12291
pursuant to Section 8[b] of that order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has reviewed the requirements
imposed on the regulated facilities in
this final general permit under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44
U.S.C. 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 (hereafter, "the 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. Under Section 401(a)(l) of
the Act, EPA may not issue a NPDES
permit until the state in which the
discharge will originate grants or waives
certification to ensure compliance with
appropriate requirements of the Act and
state law. EPA requested certification of
the permit on August 11, 1988. On June
14, 1989, the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation waived
certification of the general permit.
D. Effective Date
The final NPDES general permit
issued today is effective on July 17, 1989,
and upon written notification of
coverage from the Permit Issuing
Authority.
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. 605(b), that
this general NPDES permit will not have
a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Moreover, the


29986








Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


permit reduces a significant burden on
regulated sources.
Lee A. DeHihns IIl.
Acting RegionalAdministrtor, Region TV.
Summary of Comments
Appendix A-Public Comments
Public notice of the draft permit was
published at 53 FR 32442 (August 25,
1988). The comment period was
scheduled to close on September 25,
1988. Region IV received a request from
the Florida Petroleum Council for an
extension of public comment period,
since the proposed draft raised issues of
potentially significant concern to the
petroleum industry. The comment period
was noticed at 53 FR 43035 (October 25,
1988) and extended until the close of
business on November 15, 1988.
Significant comments presented during
the public comment periods were
considered in the formulation of a final
decision regarding the proposed permit.
The following parties responded with
written comments on the general permit:
Total Petroleum Inc., Kerr-McGee
Corporation, Hopping Boyd Green &
Sams, Florida Petroleum Council,
Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Shell Oil Company
Professor Richard L. Williamson, Jr.,
Florida Petroleum Marketers
Association, Hunton & Williams, Florida
Department of Environmental
SRegulation (FDER), Kaiser Engineers,
Conoco Inc., and the American
Petroleum Institute.
(1) Comment: Several industry
commenters stated that the Region has
failed to consider adequately the factors
necessary to establish technology-
based effluent limitations for benzene,
lead. and napthalene. They mentioned
that there are no promulgated effluent
guidelines applicable for these point
sources, therefore, this permit must
necessarily establish technology based
effluent limitations on a site-by-site
basis [40 CFR 125.3(c)(2)]. Consequently,
the Region must consider, inter alia, the
"engineering aspects of the application
of various types of control techniques
and the cost of achieving such effluent
reductions." They stated that treating
benzene contaminated groundwater to
1.0 p.g/1 on a consistent basis would
require optimal conditions to be met,
and also mentioned that long term
treatment could amount to $1,000,000 or
more per site. In some cases it may be a
technical impossibility to treat
hydrocarbon contaminated groundwater
to trace levels in the aquifer, even if the
most advanced technology currently
available is used.
Response: The Region agrees that
Optimal conditions for complying with
the proposed benzene limit may not be


available at every site. Each operator
must consider which factors may
prevent compliance with the proposed
limits before applying for coverage
under the general permit. Other factors,
such as iron and manganese levels
above 5.0 mg/1 in the influent require
polishing steps before using carbon
absorption as a cleanup alternative.
However, on individual permit requests,
previous facilities were designed to
meet a benzene limit of 1.0 pg/1 by
applying engineering techniques to keep
the influent to the airstripper at low
concentrations before treatment
occurred. Some facilities were using
infiltration galleries and were in
operation before applying for an NPDES
permit and were consistently meeting
the 1.0 pg/1 effluent limitation for
benzene from their treatment facilities
prior to requesting a discharge permit to
surface waters. If enormous costs could
be verified after hydrogeologic
consideration due to a long term cleanup
project, an individual permit might seem
more appropriate; however, Chapter 17-
70 of the State Underground Petroleum
Environmental Response Program does
provide flexibility with regard to costs
and time frame after a minimum of one
year or less if data exist to verify that
the cleanup remedial action is complete.
The State of Florida would have the
responsibility to make a determination
as to whether the remedial action
operations would be deemed complete
based on concentrations found in the
groundwater and consider the technical
feasibility of other proven groundwater
techniques to further reduce
contaminant levels at the site.
Therefore, compliance with the
proposed limits of the general permit
does not infer high cleanup costs, since
FDER would verify whether a
remediation plan is complete based on
individual site data received from the
operator. Even though airstripping
independently does very little for
removal of leaded compounds in
gasoline, airstripping plus other
treatment processes combined do
reduce the lead levels enough to meet
the permit limit. Considering the amount
of hydrocarbons recovered in the mobile
free floating phase and the high
adsorption potential of organic leading
compounds onto the soils, treatment to
comply with the lead limit has not
raised concern at other facilities with
individual permits. The technology being
used, even though not a lead removal
technology, is able to reduce the levels
of leaded compounds.
(2) Comment: Several commenters
mentioned that the proposed limitations
for benzene, lead and naphthalene are
more stringent than necessary to meet


applicable water quality standards. The
commenters mentioned that outside of
the mixing zone, Florida has established
a general water quality criteria for lead
of 50.0 jg/l [FAC 17-3.061(2)(i)], yet the
Region proposed to establish end-of-
pipe effluent limitations at the point of
discharge of 30.0 pg/.l apparently
assuming that all discharges will be to
Class I Waters-Potable Water Supplies
[FAC 17-3.091(16)] and that the drinking
water intake pipe will be adjacent to the
effluent discharge, a specifically
prohibited practice [FAC 17-4.244(1)(d)].
It was stated that the Florida Petroleum
Council 1986 report entitled "Benzene in
Florida Groundwater" demonstrated
that drinking water containing less than
25 pig/l of benzene would not contribute
to leukemia. Commenters also
mentioned that 5.0 pig/I is the U.S. EPA
drinking water standard and that the
Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation is proposing to set the
benzene limit equal to EPA's standard.
Response: The effluent limitations are
technology-based and applied at the
end-of-pipe; therefore, a mixing zone is
not granted under this general permit.
On previous indivius indual permit requests
for cleanup of this type, the limits were
applied at the end-of-pipe. Zones of
mixing are granted on a case-by-case
basis by FDER and will be considered in
individual permit issuances. The State of
Florida had considered raising their
standard to 5.0 jig/1 (MCL) for benzene
in the drinking water, but these
proposed limits have not been finalized.
The 1.0 jg/1 limit for benzene has been
proven to be technologically achievable,
and is coincidentally between the 10-1
and 10o- risk levels of 6.6 pg/l and 0.66
pg/1 for increase in cancer over a
lifetime (EPA 440/5-80-018); therefore, a
revision upward is not justified. Also, as
discussed in response to Comment (1),
the level of influent concentrations by
petroleum contamination to the
treatment system should be controlled
by the operator, i.e., segregating the
more concentrated contaminated
groundwaters for product reclamation or
off-site disposal.
(3) Comment: Several commenters
stated that the Region's proposed
toxicity limitations are both
procedurally and substantively infirm
and should be used for information
screening purposes only. They
mentioned the proposed toxicity
limitation is more stringent than
required under applicable Florida water
quality standards and that the subject
State regulation provides that the
maximum concentration of wastes in the
mixing zone shall not exceed the
amount lethal to 50% of the test


- -- -II--I aY ~----- I- -~I-
--


29987






Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


organisms in 96 hours (96 hr LCso] for a
species significant to the indigenous
aquatic community [FAC 17-4.244(4)(a)].
They mentioned the Region purports to
equate the "effluent with the 'mixing
zone' and three appropriate test species
with a species significant to the
indigenous aquatic community", an
approach at odds with the Florida
Department of Environmental
Regulation. It was also mentioned that
while this may be Agency policy, no
substitute can exist for the exercise of
informed decision making. CF NRDC v.
EPA, No. 80-1607 (D.C. Cir. 1988) slip op.
at 64-65.
Response: The "Whole Effluent
Toxicity Testing Policy for Florida",
dated May 5, 1986, was developed by
EPA, Region IV, for use in writing
NPDES permits in Florida. Our
requirements, procedures and methods
do not have to correspond with those
required by the FDER.
After consideration of comments
received regarding the toxicity
requirement, the language in this permit
has been revised to allow additional
confirmatory testing if the toxicity tests
fail. These additional toxicity tests will
be used to determine if coverage by the
general permit should continue or if an
individual permit will be required.
Failure of the tests does not constitute a
permit violation. The use of non-
indigenous species for standard
laboratory toxicity is consistent with
EPA's Technical Support Document and
the final report of the Bioassay Task
Force Report of August 1985, by the
FDER. This report recommended that
"standard stock monocultures of known
health and sensitivity must be used in
testing." In interpreting the meaning of
the use of organisms significant to the
indigenous aquatic community, this has
been interpreted by FDER as meaning
"any recognized organisms can be used
for bioassay testing as long as that
organism is known to be sensitive to
toxic substances that can be expected to
impact the indigenous community",
(page 6, Final Report-Bioassay Task
Force). With regard to allowance of a
mixing zone under Florida's standards,
these discharges do not have approved
mixing zones. In the absence of a mixing
zone, the least stringent rule [17-
4.244(4)], which prohibits wastes at the
point of discharge from exceeding the 96
hour LC5o (LCso < 100%). applies at the
end-of-pipe (page 5, Final Report of the
Bioassay Task Force).
(4) Comment: Some commenters
stated that EPA lacks the authority to
require development of a Best
Management Practices (BMP) Plan. The
Clean Water Act (CWA) empowers EPA


to include such requirements in an
NPDES permit only if it has published
industry-specific BMP regulations and,
even then, only after making certain
specified regulatory determinations.
Since EPA has yet to promulgate
requirements applicable to these
discharges, it is without the statutory
authority to impose them in the general
permit. In NRDC v. EPA, industry
petitioners, including API challenged
EPA's authority under sections 125.100
and 125.103 to include BMPs in NPDES
permits on a case-by-case basis under
section 402(a)(1). In a Settlement
Agreement dated June 7, 1982, the
parties agreed that the BMP issue was
not ripe for adjudication because EPA
had suspended the effectiveness of its
BMP regulations pending further review,
and the BMP issue was dismissed on the
ripeness ground on August 6, 1982.
Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement,
the industry petitioners reserve the right
to challenge any new BMP regulations
which may be promulgated. Many of the
same concerns would be addressed in
the applicable Site Remedial Action
Plan.
Response: Section 402(a)(2) of the Act
and the implementing regulations at 40
CFR 122.43(a) authorize EPA to require
Best Management Practices Plans in
NPDES permits. Decision of the General
Counsel, No. 72, Issue VI. The permit
requires that the BMP plan be prepared
in conjunction with the Site Remedial
Action Plan.
(5) Comment: An industry commenter
stated that the separate authorization to
combine contaminated groundwater
pumped to above-ground storage tanks
with contaminated groundwater from
the sites recovery well should be
deleted.
Response: The Region did not intend
to construe this as a separate permit
requirement, but could be included in
the notification stages when the facility
will be combining discharges. This
would give the Region an accurate
account of facilities that would actually
be using these treatment processes to
treat the storage tank bottom waters.
This can be handled in the Notice of
Intent (NOI) which is required by EPA
for the permitted to be covered under
the general permit.
(6) Comment: Several commenters
mentioned that as long as the permitted
is meeting the effluent limits, the one-
time analysis of the effluent for priority
pollutants appears to be unnecessary.
Response: This one-time scan was
incorporated into the general permit to
check the treatment facilities'
performance near the start of operation
for the reduction of other priority


pollutants which are also discharged. It
is the Region's view that if the treatment
efficiency is adequate in the initial
cleanup operations, the effluent quality
in the later stages of cleanup operations
should not deteriorate as the cleanup
operations progress and the
groundwater quality is restored.
(7) Comment: One commenter stated
that since these are technology based
limits, if an "upset" occurs, it
necessarily follows that it should be
possible to raise that defense to any
permit violation. They recommended
deleting the water-quality qualifier
which appears to limit unnecessarily the
availability of the upset defense in this
setting.
Response: The Region agrees that this
statement should not be included and it
has been deleted in the final issuance of
the general permit.
(8) Comment: One commenter stated
that it was unnecessary for general
permittees to receive permission from
EPA to deactivate coverage under the
general permit.
Response: The language in the permit
has been clarified to state that EPA will
inactivate coverage by the general
permit after review of site closure
documentation.
(9) Comment: One commenter stated
that the 30 Ipg/l effluent limit imposed
for lead would not necessarily In all
circumstances protect human health.
The EPA 440/5-80-057 Ambient Water
Criteria document for lead is obsolete,
since EPA Headquarters has proposed a
new drinking water standard for lead
which contains an impressive array of
health information of 5.0 pg/I (53 FR
31565, August 18, 1988). Past practice for
Florida is to keep the water quality
criteria for lead well below the federal
standard; therefore, anticipation can be
made that the State will lower their
standards. If the State of Florida
imposes this 5.0 pg/1 for lead, this would
be measured outside the mixing zone
after dilution has been taken into
account. For example, with a dilution of
5:1, the effluent could have a
concentration of 30 pg/l and still not
exceed the new water quality standard.
The general permit should be more
stringent than individual permits based
on reasonable worst case, yet, nowhere
is the general permit discharge limited to
those with substantial low flow or to
conditions where there are ambient
background levels of lead. This would
result in the instream concentration of
5.0 Mpg/1 to be exceeded. The lead limit
of 30.0 Mg/l will not protect freshwater
organisms. The current documents
include values that would protect
organisms themselves. For some


1--~~*lll~l~a--------- ---1-- ~--- ~---__--- C --II


23938








Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


t substances, including lead, the value for
at the protection of aquatic organisms
could be more stringent than human
health, particularly in streams with very
,s low hardness (7.7 pg/l at a hardness of
200 pg/1). The effluent limit will not be
protective of aquatic organisms in
streams with low flows and/or high
background levels. It was recommended
that a one-time priority pollutant scan
be used to ensure the treated water did
not contain any toxic pollutants. Also,
that a more frequent sampling be
imposed in the permit if a failure does
occur during toxicity testing to
he I determine if the limit is being
maintained using a larger data base and
this permit violation would trigger
is applying for an individual NPDES
it permit.
of Response: This general permit was
not written to consider existing or
proposed drinking water standards by
any regulatory agency. The testing
requirement for lead is currently being
required by the State of Florida for the
groundwater at sites which do not
t satisfy the "no further action" or
.it "monitoring only" alternative. With
regard to toxicity testing, the Region has
revised the toxicity testing requirement
based on significant comments received
d on the draft general permit. The
Regional toxicity testing requirements
still supports the use of organisms
significant to the indigenous aquatic
community as mentioned in the
response to Comment (3); however,
I additional tests will be required to
a support continuance or revocation of
f coverage under the general permit. Part
II, Section G. does provide exclusion of
for coverage under the general permit, if a
permitted proposes a discharge to
receiving waters that are classified as
be "Special Protection, Outstanding Florida
S Waters." A priority pollutant scan is
included into Part I B. of the general
uld permit.
S (10) Comment: One commenter
recommended a reduction from the three
Sof to two species for use in toxicity tests.
Also, language should be included in the
permit to clarify that these operations


must also meet the approval of Florida
prior to receipt of NPDES general permit
coverage.
Response: The recommendation for a
reduction from the proposed three (3)
species for toxicity testing to the two (2)
species was incorporated into the
conditions of the final permit. Language
was included into the notification stages
of the final permit to indicate that these
facilities must also obtain approval from
the State of Florida prior to attaining
coverage under the NPDES general
permit.
(11) Comment: One commenter
recommended that the proposed limits
for a pH range of 6.0-8.5 should be
dropped since the limits are unrealistic
for Florida and natural groundwater
often measures in the 4.0-6.0 range for
pH.
Response: On previous individual
permits issued the pH range of 6.0-8.5
was required and actual operating data
indicate that some facilities are
operating within this range; therefore,
deletion of this pH range is not justified.
III. Other Changes to Final Permit
After review of the proposed permit,
Region IV incorporated other changes
into the final permit that are part of
today's final issued permit.
(1) In Part I, Section D, the schedule of
compliance was changed to reflect
operational level attainment dates for
permittees with revoked individual
permits and new dischargers.
(2) In Part II, Section A.2, revised
language was incorporated into the
permit for penalties for violations of
permit conditions, in accordance with
the Water Quality Act of 1987.
(3) In Part II, Section F, language was
included to allow coverage under the
general permit for permittees during
initial cleanup operations when Initial
Remedial Actions (IRA) have been
approved by Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation, or if a Site
Rehabilitation Initiation Order has been
approved.
(4) In Part IV of the Best Management
Practices (BMP) plan, language was


added to insure that the plan is
maintained at the facility and made
available upon request from the Permit
Issuing Authority.
Appendix B-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 treated groundwater
and stormwater incidental to
groundwater cleanup operations 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. The permit consists of Part
I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, and Part V.
This permit shall become effective at
1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time,
on Monday, July 17, 1989.
This permit and the authorization to
discharge shall expire at midnight,
Eastern Daylight Savings Time, on July
16, 1994.
John T. Marlar,
Chief, Facilitics Performance Branch, for
Bruce R. Barrett, Director, Water
Management Division Region IV.
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
permitted is authorized to discharge
treated groundwater and stormwater
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 permitted as specified
below:


Discharge limitations Monitoring requirements
Effluent characteristic Daily Daily Measure-
Daily Dail ment Sample type
average maximum freqe

Flow, MGD..........-......................................................................................... ... .............................. Report............. Report............. Continuous.... Flowmeter.
Benzene, g/1 ....................................... .................. .................... ........... ........... ........................ 1 ................. 1/month......... Grab.
*Total Lead, ............................................. ................................ ........... ........... ....................... 30.0................. /month......... Grab.


The effluent (100%) shall not be lethal
to more than 50% of appropriate fish and
invertebrate test organisms in 48 hour


static toxicity tests (48-hr. LCo). Failure
to demonstrate compliance with the
acute toxicity requirement may result in


coverage under this permit being
revoked, (see Part V-2).


ere
d to


Id
of
lit
ter


I.---- L- I__-- IL _~ -_ -.a~l-L--rL L-


29989








Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


The pH shall not be less than 6.0
standard units nor greater than 8.5
standard units and shall be monitored
once every month by grab sample, or
continuously with a recorder, at the
discretion of the permitted (See item
I.B. 4).
There shall be no discharge of floating
solids or visible foam in other than trace
amounts.
Samples taken in compliance with the
monitoring requirements specified
above shall be taken at the following


locationss: nearest accessible point
after final treatment but prior to actual
discharge or mixing with the receiving
waters.
*Monitoring for this parameter is
required only when contamination
results from leaded fuel.
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
permitted is authorized to discharge
treated groundwater and stormwater
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 foregoing effluent limitations.
Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the permitted as specified
below:


Discharge limitations Monitoring requirements
Effluent characteristic Dail Daily Measure-
Daily Daily ment Sample type
average maximum frequency

Flow, MG ............................................................................................................................................................ Report............. Report............. Continuous..... Flowmeter.
Benzene. pg/l ........................ ........ ......................................................................................................................... 1.0................... /month.......... Grab.
Naphthalene, j.g/1 ..................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 100.0............... 1/m onth.......... G rab.
Total Lead. g/1 ..................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 30.0................ 1/month.......... Grab.
'Total Lead, g .................................................................. ....30.0.......1/.month...IGrab.


The effluent (100%) shall not be lethal
to more than 50% of appropriate fish and
invertebrate test organisms in 48 hour
static toxicity tests (48-hr. LCro). Failure
to demonstrate compliance with the
acute toxicity requirement may result in
coverage under this permit being
revoked, (see Part V-2).
The pH shall not be less than 0.0
, standard units nor greater than 8.5
standard units and shall be monitored
once every month by grab sample, or
continuously with a recorder, at the
discretion of the permitted (See item
I.B. 4).
There shall be no discharge of floating
solids or visible foam in other than trace
amounts.
Samples taken in compliance with the
monitoring requirements specified
above shall be taken at the following
locationss: nearest accessible point
after final treatment but prior to actual
discharge or mixing with the receiving
waters.
*Monitoring for this parameter is
required only when contamination
results from leaded fuel.
B. Other Requirements
1. Any more frequent effluent
discharge monitoring required by the
Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER) 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-A of
this permit.
2. Effluent limitations for combining
,--ontaminated groundwater pumped to
jove-ground storage tanks, with



contaminated groundwater from the
sites recovery wells.
a. The permitted shall notify FUER 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 FDER will constitute
approval for coverage by this general
permit.
3. Within 60 days of the effective date
of this permit or startup of discharge the
permitted 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 organic.
b. EPA Method 624-Purgeable
Organics.
If the analyses required in the above
Part B-3 reveal other toxic pollutants or
subsequent biomonitoring test shows
lethality (less t han 50% survival of test
organisms in 100% effluent), this General
Permit may be terminated and an
individual permit issued.
4. If the p1H is monitored continuously,
the pH values shall not deviate outside
the required range more than 7 hours
and 26 minutes in any calendar month
and no individual excursion shall
exceed 00 minutes. An "excursion" is an
unintentional and temporary incident in
which the pH value of discharge
wastewater exceeds the range set forth
in the permit.


C. Test Procedures
In performing the analysis for the
dissolved constituents in the surface
water and groundwater, the permitted
shall use the guidelines recommended
and described in Sections 17-
70.008(9)[a-e] of the petroleum
contamination site cleanup criteria rule
for the State of Florida.
a. 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 Section 17.70.008(9)[d] of
the State Underground Petroleum
Environmental Response Program:
(1) Lead (EPA Method 239.2 or Standard
Method 304)
(2) Priority Pollutant Volatile Organics
(EPA Method 624)
(3) Priority Pollutant Extractable
Organics (EPA Method 625)
(4) Non-Priority Pollutant Organics (with
GC/MS Peaks greater than 10 ppb)
(EPA Methods 624 & 625)
D. Schedule of the Compliance
1. The permitted 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 14 calendar days after
any date identified in the above


I-rr "C C"nr^-uruunlrp~l~--nu~~p)Ll~yy;llOl ~LIII-~--~l-~l~V --- 9- -I


29990


--~------L-







Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


schedule of compliance the permitted
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 permitted 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
violates permit conditions is subject to a
fine of not less than $5,000 nor more
S than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 3 years,
or both. Any person who negligently
violates permit conditions is subject to a
fine of not less than $2,500 nor more
than $25,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 1 year,
or both.
3. Duty to Mitigate
The permitted 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. Permit Modification
After notice and opportunity for a
hearing, this permit may be modified,
terminated or revoked for cause
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.


It the permitted believes that any past
or planned activity would be cause for
modification or revocation and
reissuance under 40 CFR 122.62, the
permitted must report such information
to the Permit Issuing Authority. The
submittal of a new application may be
required of the permitted. The filing of a
request by the permitted for a permit
modification, revocation and reissuance,
or termination, or a notification of
planned changes or anticipated
noncompliance, does not stay any
permit condition.
5. 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 permitted so notified.
The permitted shall comply with
effluent standards or prohibitions
established under Section 307(a) of the
Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants
within the time provided in the
regulations that establish those
standards or prohibitions, even if the
permit has not yet been modified to
incorporate the requirement.
6. 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
permitted from civil or criminal
penalties for noncompliance.
7. Oil and Hazardous Substance
Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be
construed to preclude the institution of
any legal action or relieve the permitted
from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permitted is or
may be subject under Section 311 of the
Act.
8. State Laws
-Nothing in this permit shall be
construed to preclude the institution of
any legal action or relieve the permitted
from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties established pursuant to any
applicable State law or regulation under
authority preserved by Section 510 of
the Act.


9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Duty to Provide Information
The permitted 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 permitted 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 permitted 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
permitted 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 permitted 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
permitted 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 the 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


~ I I __ ___ C _I


29991







Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


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 permitted 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
permitted 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
permitted 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 permitted
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 permitted submitted notices as
required under Paragraph b. 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
?aragraph 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 permitted. 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 non-compliance with
such technology based permit limitation
if the requirements of 40 CFR
122.41(n)(3) are met.
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:
a. "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. DC 20402. Order by SD
catalog No. C13.10:421.)
b. "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, DC 20402. Order by catalog
No. 127.19/2:W29/2, Stock No. S/N
24003-0027.)
c. "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.)
d. "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 permitted 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.


C -- -------~--~-i----~-~ ------C-- -- -- I -U


29992







Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


6. Record Contents
- Records of monitoring information
shall include:
a. The date, exact place, and time of
sampling or measurements;
b. The individuals) who performed
the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) analyses were
performed;
d. The individuals) who performed
the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or
methods used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
7. Inspection and Entry
The permitted 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 permitted'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 permitted 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 permitted shall give advance
notice to the Permit Issuing Authority of
I.--- any planned change in the permitted
facility or activity which may result in
noncompliance with permit


requirements. Any maintenance of
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 permitted 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 permitted 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 permitted 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 permitted shall orally report any
noncompliance which may endanger
health or the environment, within 24
hours from the time the permitted
becomes aware of the circumstances. A
written submission shall also be
provided within 5 days of the time the
permitted 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 permitted 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 permitted 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 substances) (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 pg/l); or
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter
(200 p.g/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile;
five hundred micrograms per liter (500
pg/1) for 2, 4-dinitrophenol and for 2-
methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one
milligram per liter (1 mg/1) 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


- -29993


29993






Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


discharge will exceed the highest of the
following "notification levels":
. (1) Five hundred micrograms per liter
(500 jg/l); or
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) 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
S (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 statements, 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) Pub. L. 92-
500, as amended by Pub. L. 95-217, Pub.
L. 95-576 and Pub. L. 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
samples) shall be collected at the
periods) 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.


I-,--,I _,,,,,


29994







Federal Register / VoL 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


8. Toxic Pollutant
. A toxic pollutant is any pollutant
'isted 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 NPDES General Permit Number
FLGO40001 are required to submit a
notice of intent (NOI) to be covered by
the general permit to the Permit Issuing
Authority. The NOI shall include: (1)
The name and address of the operation,
(2) the applicable individual NPDES
numberss, (3) the identification of any
new discharge location not contained in
the expired permit, (4) evidence that the
operation has been approved for Initial
Remediation Actions (IRA), or has
obtained a Site Rehabilitation Initiation
Order and an approved Remedial Action
Plan (RAP) from the FDER, in
accordance with Florida Administrative
Codes (FAC) 17-70.006, 17-70.008 and
17-70.010, respectively, (5) a map
showing the facility and discharge
location (in latitude and longitude), and
(6) the name of the receiving water.
Operators having several individual
permits are encouraged to consolidate
requests for coverage into one NOI for
all individual permits. The previous
--ubmission of the proper forms in the
newal application does not relieve the
permitted desiring coverage under the
general permit of the requirement to file
a NOI.
b. Dischargers having valid individual
NPDES permits that desire coverage
under the general permit are required to
file a NOI to the Permit Issuing
Authority within at least 30 days prior to
expiration of their current permitss. The
notice shall contain the same
information specified in paragraph (a)
above. Permittees desiring to retain their
individual permit are required to submit
the appropriate application forms at
least 180 days before expiration of their
individual permit.
c. Dischargers who have not
previously obtained a valid individual
NPDES permit will be required to submit
the same information specified in
ii paragraph (a) above, except items (2)
I and (3). The application for coverage
Sunder the general permit must be made
at least forty-five (45) days before the
discharge is to commence.
d. Notification of coverage will be
given by the Permit Issuing Authority by
certified mail to the permitted.
e. Coverage by this general permit
-*.all become effective on the date of
.ification of coverage by the Permit
issuing Authority.


f. Coverage by this general permit
shall expire on July 16,1994.
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 discharges) 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 sources) 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 Regional
Administrator, are more appropriately
controlled under an individual permit
than under a general permit.
The Regional Administrator 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 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 Regional Administrator.
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" as set
forth by FAC 17-3.043.
6. The permitted 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.
Part III-Other Requirements
A. Reporting of Monitoring Results
Monitoring results obtained during the
previous calendar quarter shall be
summarized for each month (each
quarter if monitoring frequency is
quarterly) and must be reported on a
Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA
No. 3320-1), 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.) Duplicate
signed copies of these, and all other
reports required by Section D of Part II,
Reporting Requirements, shall be
submitted to the Permit Issuing
Authority and the State at the following
addresses:
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV, Facilities Performance
Branch, Water Management Division,
345 Courtland Street NE., Atlanta, GA
30365
Florida Dept. of Environmental
Regulation, Local District Office
Address
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, if the effluent
standard of limitation so issued or
approved:
1. Contains different conditions or is
otherwise more stringent than any
condition in the 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.


'-L II_~,T24CMIZ-


2






Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 1989 / Notices


m m-I -- I I IC


Part IV-Best Management Practices
and 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
Regulation (See Part II.F.c.). The
permitted 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 permitted 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 runnoff; 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,Waste Management
Division, Region IV, Atlanta, GA 30365.
Part V-Biomonitoring Program
In accordance with Part 1 of this
permit, the permitted shall initiate the
series of tests described below within 30
days of coverage or commencement of
discharge from outfall(s) 001.
1. If the effluent is discharged to a
freshwater stream, the permitted shall
conduct 48-hour static toxicity tests on
two appropriate test species (EPA/600/
4-85/013, Table 1). The test organisms
used shall include one fish and one
invertebrate test species (Recommend:
A Daphnidae species and the fathead
minnow (Pimephales promelas). If the
effluent is discharged to a saltwater
stream, the permitted shall conduct 48-
hour static toxicity tests using the Mysid
shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia) and the
inland silverside (Menidia beryllina) or
any other species approved by EPA.
Tests shall be conducted once every
month for a period of three months
following the initiation of the tests and
once every year thereafter for the
duration of the permit using samples of


100% final effluent. Such tests will be
conducted on one grab sample of 100%
final effluent. Results of all tests
conducted with any species shall be
reported according to EPA/800/4-85/
013, Section 13, Report Preparation and
Data Utilization, and shall be submitted
to EPA with the quarterly discharge
monitoring report.
2. If lethality (less than 50% survival of
tests organisms in 100% effluent) is
demonstrated in either of the above
testss, another 48-hr static test using the
same species) and the same
methodology shall be conducted within
two weeks. If the additional tests)
indicates toxicity, coverage under the
general permit may be revoked by the
Permit Issuing Authority upon issuance
of an individual permit.
3. All test organisms, procedures and
quality assurance criteria used shall be
in accordance with Methods for
Measuring the Acute Toxicity of
Effluent to Freshwater and Marine
Organisms, EPA-600/4-85-013. A
standard reference toxicant quality
assurance test shall be conducted
concurrently with each set of toxicity
tests and its results submitted with the
quarterly discharge monitoring report.
[FR Doc. 89-16685 Filed 7-14-89; 8:45 am]
BILUNG CODE 4660-50-M


29996




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