Huntont WILLIAMS
2811 APR H PH * :01
HUNT ON & WILLIAMS LLP RIVFRFRONT PLAZA FAST TOWFR 951 FAST BYRD STREET RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 23219-4074
TF L KOI 78K 8200 FAX 804 788 8218
April 13.2017 B\ l ,S. Mail and F.-mail
H ARRY M JOHNSON. Ill DIRI C I D I Al 801 788 87*4
FILENO 29142.070312
The Honorable E. Scott Pruitt Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency William Jefferson Clinton Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Mail Code: 110 1 A Washington, DC 20460
The Utility Water Act Group's Supplemental Information In Support O f Its Petition For Rulemaking To Reconsider And Administratively Stay The Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category; Final Rule,
80 Fed. Reg. 67.838 (N ov. 3, 2 0 1 5 )- Docket No. EPA-H O -O W -2009 0819
Dear Administrator Pruitt:
[inclosed please find the Utility Water Act G roup's Supplemental Information In Support O f Its Petition For Rulemaking T o Reconsider And Adm inistratively Stay The Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category; Final Rule. 80 Fed. Reg. 67,838 (N ov. 3, 2013) A copy o f this petition has been electronically mailed to the O ffice o f Water Docket Center for filing in Docket No. EPA HQ-OW -2009-0819.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely
Harry M. Johnson, 111
Enclosure
cc:
Mr. Michael H. Shapiro (by hand delivery and e-m ail)
Jessica O'Donnell. Esq. (by e-m ail)
Kevin S. Minoli. Esq. (by e-m ail)
EPA Docket Center (by e-mail)
ATLANTA AUSTIN BANGKOK BEIJING BRUSSELS CHARLOTTE DALLAS HOUSTON LONDON LOS ANGELES
McLEAN MIAM I NEW YORK NORFOLK RALEIGH RICHMOND SAN FRANCISCO TOKYO WASHINGTON
29142.070312 F.MF_T)S 6468655 lv 2
www.hunlon.coi
J > rVVj
Utility Water Act Group
The Utility W ater Act C roup's Supplem ental Information In Support O f Its Petition Fi Rulem aking T o Reconsider And Adm inistratively Stay The Effluent Limitations
Guidelines And Standards For The Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category ; Final Rule, SO Fed. Reg. 67,838-903 (Nov. 3, 2015)
Kristy A. N. Bulled Hunton <fc Williams LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington. D.C. 20037-1709 202-955-1547 (tel.) kbullcit@hunton.com Harry VI. Johnson, 111 Elizabeth E. Aldridge Hunton & . Williams LLP Riverfront Plaza. East Tower 951 Last Bvrd Street Richmond, VA 2.3219-4074 804-788-8784 (tel.) piohnson@hunlon.com ealdridge@himton.eom Counselfo r Petitioner Utility Hater Act Group
I.
Introduction
This is supplemental information to support the Petition for Rulemaking to Reconsider
and Administratively Stay the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam
Electric Power Generating Point Source Category filed by the Utility Water Act Group
(UWAG) on March 24, 2017. Specifically, this supplemental information further substantiates
the need for immediate relief from the deadlines of the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category; Final Rule (the
"ELG Rule" or "Rule") that are imposing tremendous costs and burdens on the industry.
The Petition demonstrates that the ELG Rule should be reconsidered. If the Agency
grants the Petition as it should, it will necessitate a rulemaking that may take a year or more.
While that reconsideration is pending, the utility industry should not remain subject to the ELG
Rule or its deadlines. As described below in detail, UWAG members and other utilities have
spent, are spending, and will imminently spend millions of dollars preparing to comply with
the deadlines in the ELG Rule.1 Those costs are irreversible and unnecessary if the rule is
reconsidered, and ultimately they will be borne by the utilities' ratepayers through higher
electricity costs or will directly impact the profitability of independent power producers (IPPs).
Indeed, some imminent actions such as retrofits may complicate compliance with a future ELG
Rule if the rule is changed and renders those actions moot. Moreover, decisions about whether
Although the earliest deadline to be in compliance with the ELG Rule is approximately 18 months away (November 1,201 8), a rule of this magnitude and complexity requires substantial time to come into compliance for multiple wastestreams. Detailed studies and planning, followed by large capital expenditures and subsequent installation and testing, are time-consuming. This supplement demonstrates the actions that are already underway and that are imminent. These burdens would be alleviated with immediate relief from the deadlines while the ELG Rule is under reconsideration.
to retire plants are ongoing. Those decisions are impacted when resources are being spent on compliance with the ELG Rule.
Many affected utilities are rural cooperatives and municipal agencies whose resources are being strained investigating compliance strategies. Engineering and other resources are being devoted to exploring how to comply with a rule whose requirements should be reconsidered and changed. Utilities and IPPs have reserved many millions in their budgets for all these efforts, money that could be devoted to other productiv e uses.
Immediate relief is also necessary for additional reasons. At least 8 facilities have already been issued permits incorporating the ELG Rule's deadlines. Any stay or postponement of the ELG Rule's deadlines at the EPA level would then have to be incoiporated into those permits via state administrative action. This, too, will take time. At least 10 other facilities have permits pending at the state level for issuance in the near term. Immediate action by EPA to stay the ELG Rule and its deadlines will make it clear that those deadlines should not be incorporated into the permits at least until EPA has had the opportunity to reconsider the Rule.
To the extent there could be any doubt about the nature and magnitude of the costs and problems caused by the ELG Rule, the information in this supplement definitively establishes the need for immediate relief, whether by administrative stay under Section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act, by interim final rule, or other action to avoid the inefficiency of forcing compliance with the ELG Rule while it is under reconsideration.
II. Industry M embers are Incurring Huge Costs for Evaluating ELG Rule Impacts and Options The ELG Rule contains stringent "best available technology'' (BAT) requirements for
fly ash transport water and bottom ash transport water. For each, the Rule sets a zero discharge standard for existing facilities. If the Rule is not reconsidered, existing facilities will need to retrofit with technologies to ensure compliance with the zero discharge standard.
For flue gas desulfurization wastewater (FGDW), EPA derived very low BAT limits for arsenic, mercury, nitrate/nitrite, and selenium based on a complex, multi-step model technology of physical/chemical and biological treatment. Implementing these technologies will require much more than simply purchasing and installing them. Each retrofit requires careful evaluation of the plant's water balance and significant engineering ev aluation before any other steps can be taken. EPA agrees that planning for FGDW treatment is complex. As explained in UWAG's Petition, EPA has recommended that plants design to a "worst case" scenario for FGDW systems and conduct extensive site-specific pilot studies. Petition, pp. 45 46. While the Rule also imposes requirements for other types of wastewater, UWAG members are most impacted by the costs for bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, and FGDW retrofits.
In its Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), EPA found that the largest number of plants (both by count and by generating capacity) will incur compliance costs in the first year of the Rule's applicability. According to EPA, 23.4% of the total number of plants impacted by the Rule, representing 41,507 MWs, will incur costs in 2019. Final RIA, Table 3-1, p. 3-5. But large technological changes at power plants--whether they be baseline or peaking plants--do not happen overnight. They require years of advance planning. Therefore, plants that are or
4
may be subject to early applicability dates (i.e.. deadlines) under the Rule are already
undertaking significant, resource-intensive, and expensive planning steps.
Many industry members have initiated engineering efforts to identify and evaluate how
the Rule will impact their facilities and to assess compliance options. For purposes of this
supplement, UWAG is providing below a few specific examples of costs for these initial steps.
These costs are illustrative only; other industry members may have much higher costs for the
same actions.
DTE Energy has already entered into contracts for detailed water balance development required for technology assessments for its Monroe and Belle River Stations. DTE will soon enter into contracts to complete the technology assessments and compliance development plans for these facilities. Monroe needs retrofits for fly ash transport water, bottom ash transport water, and FGDW, while Belle River needs a bottom ash transport water retrofit. The costs of these studies, assessments, and compliance plan developments total approximately $5 million.
To date, Dynegy has already spent $2,895 million on ELG Rule compliance, including a study of compliance alternatives and engineering design.
FirstEnergy reports that it has already spent approximately $387,000 to evaluate ELG Rule impacts at four power plants. Within the next 6 months, it anticipates spending an additional $260,000 to evaluate ELG compliance options at those plants.
Within the next 6 months, Southern Illinois Power Company, a rural cooperative, is planning to spend $65,000 for consulting engineering costs necessary for ELG Rule compliance planning.
For Eversource's Merrimack Station, the company has completed initial bottom ash transport water compliance feasibility reviews at a total cost of approximately $150,000 and is currently conducting a water balance study costing approximately $85,000. For a more detailed engineering review, the company expects to spend an additional $75,000 later this year.
The City of Springfield, Illinois, with a population of 100,000, has been expending and--absent a stay of the Rule--will continue expending large sums to plan for compliance with the Rule. Thus far, it has spent $450,000 for engineering consultants to study alternatives and estimate costs of compliance with the ELG and Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) rules. Over the next 6 months, the City anticipates that the costs will rise to over $700,000.
These are the types of heavy costs that will be incurred despite EPA's potential reconsideration
of the Rule if the Rule is not stayed in the meantime.
III. Imminent Expenditures for Planning and Conducting Pilot Studies
As noted earlier and as discussed in the Petition, FGDW retrofits require site-specific
pilot studies. The pilot studies are not simple, short-term efforts. They are data intensive and
can be protracted, depending on operating conditions at the plant. As EPA states:
[P]Iants should conduct studies investigating the variability of their FGD purge stream in order to better inform their design process. Plants can use ... appropriate analytical methods to measure the flow rate, selenium concentration, nitrate/nitrate [sic] concentrations, and any other values necessary for design of the system. Plants should acquire this information over a long enough period of time that will include variability in plant operations such as shutdowns, fuel switches (preferably for all fuel types burned at the plant), variability in electricity generating loads, periods with high [oxidation reduction potential], etc.
EPA Memorandum, Variability in Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater: Monitoring and
Response, EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-6033 (Sept. 30, 2015) at 15-16.
Members of the industry have provided the following specific cost information related
to planning for and implementing FGDW pilot studies.
WEC Energy Group anticipates spending $800,000 for a pilot test of a FGDW treatment system to be conducted at the Elm Road Generating Station beginning in late May or early June. This is in addition to pilot study expenditures that have already occurred to date, including $185,000 used to co-fund the EPRI ABMet study at Pleasant Prairie Power Plant' and $260,000 to conduct a second pilot test at Pleasant Prairie to evaluate the ability to treat bottom ash transport water and send it to the FGD scrubber.
Cooperative Energy, a rural cooperative located in Mississippi, expects to spend $2 million over the next 6-9 months for engineering and mechanical expenses related to its FGDW pilot study.
The cost figure reported only includes WEC Energy Group's portion of the EPRI study.
6
DTE Energy is participating in an EPRI-led pilot study at its Monroe Station. The pilot is testing technologies that combine FCiDW with C'CR material prior to disposal. The capital outlay for the water balance work and the pilot study is approximately $1 million.
Muscatine Power and Water estimates that its pilot studies will cost approximately $150,000, including engineering consultant fees and lab analyses. These costs will be incurred in 2018.
Once again, these expenditures are necessary as long as the Rule remains in effect as is. But
companies could put those funds to a better use if the ELG Rule is ultimately changed, as we
believe it should be.
IV. Industry Members Will Be Harmed by Incurring Near-Term Capital Costs
Many industry members are on the verge of expending, or committing to expend, major
capital costs for ETG Rule retrofits. If EPA plans to reconsider the Rule, it would be unjust for
these companies to incur these expenditures. As a prime example, the utility owners and
operators of plants within the American Electric Power System (AEP System) report that for
the remainder of 2017 they have planned expenditures for ELG-associated projects totaling
approximately $16.5 million in direct costs (no overhead or Allowance for Funds Used during
Construction (AFUDC) included). For the first half of 2018, the AEP System plans
expenditures totaling approximately $21.4 million in direct costs (not including AFUDC).
Industry members have offered the follow ing additional examples of near-term capital
cost expenditures.
Hoosier Energy, a rural cooperative, reports that it must commit to a zero discharge FGD retrofit for its Merom Generating Station within the next 60 days. The retrofit is estimated to cost $46 million. Merom's permit contains a November 1, 2018 applicability date for FGDW, which is driving this decision.
Santee Cooper faces imminent, irreversible financial commitments for ELG compliance costs at the Cross and Winyah Generating Stations. Beginning in May 2017, Santee Cooper will need to contract for additional construction and engineering services to meet the ELG requirements at both stations. The amount
7
contracted for this work over the short term is estimated to cost Santee Cooper $5 million by May 2017 and another $22 million by July 2017, for a total of $27 million. The total amount of the contract for these construction and engineering services is estimated to cost $90 million. These expenses will be in addition to the $5.5 million that Santee Cooper has already spent on pilot studies and development of compliance strategies for the ELG Rule.
Southern Illinois Power Company expects to spend $9.5 million for a bottom ash transport water retrofit within the next 6-12 months.
FirstEnergy expects to spend $2.5 million to modify a power plant's bottom ash system within the next 6-12 months.
Within the next 6-12 months, WEC Energy Group estimates it will incur the following costs totaling 52,750,000:
1. Weston Generating Station: About $1,500,000 will be expended on preliminary engineering for converting the bottom ash system for one of its units to a mechanical drag system.
2. Elm Road Generating Station: About $1,000,000 will be expended on preliminary engineering for the technology selected for the FGDW system.
3. Oak Creek Power Plant and Pleasant Prairie Power Plant: About $250,000 will be expended for preliminary engineering related to modifications needed for the bottom ash systems.
For Eversource's Merrimack Station, following the detailed design study to be conducted this summer and fall, the company anticipates hiring a consultant to develop detailed bid specifications for the retrofit at a cost of $50,000-$75,000, to be incurred in 2018.
For the City o f Springfield, within the next 6 months it anticipates hav ing to commit to an engineering design contract with an estimated cost of $3 million.
The City of Colorado Springs is also burdened with a near-term commitment. It
must contract within the next month for engineering/design services to meet the zero
discharge bottom ash transport water requirement. The system retrofit must take
place in late 2017/early 2018. It is expected that the retrofit will cost approximately
$350,000-400,000.
*
Lakeland Electric's McIntosh Power Plant is an indirect discharger and is subject to a deadline of November 1,2018 for compliance with FGDW pretreatment limits as well as other requirements. To meet that compliance date, Lakeland Electric reports that it must enter into contracts for biological and/or physical/chemical treatment as soon as possible, because its estimated lead time to design, permit, construct, and commission the system is 16-24 months. As a result, Lakeland must commit to significant capital expenditures within the next 60 days.
8
V. Budgeting for Long-term Capital Costs of the Rule Affects Industry Members As documented in the Petition, industry members have been budgeting for substantial
long-term capital outlays related to the Rule. This budgeting is necessary not only for prudent corporate management, but also to reflect the anticipated capital costs appropriately in mandatory corporate filings such as 10-K.s. NRG anticipates that its total ELG costs will be approximately $200 million.' And, of AEP's total projected environmental investments for 2018 through 2025, the ELG Rule compliance costs alone are projected to range from $400$550 million.*4
Budgeting for the ELG Rule means that corporate funds are diverted from other ventures or opportunities. Also, the investment community will consider the anticipated outlays in valuing the company and evaluating its potential for growth and revenue enhancement. The long-term capital costs associated with the Rule are thus causing business repercussions now, even though construction may not have commenced. VI. The Rule is Affecting Unit Retirement Decisions
The power industry is dynamic. Companies must routinely assess the strength of the market, its potential for growth, the dispatch patterns within the market, and the viability of their generating units within the regional market. The ELG Rule is impacting how companies assess their units, as it imposes costs that are large enough to affect the viability of some units. If EPA decides to reconsider the Rule, it should grant a stay of the Rule and its deadlines so
' NRG, Form 10-K, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31,2016 (Feb. 28, 2017) at 32.
4 For total expected environmental investments, see AEP, Inc. Form 1OK, filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31,2016 (Feb.
28,2017) at 14.
'
9
that units facing the threat of early retirement can be maintained until EPA has finished its reconsideration of the Rule.
DTE Energy recently announced that it plans to retire three facilities (Trenton Channel, River Rouge, and St. Clair) prior to December 31,2023. DTE committed to this specific retirement date based solely on the ELG Rule's applicability date range of November 1,2018 to December 31,2023. Also, one rural cooperative believes the ELG Rule will potentially cause retirement of its coal-fired facility and the loss of 83 full-time jobs, in addition to loss of numerous contractors' jobs.
Lakeland Electric reports that the very tight compliance deadline it faces as an indirect discharger, and the high expenses associated with the necessary retrofits, are forcing it to consider ceasing operations of its only coal unit. Given its estimate that it would take five years to bring a new unit online as replacement power, Lakeland Electric may have to purchase replacement power at a higher cost than that associated with the current unit and pass those costs onto its ratepayers. Also, if Lakeland Electric ceases to operate its coal unit, it will result in the loss of approximately 100 jobs and cause a significant economic impact to the Lakeland community.
Additionally, many companies are evaluating ELG Rule costs along with the costs of the many other rulemakings affecting coal-fired generation, such as the C'CR Rule. In some cases, the cumulative impact of these multiple regulations is threatening the continued viability of coal units. Owensboro Municipal Utilities, for example, recently announced retirement of a coal-fired unit at its Elmer Smith Generating Station. The anticipated costs for ELG and CCR rule compliance were a major factor in the retirement decision.
10
Staying the ELG Rule during reconsideration will allow companies to make better
business decisions based primarily on market forces and not affected by regulatory imperatives
derived from a rule that is being reevaluated.
VII. Final Permits with ELG Applicability Dates Are Driving Expenditures Under the ELG Rule, a facility 's permit writer must set an applicability date for each
wastestream impacted bv the Rule. That applicability date must be "as soon as possible'"(as
that term is defined within the Rule) within the range of November 1,2018 to December 31.
2023. Some of the final permits industry members have received to date are summarized in the
table below.
Company OVEC/IKEC
Plant Cliffy Creek
Date of Final Permit Mar. 28, 2017
Applicability Dates' April 1,2022 (BATW and FGDW)
DTE
Belle River
Jan. 27, 2017 Dec. 31,2021 (BATW)
Duke Energy Duke Energy Ameren
Edwardsport
Mar. 30,2016
Marshall
Sept. 9, 2016
Sioux Energy Center Mar. 2017
April 1,2021 (gasification wastewater)* Nov. 1,2018 (FATW) Jan. 31,2021 (BATW and FGDW) May 1,2021 (BATW and FATW)
Dynegy
Coffeen
Sept. 16, 2016 April 1,2019 (BATW)
April 1,2020 (FGDW)
Hoosier
Merom
Nov. 1,2018 (FGDW)
Energy
*Subject to a reopener clause to allow, with appropriate justification, modification of the applicability
date to no later than Dec. 31,2023.
Also, Appendix A to this filing contains a collection of final permits with ELG applicability
dates.
? BATW=bottom ash transport water; FATW=fly ash transport water; FGDW=flue gas desulfurization wastewater.
As noted earlier, even when applicability dates are several years in the future, the
process of preparing for compliance is complex, multifaceted, and very time-consuming.
Facilities must devote substantial resources now to ensure completion of all the necessary steps
to be in full compliance on that date (e.g., studies, design, testing, construction, further testing,
etc.). Those steps have already, or are imminently being, commenced. If EPA decides to
reconsider the Rule, a stay is necessary so that regulators can modify these permit deadlines
before facilities with newly reissued permits are disadvantaged.
VIII. Industry Members Also Have Many Pending Permits with ELG Applicability Dates
In addition to the final permits already issued with ELG applicability dates, industry
members have many pending permits with proposed ELG applicability dates. We include
below some examples of pending permits expected to be issued within the next 6 months with
ELG applicability dates.
Company AEP AEP Consumers Energy 6 Consumers Energy WEC Energy Group WEC Energy Group
DTE Energy DTE Energy DTE Energy
Plant Cardinal Conesville J. H. Campbell D. E. Karn Weston Oak Creek/Elm Road Monroe Trenton Channel River Rouge
fl Appendix B to this filing is the Direct Testimony of Heather A. Breining on behalf of Consumers Energy Company, tiled with the Michigan Public Service Commission in March 2017. The testimony describes Consumer Energy's plans for complying with the ELG Rule.
12
These are just a few of the facilities facing the burden of actual ELG deadlines in pending permits that will soon be issued. There are many more permits close to finalization that will include ELG Rule deadlines. IX. The ELG Rule's Dubious Model Technology for FGDW M agnifies the Need for a
Stay The need for immediate relief from the ELG Rule is magnified by the inability of the model technology for FGDW to meet the limits in the Rule. The Rule specifies a biological treatment system for FGDW as part of the BAT. But, as demonstrated in the Petition and confirmed in a subsequent report,7that technology is unable to reliably meet the limits in the Rule when a facility is burning a subbituminous coal such as Powder River Basin coal. Plants burning bituminous coal are likewise experiencing problems with the model system, and are finding they may not be able to meet the limits consistently. Rural cooperatives such as Cooperative Energy and municipalities such as the City of Springfield, among others, are facing huge costs for FGDW retrofits with no certainty that the final systems will consistent! meet the ELG limits using EPA's model technology. Because the model technology has never been validated across a broad range of operating conditions, companies are being forced to dedicate substantial resources investigating possible compliance strategies. Companies must obviously be in compliance with the FGDW limit no later than their applicability date. They cannot wait to begin their investigations because it is unclear when (and if) they will find a viable technical solution (or what that solution may entail). Consequently, members are already undertaking pilot studies
7See Report by the Electric Power Research Institute entitled Biological Treatment o f Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater at a Power Plant Burning Powder River Basin Coal, submitted by UWAG on April 12, 2017.
13
and other measures trying to identify a solution as soon as possible. Given that the Rule's model technology for FGDW is a prime candidate for reconsideration, these costs will be unjustly incurred unless the Rule is stayed. X. Conclusion
The ELG Rule should be reconsidered and it should be stayed while under reconsideration. Justice requires an immediate stay. Moreover, a stay is in the public interest and is necessary to avoid disadvantaging industry members whose permits have been or are being revised to include ELG applicability dates.
14
29142.080072 I M I US 04659709\ 8
APPENDIX A
ID E M
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment.
100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis. IN 46204
(800)451-6027 (317)232-8603 www.idem.IN.gov
Eric J. Holcom b Governor
Bruno Pigott Commissioner
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 28, 2017
Mr. J. Michael Brown, Environmental, Safety & Health Director Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corporation 3932 U.S. Rte 23 PO Box 468 Piketon, OH 45661
Dear Mr. Brown:
Re: Final NPDES Permit No. IN0001759 IKEC - Clifty Creek Station Madison, Jefferson County, Indiana
Your application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for authorization to discharge into the waters of the State of Indiana has been processed in accordance with Section 402 and 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.), and IC 13-15, IDEM's permitting authority. All discharges from this facility shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
One condition of your permit requires periodic reporting of several effluent parameters. You are required to submit both federal discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and state Monthly Monitoring Reports (MMRs) on a routine basis. The MMR form can be found on IDEM's web site at http://www.in.qov/idem/cleanwater/2396.htm.
Once you are on this page, select the "IDEM Forms" page and locate the "Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR) for Industrial Discharge Permits-30530" under the Wastewater Facilities heading. We recommend selecting the "XLS" version because it will complete all of the calculations when you enter the data.
Please note that IDEM will no longer accept paper DMR or MMR forms after December 28, 2016. After that date all NPDES permit holders are required to submit their monitoring data to IDEM using NetDMR. Please contact Rose McDaniel at (317) 233-2653 or Helen Demmings at (317) 232-8815 if you would like more information on NetDMR. Information is also available on our website at http://IN.gov/idem/cleanwater/2422.htm.
Another condition, which needs to be clearly understood, concerns violation of the effluent limitations in the permit. Exceeding the limitations constitutes a violation of
An Equal Opportunity Employer
0
A State that Works
0 Recycled Paper
the permit and may subject the permittee to criminal or civil penalties. (See Part II A.2.) It is therefore urged that your office and treatment operator understand this part of the permit.
A response to the comments contained in the letter from yourself, and an additional comment letter from Tony Mendoza and Casey Roberts, Staff Attorneys with Sierra club, jointly with Thomas Cmar, Attorney with Earth Justice, pertaining to the draft NPDES permit is contained in the Post Public Notice Addendum. The Post Public Notice Addendum is located at the end of the Fact Sheet.
It should also be noted that any appeal must be filed under procedures outlined in 1C 13-15-6, IC 4-21.5, and the enclosed Public Notice. The appeal must be initiated by filing a petition for administrative review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within fifteen (15) days of the emailing of an electronic copy of this letter or within eighteen (18) days of the mailing of this letter by filing at the following addresses:
Director Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North Room 501 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North Room 1301 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
If you have any questions concerning the permit, please contact Richard Hamblin at 317/232-8696 or rhamblin@iderTun.gov. Questions concerning appeal procedures should be directed to the Office of Environmental Adjudication, at 317/232-8591.
Sincerely,
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Enclosures cc: Jefferson County Health Department
U.S. EPA, Region 5 Tony Mendoza, Sierra Club
Page 1 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the "Act"), and IDEM's authority under IC 13-15,
INDIANA-KENTUCKY ELECTRIC CORPORATION is authorized to discharge from the Clifty Creek Generating Station that is located at 1335 Clifty Hollow Road, Madison, Indiana, to receiving waters identified as the Ohio River, Clifty Creek, and Unnamed Tributaries to Clifty Creek in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III, and IV hereof. This permit may be revoked for the nonpayment of applicable fees in accordance with IC 13-18-20.
Effective Date: May 1,2017___________________ Expiration Date: April 30, 2022______________
In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information and forms as are required by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management no later than 180 days prior to the date of expiration. Issued March 28, 2017, for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Page 2 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
PART I
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
1. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 001. The discharge is limited to landfill runoff and storm water runoff from the western portion of the coal combustion residual landfill watershed. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the Ohio River, Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1][2][3][4]
Outfall 001
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter
Averaae
Maximum
Flow[5]
Report
Report
TSS[6]
Copper[7]
lron[7]
Aluminum[7]
Arsenic[7|
........
........
Cadmium[7]
T. Chromium[7]
Selenium[7]
Zinc[7)
........
Mercury[7][8]
TDS
........
Boron
Alkalinity
Sodium
--
Units MGD
.......
.......
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
50 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Units
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l ng/i mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Iffie
1 X Weekly 24 Hour Total
1 X Weekly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
6 X Yearly
Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Monthly Grab
Parameter pH
[1]
[2]
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv 1 X Weekly
Tffie Grab
See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates beyond the approved estimated maximum dosage rates, or changes that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of the additive contributing to this Outfall, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates
Page 3 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
[3] The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at each outfall discharging directly to the Ohio River.
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
[4] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[5] Flow is calculated at Outfall 001 based on depth measurements of the water overflowing the rectangular weir-type overflow structure.
[6] An exceedance of the concentration limitations for TSS which is demonstrated to have been caused by the presence of algae in the effluent will not constitute a violation of the permit. In such cases, if visual examination reveals the presence of algae, the permittee may quantitatively demonstrate the presence of algae by subtracting the results of a volatile suspended solids test (as described in the current U.S. EPA approved version of the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater) from measure TSS along with a letter of explanation to accompany monthly DMR forms. Standard tests for TSS are to be performed at all other times.
[7] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[8] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit using EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E.
Parameter Total Mercury
EPA Method
LOP
1631, Revision E 0.2 ng/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l
Page 4 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
2. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 002. The discharge is limited to boiler slag sluice water, storm water runoff, boiler room sumps, coal pile runoff, stormwater runoff and leachate from the east portion of the coal combustion residual landfill, and treated FGD wastewater (Internal Outfall 201). Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1][2][3][4][5]
Outfall 002
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter
Averaae
Maximum
Flow[6]
Report
Report
O+G
TSS[7][9]
Copper[8]
lron[8]
Aluminum[8]
Arsenic[8]
Cadmium[8]
T. Chromium[8]
Selenium[8]
Zinc[8]
Mercury[8][11]
TDS
Boron
........
Alkalinity
Sodium
Fluoride
Manganese
BODs
Lead[8]
Ammonia, as N
Summer[12]
Winterfl 2]
Nitrate/Nitrite,
as N
Bromide[13]
Units MGD ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ----....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ----....... ....... .......
....... .......
....... .......
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
..........
10
15
28.4
94.1
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
12
20
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
3.7
7.4
12.1
24.3
Report Report
Report Report
Units
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l ng/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Tvoe
1 X Weekly 24 Hour Total
1 X Monthly Grab
1 X Weekly Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X Monthly! 10] Grab
2 X Monthly! 10] Grab
2 X Monthlyfl 0] Grab
2 X Monthly[10] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
6 X Yearly
Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X Monthly[10] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X Monthly[10] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
mg/l 2 X MonthlyllO] Grab mg/l 2 X MonthlyllO] Grab
mg/l 2 X MonthlyllO] Grab mg/l 1 X Quarterly Grab
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample Frequency Type 1 X Weekly Grab
Page 5 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
[1] See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
[2] In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates beyond the approved estimated maximum dosage rates, or changes that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of the additive contributing to this Outfall, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
[3] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[4] The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at each outfall discharging directly to the Ohio River.
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
[5] Effective April 1, 2022, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water.
[6] Flow is calculated based on maximum pump design capacities plus average daily rainfall and evaporation. Rainfall and evaporation calculations are based on annual rainfall and EPA coefficients of drainage/absorption/evaporation.
[7] An exceedance of either the monthly average or daily maximum concentration limitations for TSS which is demonstrated to be caused by the presence of algae in the effluent will not constitute a violation of the permit. In such cases, if visual examination reveals the presence of algae, the permittee may quantitatively demonstrate the presence of algae by subtracting the results of a volatile suspended solids test (as described in the current U.S. EPA approved version of the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater) from measure TSS along with a letter of explanation to accompany monthly DMR forms. Standard tests for TSS are to be performed at all other times.
Page 6 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
[8] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[9] Limitations developed using the Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF).
[10] Measurement frequency is twice monthly. Each measurement shall be taken with a minimum of five days between each sample over the course of a calendar month.
[11] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit using EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E.
Parameter Total Mercury
EPA Method
LOP
1631, Revision E 0.2 ng/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l
[12] Summer limitations apply from May 1 through November 30. Winter limitations apply from December 1 through April 30.
[13] The following EPA test methods and/or Standard Methods and associated LODs and LOQs are to be used in the analysis of the effluent samples. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM.
Parameter Bromide
Test Method 300.0, Rev 2,1
LOP 0.01
LOQ 0.03
Page 7 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
3. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 003. The discharge is limited to non contact cooling water and storm water runoff. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1][2][3][4][5]
Outfall 003
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Flow[6]
Report
Report
TRC
Continuous[7][8]........
Interm ittent[7][5]------
-----
Total Residual
Oxidants [7][9][8]--
Chlorination/Bromination
Frequency[7][10].......
Chlorination/Bromination
Dose Duration[7][10]........
Chlorination/Bromination
Duration/Day [7][10]........
Temperature [12][14]
Intakef 11] .........
Effluent[11] .........
Mixed River[13].......
AT[15][16] .........
Units MGD
-----
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Units ......
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
Daily
24 Hour Tote
0.016
0.038 0.2
mg/l Daily mg/l Daily
Grab Grab
0.06
mg/l Daily
Grab
4
Times/Day Monthly
Report
40
Minutes/Dose Monthly
Report
120
Minutes/Day Monthly
Report
Report Report Report
12
F
Daily
F
Daily
"F
Daily
F
Daily
Continuous Continuous
Report Report
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Frequency
Type
1 X Weekly Grab
[1] See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
[2] In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates beyond the approved estimated maximum dosage rates, or changes that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of the additive contributing to this Outfall, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
Page 8 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
[3] See Part III of this permit for additional requirements and information for Alternate Thermal Effluent Limitations.
[4] The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at each outfall discharging directly to the Ohio River.
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
[5] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[6] Flow is to be calculated based on maximum design capacities of each of the 12 circulating water pumps and the number of units in service.
[7] The effluent limitations for total residual chlorine (TRC) and total residual oxidants (TRO) for Outfall 003 applies to the peak concentration occurring during periods of chlorination/bromination.
Chlorination I Bromination shall be sequential; TRC or TRO shall not be detected from more than one discharge tunnel at anytime. Samples shall be taken in front of the discharge tunnel being chlorinated/dechlorinated and dechlorinated/debrominated at the time of sampling. Dilution by the discharge from tunnels not being treated by chlorination/bromination is allowed in calculating the TRC or TRO to be reported.
[8] The water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL) for chlorine is less than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) as defined below. Compliance with this permit will be demonstrated if the effluent concentrations measured are less than the LOQ.
If the measured concentration of chlorine is greater than the water quality based effluent limitations and above the respective LOD specified in the table below in any three (3) consecutive analyses, or any five (5) out of nine (9) analyses, then the discharger shall re-examine the chlorination/de-chlorination procedures.
Parameter Chlorine
Test Method
LOD
4500-CI-D,E or 4500-CI-G 0.02 mg/l
LOQ 0.06 mg/l
Use the test methods for Total Residual Chlorine to determine Total Residual Oxidants. At present, two test methods are considered to be acceptable to IDEM,
Page 9 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
amperometric (4500-CI-D,E) and DPD colorimetric method (4500-CI-G), to determine TRO concentrations at the level of 0.06 mg/l.
Case-Specific LOD/LQQ The permittee may determine a case-specific LOD or LOQ using the analytical method specified above, or any other test method which is approved by the Commissioner prior to use. The LOD shall be derived by the procedure specified for method detection limits contained in 40 CFR Part 136, Appendix B, and the LOQ shall be set equal to 3.18 times the LOD. Other methods may be used if first approved by the Commissioner.
[9] If bromine is used less than two (2) hours per day for the station, the limit is 0.06 mg/l.
If the duration of bromination is greater than two (2) hours per day for the plant, debromination is required. Debromination is required on a stoichiometric basis to ensure that all bromine has been reduced to bromide.
[10] The monitoring for chlorination/bromination "frequency", "dose duration", and "duration/day" applies when the facility is applying chlorination and/or bromination.
[11] The water inlet and outlet temperatures are recorded continuously at the inlets and outlets of each of the six unit condensers at the plant. Those inlet and outlet temperatures are then averaged to determine the plants' daily inlet and outlet temperatures to be reported to IDEM.
[12] The following conditions apply for Temperature outside the mixing zone:
(1) There shall be no abnormal temperature changes that may adversely affect aquatic life unless caused by natural conditions.
(2) The normal daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations that existed before the addition of heat due to other than natural causes shall be maintained.
(3) The maximum temperature rise at any time or place above natural shall not exceed:
(i) five (5) degrees Fahrenheit (two and eight-tenths (2.8) degrees Celsius) in streams; and
(ii) three (3) degrees Fahrenheit (one and seven-tenths) (1.7) degrees Celsius) in lakes and reservoirs.
Page 10 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
[13] The mixed river temperature is to be determined by employing the following mathematical model:
Qe(Te-Tu) Tmr= Tu + ..............
3553
where: Tmr =mixed river temperature (F) Tu =upstream river temperature (F) Te =effluent temperature (F) Qe =effluent flow (MGD) 3553 = one-half of the Cb.io low flow value of the receiving stream in MGD
[14] The maximum time interval between measurements is one minute. Temperature measurements shall be recorded continuously in one minute intervals, and the total number of minutes above the corresponding maximum limits in Table 1 for the twelve (12) months shall be reported. The twelve months shall include the current month and the previous eleven (11) months.
[15] AT= Tu - Tmr
where: T mr = mixed river temperature (F) T u = upstream river temperature (F)
[16] The permittee is authorized to utilize thermal treatment for zebra mussel control, in accordance with the IDEM approval letter dated July 23, 1996 and the facility's thermal treatment plan.
Discharge resulting from the thermal treatment process should be scheduled to occur at such a time as to minimize the potential for human exposure.
Maximum discharge temperature is to be listed as a footnote on the DMR.
Page 11 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
4. The permittee is required to collect intake water samples in conjunction with certain discharge samples. The intake structure is designated as 000 on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the intake water characteristics. Such samples shall be monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS Ml
Intake Structure 000
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Aluminum[2]
Arsenic[2]
Cadmium[2]
T. Chromium[2]
Seienium[2]
Zinc[2|
Temperature[4]
Units ...... ....... ....... ...... ....... ......
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Units mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
F
Monitoring Requiremer
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
2 X Monthly[3] Grab
Daily
Continuous
[1] Gross, net, and intake values must be reported for select parameters at Outfall 002 and 003. The net result shall be calculated by subtracting the concentration value of the intake water, including any adjustments, from the concentration value of the gross discharge. The background values are to be calculated by using at a minimum of ten daily samples taken over a minimum of 30 days. The background levels are to be updated quarterly.
If the monitoring of the intake water indicates that the eligibility for net limitations has been altered or no longer exists, the permittee shall notify the Industrial NPDES Permits Section of the Office of Water Quality. In such a case, the permit may be modified or revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing to include appropriate effluent limitations.
[2] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[3] Measurement frequency is twice monthly. Each measurement shall be taken with a minimum of five days between each sample over the course of a calendar month.
[4] The water inlet and outlet temperatures are recorded continuously at the inlets and outlets of each of the six unit condensers at the plant. Those inlet and outlet temperatures are then averaged to determine the plants' daily inlet and outlet temperatures to be reported to IDEM.
Page 12 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
5. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the internal outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 201. The discharge is limited to treated FGD wastewater. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to comingling with other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Parameter Flow TSS Arsenic[1]
Interim Final[2] Selenium[1] Interim
Final[2] Mercury[1][3]
Interim Final[2] Nitrate/Nitrite, as N Interim Final[2]
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Internal Outfall 201
Units MGD
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
30
100
Report 8
Report 11
Report 12
Report 23
Report 356
Report 788
Units mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Daily
24 Hour Total
2 X Monthly Grab
ug/l 1 X Weekly Grab ug/i 1 X Weekly Grab
ug/i 1 X Weekly Grab ug/l 1 X Weekly Grab
ng/l 6 X Yearly[4] Grab ng/l 1 X Weekly Grab
Report 4.4
Report 17.0
mg/l 1 X Weekly mg/l 1 X Weekly
Grab Grab
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv 1 X Weekly
im . Grab
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[2] Final effluent limitations become effective April 1, 2022.
[3] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted using EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E.
Parameter Total Mercury
EPA Method
LOP
1631, Revision E 0.2 ng/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l
Page 13 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year until the final effluent limitations become effective April 1, 2022.
Page 14 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
6. The permittee is authorized to discharge storm water from the outfalls listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge storm water from Outfalls 008S, 013S, 018S, 028S, and 030S. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into Clifty Creek (008S, 013S, 030S), Unnamed Tributary to Clifty Creek (028S), or the Ohio River (018S). Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1][2][3]
Parameter
Daily Maximum
Units
Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample Freauencv Type
Flow Total Suspended Solids pH Oil & Grease COD Ammonia, as N Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Nitrate plus Nitrite Nitrogen Total Phosphorus Selenium[4] Zinc[4] Boron
Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
MGD mg/l s.u. mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly 1 X Yearly
Estimate Total Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
[1] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[2] All samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches and at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. There shall be a minimum of three (3) months between reported sampling events.
For each sample taken, the permittee shall record the duration and total rainfall of the storm event, the number of hours between beginning of the storm measured and the end of the previous measurable rain event, and the outside temperature at the time of sampling.
A grab sample shall be taken during the first thirty (30) minutes of the discharge (or as soon thereafter as practicable).
[3] The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at Outfall 018S that discharges directly to the Ohio River.
Page 15 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
Page 16 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
B. NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
At all times the discharge from any and all point sources specified within this permit shall not cause receiving waters:
1. including the mixing zone, to contain substances, materials, floating debris, oil, scum, or other pollutants:
a. which will settle to form putrescent, or otherwise objectionable deposits;
b. which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
c. which produce color, visible oil sheen, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance;
d. which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans;
e. which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants or algae to such a degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated uses.
2. outside the mixing zone, to contain substances in concentrations which on the basis of available scientific data are believed to be sufficient to injure, be chronically toxic to, or be carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic to humans, animals, aquatic life, or plants.
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING
1. Representative Sampling
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge flow and shall be taken at times which reflect the full range and concentration of effluent parameters normally expected to be present. Samples shall not be taken at times to avoid showing elevated levels of any parameters.
2. Monthly Reporting
The permittee shall submit monitoring reports to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) containing results obtained during the previous month and shall be postmarked no later than the 28th day of the month following each completed monitoring period. The first report shall be submitted by the 28th day of the month following the month in which the
Page 17 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
permit becomes effective. These reports shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and the Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). All reports shall be submitted electronically by using the NetDMR applicationThe Regional Administrator may request the permittee to submit monitoring reports to the Environmental Protection Agency if it is deemed necessary to assure compliance with the permit.
a. Calculations that require averaging of measurements of daily values (both concentrations and mass) shall use an arithmetic mean, except the monthly average for E. co li shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
b. Daily effluent values (both mass and concentration) that are less than the LOQ that are used to determine the monthly average effluent level shall be accommodated in calculation of the average using statistical methods that have been approved by the Commissioner.
c. Effluent concentrations less than the LOD shall be reported on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms as < (less than) the value of the LOD. For example, if a substance is not detected at a concentration of 0.1 pg/l, report the value as <0.1 pg/l.
d. Effluent concentrations greater than or equal to the LOD and less than the LOQ that are reported on a DMR shall be reported as the actual value and annotated on the DMR to indicate that the value is not quantifiable.
e. Mass discharge values which are calculated from concentrations reported as less than the value of the limit of detection shall be reported as less than the corresponding mass discharge value.
f.
Mass discharge values that are calculated from effluent
concentrations greater than the limit of detection shall be reported
as the calculated value.
Definitions
a. "Monthly Average" means the total mass or flow-weighted concentration of all daily discharges during a calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled or measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such calendar month.
The monthly average discharge limitation is the highest allowable average monthly discharge for any calendar month.
Page 18 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
b. "Daily Discharge" means the total mass of a pollutant discharged during the calendar day or, in the case of a pollutant limited in terms other than mass pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-11(e), the average concentration or other measurement of the pollutant specified over the calendar day or any twenty-four hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day for the purposes of sampling.
c. "Daily Maximum" means the maximum allowable daily discharge for any calendar day.
d. A "24-hour composite sample" means a sample consisting of at least 3 individual flow-proportioned samples of wastewater, taken by the grab sample method or by an automatic sampler, which are taken at approximately equally spaced time intervals for the duration of the discharge within a 24-hour period and which are combined prior to analysis. A flow-proportioned composite sample may be obtained by:
(1) recording the discharge flow rate at the time each individual sample is taken,
(2) adding together the discharge flow rates recorded from each individuals sampling time to formulate the "total flow" value,
(3) the discharge flow rate of each individual sampling time is divided by the total flow value to determine its percentage of the total flow value,
(4) then multiply the volume of the total composite sample by each individual sample's percentage to determine the volume of that individual sample which will be included in the total composite sample.
e. "Concentration" means the weight of any given material present in a unit volume of liquid. Unless otherwise indicated in this permit, concentration values shall be expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/l).
f.
The "Regional Administrator" is defined as the Region 5 Administrator,
U.S. EPA, located at 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604.
g. The "Commissioner" is defined as the Commissioner of the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management, who is located at the
following address: 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana
46204.
h. "Limit of Detection" or "LOD" means the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with ninety-nine
Page 19 of 59 Permit No, IN0001759
percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero (0) for a particular analytical method and sample matrix.
i.
"Limit of Quantitation" or "LOQ" means a measurement of the
concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a specified
laboratory procedure calibrated at a specified concentration above the
method detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at
which a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a
specified laboratory procedure for monitoring of the contaminant. This
term is also sometimes called limit of quantification or quantification
level.
j.
"Method Detection Level" or "MDL" means the minimum concentration
of an analyte (substance) that can be measured and reported with a
ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is
greater than zero (0) as determined by procedure set forth in 40 CFR
136, Appendix B. The method detection level or MDL is equivalent to
the LOD.
k. "Grab Sample" means a sample which is taken from a wastestream on a one-time basis without consideration of the flow rate of the wastestream and without considerations of time.
Test Procedures
The analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the current version of 40 CFR 136. Multiple editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater are currently approved for most methods, however, 40 CFR Part 136 should be checked to ascertain if a particular method is approved for a particular analyte. The approved methods may be included in the texts listed below. However, different but equivalent methods are allowable if they receive the prior written approval of the Commissioner and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
a. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 18th, 19th, or 20th Editions, 1992, 1995, or 1998, American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. 20005.
b. A.S.T.M. Standards, Parts 23, Water; Atmosphere Analysis 1972 American Society forTestinq and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
Page 20 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
c. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes June 1974, Revised, March 1983, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, 1014 Broadway, Cincinnati, OH 45202.
5. Recording of Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall maintain records of all monitoring information and monitoring activities, including:
a. The date, exact place and time of sampling or measurement;
b. The person(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed;
d. The person(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such measurements and analyses.
6. Additional Monitoring by Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. Other monitoring data not specifically required in this permit (such as internal process or internal waste stream data) which is collected by or for the permittee need not be submitted unless requested by the Commissioner.
7. Records Retention
All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit, including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recording from continuous monitoring instrumentation, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years. In cases where the original records are kept at another location, a copy of all such records shall be kept at the permitted facility. The three years shall be extended:
Page 21 of 59 Permit No, IN0001759
a. automatically during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the permittee or regarding promulgated effluent guidelines applicable to the permittee; or
b. as requested by the Regional Administrator or the Indiana Department of Environmental Management,
STORM WATER MONITORING AND NON-NUMERIC EFFLUENT LIMITS
Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall implement the non-numeric permit conditions in this Section of the permit for the entire site as it relates to storm water associated with industrial activity regardless which outfall the storm water is discharged from.
1. Control Measures and Effluent Limits
In the technology-based limits included in Part D.2-4., the term "minimize" means reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable using control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practice.
2. Control Measures
Select, design, install, and implement control measures (including best management practices) to minimize pollutant discharges that address the selection and design considerations in Part D.3 to meet the non-numeric effluent limits in Part D.4. The selection, design, installation, and implementation of these control measures must be in accordance with good engineering practices and manufacturer's specifications. Any deviation from the manufacturer's specifications shall be documented. If the control measures are not achieving their intended effect in minimizing pollutant discharges, the control measures must be modified as in accordance with the corrective action requirements in Part I.D.6. Regulated storm water discharges from the facility include storm water run-on that commingles with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity at the facility.
3. Control Measure Selection and Design Considerations
When selecting and designing control measures consider the following:
a. preventing storm water from coming into contact with polluting materials is generally more effective, and cost-effective, than trying to remove pollutants from storm water;
Page 22 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
b. use of control measures in combination may be more effective than use of control measures in isolation for minimizing pollutants in storm water discharge;
c. assessing the type and quantity of pollutants, including their potential to impact receiving water quality, is critical to designing effective control measures that will achieve the limits in this permit;
d. minimizing impervious areas at the facility and infiltrating runoff onsite (including bioretention cells, green roofs, and pervious pavement, among other approaches), can reduce runoff and improve groundwater recharge and stream base flows in local streams, although care must be taken to avoid ground water contamination;
e. flow can be attenuated by use of open vegetated swales and natural depressions to reduce in-stream impacts of erosive flow;
f.
conservation and/or restoration of riparian buffers will help protect
streams from storm water runoff and improve water quality; and
g. use of treatment interceptors (e.g. swirl separators and sand filters) may be appropriate in some instances to minimize the discharge of pollutants.
Technology-Based Effluent Limits (BPT/BAT/BCT): Non-Numeric Effluent Limits
a. Minimize Exposure Minimize the exposure of manufacturing, processing, and material storage areas (including loading and unloading, storage, disposal, cleaning, maintenance, and fueling operations) to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. To the extent technologically available and economically practicable and achievable, either locate industrial materials and activities inside or protect them with storm resistant coverings in order to minimize exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff (although significant enlargement of impervious surface area is not recommended). In minimizing exposure, pay particular attention to the following areas:
Loading and unloading areas: locate in roofed or covered areas where feasible; use grading, berming, or curbing around the loading area to divert run-on; locate the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems.
Page 23 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Material storage areas: locate indoors, or in roofed or covered areas where feasible; install berms/dikes around these areas; use dry cleanup methods.
Note: Industrial materials do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from affected areas will not be discharged to receiving waters.
b. Good Housekeeping
Keep clean all exposed areas that are potential sources of pollutants, using such measures as sweeping at regular intervals, store materials in appropriate containers, identify and control all on-site sources of dust to minimize stormwater contamination from the deposition of dust on areas exposed to precipitation, keep all dumpsters under cover or fit with a lid that must remain closed when not in use, and ensure that waste, garbage, and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged.
Fugitive Dust Emissions. Minimize fugitive dust emissions from coal handling areas to minimize the tracking of coal dust offsite that could be discharged in stormwater through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, (list not exclusive): installing specially designed tires; and washing vehicles in a designated area before they leave the site and controlling the wash water.
Delivery Vehicles. Minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site. Implement procedures to inspect delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater. Ensure the overall integrity of the body or container of the delivery vehicle and implement procedures to deal with leakage or spillage from delivery vehicles.
Fuel Oil Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from fuel oil unloading areas. Use containment curbs in unloading areas where feasible. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure that any leaks or spills are immediately contained and cleaned up, and use spill and overflow protection devices (e.g., drip pans, drip diapers, or other containment devices placed beneath fuel oil connectors to contain potential spillage during deliveries or from leaks at the connectors).
Page 24 of 59 Permit No, IN0001759
Chemical Loading and Unloading. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from chemical loading and unloading areas. Use containment curbs at chemical loading and unloading areas to contain spills, where practicable. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure leaks and spills are immediately contained and cleaned up and, where practicable, load and unload in covered areas and store chemicals indoors.
Miscellaneous Loading and Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from loading and unloading areas through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): covering the loading area; grading, curbing, or berming around the loading area to divert run-on; locating the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems; or equivalent procedures.
Liquid Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from above-ground liquid storage tanks through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, the following (list not exclusive): using protective guards around tanks; using containment curbs; installing spill and overflow protection; using dry cleanup methods; or equivalent measures.
Large Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from large bulk fuel storage tanks. Use containment berms (or their equivalent). Comply with applicable state and federal laws, including Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements.
Spill Reduction Measures. Minimize the potential for an oil or chemical spill, or reference the appropriate part of the SPCC plan. Visually inspect as part of the routine facility inspection the structural integrity of all above-ground tanks, pipelines, pumps, and related equipment that may be exposed to stormwater, and make any necessary repairs immediately.
Oil-Bearing Equipment in Switchyards. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from oil-bearing equipment in switchyard areas. Use level grades and gravel surfaces to retard flows and limit the spread of spills, or collect runoff in perimeter ditches.
Residue-Hauling Vehicles. Inspect all residue-hauling vehicles for proper covering over the load, adequate gate sealing, and overall
Page 25 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
integrity of the container body. Repair vehicles without load covering or adequate gate sealing, or with leaking containers or beds
Ash Loading Areas. Reduce or control the tracking of ash and residue from ash loading areas. Clear the ash building floor and immediately adjacent roadways of spillage, debris, and excess water as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater.
Areas Adjacent to Disposal Ponds or Landfills. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from areas adjacent to disposal ponds or landfills. Reduce ash residue that may be tracked on to access roads traveled by residue handling vehicles, and reduce ash residue on exit roads leading into and out of residue handling areas.
Landfills, Scrap Yards, Surface Impoundments, Open Dumps, General Refuse Sites. Minimize the potential for contamination of runoff from these areas.
c. Maintenance
Maintain all control measures which are used to achieve the effluent limits required by this permit in effective operating condition. Nonstructural control measures must also be diligently maintained (e.g., spill response supplies available, personnel appropriately trained). If control measures need to be replaced or repaired, make the necessary repairs or modifications as expeditiously as practicable.
d. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
Minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective response to such spills if or when they occur. At a minimum, implement:
i.
Procedures for plainly labeling containers (e.g., "Used Oil",
"Spent Solvents", "Fertilizers and Pesticides", etc.) that could
be susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper
handling and facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur;
ii. Preventive measures such as barriers between material
storage and traffic areas, secondary containment provisions,
and procedures for material storage and handling;
iii. Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning
up leaks, spills, and other releases. Employees who may
cause, detect or respond to a spill or leak must be trained in
these procedures and have necessary spill response
equipment available. If possible, one of these individuals
Page 26 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
should be a member of the storm water pollution prevention team; iv. Procedures for notification of appropriate facility personnel, emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. State or local requirements may necessitate reporting spills or discharges to local emergency response, public health, or drinking water supply agencies. Contact information must be in locations that are readily accessible and available; and v. A procedure for documenting all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a storm water conveyance.
e. Erosion and Sediment Controls
Through the use of structural and/or non-structural control measures stabilize, and contain runoff from, exposed areas to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants. Among other actions to meet this limit, place flow velocity dissipation devices at discharge locations and within outfall channels where necessary to reduce erosion and/or settle out pollutants. In selecting, designing, installing, and implementing appropriate control measures for erosion and sediment control, check out information from both the State and EPA websites. The following two websites are given as information sources:
http://www.in.gov/idem/stormwater/2363.htm and https://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater-discharaes-industrial-activities
f.
Management of Runoff
Divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the discharge.
g. Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt
Enclose or cover storage piles of salt, or piles containing salt, used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces. Implement appropriate measures (e.g., good housekeeping, diversions, containment) to minimize exposure resulting from adding to or removing materials from the pile. Piles do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from the piles is not discharged.
Page 27 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Employee Training
Train all employees who work in areas where industrial material or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of the Pollution Prevention Team. The following personnel must understand the requirements of Part I.D. and Part I.E. of this permit and their specific responsibilities with respect to those requirements: Personnel who are responsible for the design, installation, maintenance, and/or repair of controls (including pollution prevention measures); personnel responsible for the storage and handling of chemicals and materials that could become contaminants in stormwater discharges; personnel who are responsible for conducting and documenting monitoring and inspections related to storm water; and personnel who are responsible for taking and documenting corrective actions as required in Part
I.D .6.
Personnel must be trained in at least the following if related to the scope of their job duties (e.g., only personnel responsible for conducting inspections need to understand how to conduct inspections): an overview of what is in the SWPPP; spill response procedures, good housekeeping, maintenance requirements, and material management practices; the location of all controls on the site required by this permit, and how they are to be maintained; the proper procedures to follow with respect to the permit's pollution prevention requirements; and when and how to conduct inspections, record applicable findings, and take corrective actions.
Non-Storm water Discharges
Determine if any non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit exist. Any non-storm water discharges discovered must either be eliminated or modified into this permit.
The following non-storm water discharges are authorized and should be documented when they occur in accordance with Part I.E.2.C. of the permit:
Discharges from fire-fighting activities; Fire Hydrant flushings; Potable water, including water line flushings; Uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside storage of refrigerated gases or liquids;
Page 28 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Irrigation drainage; Landscape watering provided all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer have been applied in accordance with the approved labeling; Pavement wash water where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous material have occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed); Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents; Uncontaminated ground water or spring water; Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; Incidental windblown mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of the facility, but not intentional discharges from cooling towers (e.g., "piped cooling tower blowdown or drains); and Vehicle wash- waters where uncontaminated water without detergents or solvents is utilized;
j.
Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial
Materials
Minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials.
Annual Review
At least once every 12 months, submit an Annual Report to the Industrial NPDES Permit Section which includes the following: the results or a summary of the past year's routine facility inspection documentation and quarterly visual assessment documentation; information copied or summarized from the corrective action documentation required (if applicable). If corrective action is not yet completed at the time of submission of this Annual Report, describe the status of any outstanding corrective action(s); and any incidents of noncompliance observed or, if there is no noncompliance, a certification signed by a responsible corporate officer, general partner or the proprietor, executive officer or ranking elected official, stating the facility is in compliance with this permit.
Corrective Actions - Conditions Requiring Review
a. If any of the following conditions occur, review the SWPPP to determine if and where revisions may need to be made to eliminate the condition and prevent its reoccurrence:
Page 29 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
i.
An unauthorized release or discharge (e.g., spill, leak, or
discharge of non-stormwater not authorized by this NPDES
permit) occurs at the facility;
ii. Control measures are not stringent enough for the discharge to
meet applicable water quality standards;
iii. A required control measure was never installed, was installed
incorrectly, or is not being properly operated or maintained;
iv. Visual assessments indicate obvious signs of stormwater
pollution (e.g., color, odor, floating solids, settled solids,
suspended solids, foam); or
b. If construction or a change in design, operation, or maintenance at the facility significantly changes the nature of pollutants discharged in storm water from the facility, or significantly increases the quantity of pollutants discharge the permittee must review and revise the selection, design, installation, and implementation of the control measures to determine if modifications are necessary to meet the effluent limits in this permit.
7, Corrective Action Deadlines
If additional changes are necessary, a new or modified control must be installed and made operational, or a repair completed, before the next storm event if possible, and within 30 calendar days from the time of discovery. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within 30 calendar days, the reason(s) must be documented. A schedule for completing the work must also be identified, which must be done as soon as practicable after the 30day timeframe but no longer than 120 days after discovery.
Where corrective actions result in changes to any of the controls or procedures documented in the SWPPP, the SWPPP must be modified accordingly within 30 calendar days of completing corrective action work.
These time intervals are not grace periods, but are schedules considered reasonable for documenting the findings and for making repairs and improvements. They are included in this permit to ensure that the conditions prompting the need for these repairs and improvements are not allowed to persist indefinitely.
8. Corrective Action Report
The existence of any of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6 must be documented within 24 hours of becoming aware of such condition. The following information must be included in the documentation:
Page 30 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
a. Identification and description of the condition triggering the need for corrective action review. For any spills or leaks, include the following information: a description of the incident including material, date/time, amount, location, and reason for spill, and any leaks, spills or other releases that resulted in discharges of pollutants to waters of U.S., through stormwater or otherwise;
b. Date the condition was identified; and
c. A discussion of whether the triggering condition requires corrective action. For any spills or leaks, include response actions, the date/time clean-up completed, notifications made, and staff involved. Also include any measures taken to prevent the reoccurrence of such releases.
Document the corrective actions taken that occurred as a result of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6. within 30 days from the time of discovery of any of those conditions. Provide the dates when each corrective action was initiated and completed (or is expected to be completed). If applicable, document why it is infeasible to complete necessary installations or repairs within the 30-day timeframe and document the schedule for installing the controls and making them operational as soon as practicable after the 30-day timeframe.
Inspections
a. Routine Facility Inspections
During normal facility operating hours conduct inspections of areas of the facility covered by the requirements in this permit, including the following:
i.
Areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to
stormwater;
ii. Areas identified in the SWPPP and those that are potential
pollutant sources;
iii. Areas where spills and leaks have occurred in the past 3 years.
iv. Discharge points; and
v. Control measures used to comply with the effluent limits
contained in this permit.
Inspections must be conducted at least quarterly (i.e., once each calendar quarter), or in some instances more frequently (e.g., monthly), as appropriate. Increased frequency may be appropriate for some types of equipment, processes and stormwater control measures, or areas of the facility with significant activities and
Page 31 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
materials exposed to stormwater. At least one of the routine inspections must be conducted during a period when a stormwater discharge is occurring.
Inspections must be performed by qualified personnel with at least one member of the stormwater pollution prevention team participating. Inspectors must consider the results of visual and analytical monitoring (if any) for the past year when planning and conducting inspections.
During the inspection examine or look out for the following:
vi. Industrial materials, residue or trash that may have or could come into contact with stormwater;
vii. Leaks or spills from industrial equipment, drums, tanks and other containers;
viii. Offsite tracking of industrial or waste materials, or sediment where vehicles enter or exit the site;
ix. Tracking or blowing of raw, final or waste materials from areas of no exposure to exposed areas; and
x. Control measures needing replacement, maintenance or repair.
During an inspection occurring during a stormwater discharge, control measures implemented to comply with effluent limits must be observed to ensure they are functioning correctly. Discharge outfalls must also be observed during this inspection. If such discharge locations are inaccessible, nearby downstream locations must be inspected.
Routine Facility Inspection Documentation
The findings of facility inspections must be documented and the report maintained with the SWPPP. Findings must be summarized in the annual report. Document all findings, including but not limited to, the following information:
i. The inspection date and time; ii. The name(s) and signature(s) of the inspector(s); iii. Weather information; iv. All observations relating to the implementation of control
measures at the facility, including: (1) A description of any discharges occurring at the time of
the inspection; (2) Any previously unidentified discharges and/or pollutants
from the site;
Page 32 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
(3) Any evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system;
(4) Observations regarding the physical condition of and around all outfalls including any flow dissipation devices, and evidence of pollutants in discharges and/or the receiving water;
(5) Any control measures needing maintenance, repairs, or replacement;
v. Any additional control measures needed to comply with the permit requirements; and
vi. Any incidents of noncompliance observed.
Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6. of this permit.
If the discharge was visual assessed, as required in Part I.D.9.C., during the facility inspection, include the results of the assessment with the report required in Part I.D.9.a., as long as all components of both types of inspections are included in the report.
Quarterly Visual Assessment Procedures
Once each quarter for the entire permit term, collect a stormwater sample from each outfall and conduct a visual assessment of each of these samples. These samples are not required to be collected consistent with 40 CFR Part 136 procedures but should be collected in such a manner that the samples are representative of the stormwater discharge. Guidance on monitoring is available at:
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/EPA-Multi-SectorGeneral-Permit-MSGP.cfm
The visual assessment must be made:
i. Of a sample in a clean, clear glass, or plastic container, and examined in a well-lit area;
ii. On samples collected within the first 30 minutes of an actual discharge from a storm event. If it is not possible to collect the sample within the first 30 minutes of discharge, the sample must be collected as soon as practicable after the first 30 minutes and document why it was not possible to take samples within the first 30 minutes. In the case of snowmelt, samples must be taken during a period with a measurable discharge from the site; and
iii. For storm events, on discharges that occur at least 72 hours (3 days) from the previous discharge. The 72-hour (3-day) storm
Page 33 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
interval does not apply if you document that less than a 72-hour (3-day) interval is representative for local storm events during the sampling period.
Visually inspect or observe the sample for the following water quality characteristics:
iv. Color; v. Odor; vi. Clarity (diminished); vii. Floating solids; viii. Settled solids; ix. Suspended solids; x. Foam; xi. Oil sheen; and xii. Other obvious indicators of stormwater pollution.
Whenever the visual assessment shows obvious signs of stormwater pollution, initiate the corrective action procedures in Part I.D.6.
d. Quarterly Visual Assessment Documentation
Results of visual assessments must be documented and the documentation maintained onsite with the SWPPP. Documentation of the visual assessment must include, but is not be limited to:
i. Sample location(s); ii. Sample collection date and time, and visual assessment date
and time for each sample; iii. Personnel collecting the sample and performing visual
assessment, and their signatures; iv. Nature of the discharge (i.e., runoff or snowmelt); v. Results of observations of the stormwater discharge; vi. Probable sources of any observed stormwater contamination;
and vii. If applicable, why it was not possible to take samples within the
first 30 minutes.
Any corrective action required as a result of a quarterly visual assessment must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6. of this permit.
e. Exceptions to Quarterly Visual Assessments
i.
Adverse Weather Conditions: When adverse weather
conditions prevent the collection of samples during the quarter,
Page 34 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
take a substitute sample during the next qualifying storm event. Documentation of the rationale for no visual assessment for the quarter must be included with the SWPPP records. Adverse conditions are those that are dangerous or create inaccessibility for personnel, such as local flooding, high winds, or electrical storms, or situations that otherwise make sampling impractical, such as extended frozen conditions, ii. Snow: In areas subject to snow, at least one quarterly visual assessment must capture snowmelt discharge, taking into account the exception described above for climates with irregular stormwater runoff.
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
1. Development of Plan
Within 12 months from the effective date of this permit, the permittee is required to revise and update the current Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the permitted facility. The SWPPP does not contain effluent limitations. The SWPPP is intended to document the selection, design, and installation of control measures. As distinct from the SWPPP, the additional documentation requirements are intended to document the implementation (including inspection, maintenance, monitoring, and corrective action) of the permit requirements.
2. Contents
The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:
a. Pollution Prevention Team - The SWPPP must identify the staff members (by name or title) that comprise the facility's stormwater pollution prevention team as well as their individual responsibilities. The stormwater pollution prevention team is responsible for overseeing development of the SWPPP, any later modifications to it, and for compliance with permit Parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit. Each member of the stormwater pollution prevention team must have ready access to either an electronic or paper copy of applicable portions of this permit, the most updated copy of the SWPPP, other relevant documents or information that must be kept with the SWPPP.
b. Site Description - As a minimum, the plan shall contain the following:
i. A c tiv itie s a t the F acility. Provide a description of the nature of the industrial activities at the facility.
Page 35 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
G e n e ra l lo ca tio n m ap. Provide a general location map (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map) with enough detail to identify the location of the facility and all receiving waters for the stormwater discharges. Site m ap. Provide a map showing:
(A) Boundaries of the property and the size of the property in acres;
(B) Location and extent of significant structures and impervious surfaces;
(C) Directions of stormwater flow (use arrows); (D) Locations of all stormwater control measures; (E) Locations of all receiving waters, including wetlands, in
the immediate vicinity of the facility. Indicate which waterbodies are listed as impaired and which are identified by the State of Indiana or EPA as Tier 2 or Tier 2.5 waters; (F) Locations of all stormwater conveyances including ditches, pipes, and swales; (G) Locations of potential pollutant sources identified; (H) Locations where significant spills or leaks identified have occurred; (I) Locations of all stormwater monitoring points; (J) Locations of stormwater inlets and outfalls, with a unique identification code for each outfall (e.g., Outfall No. 1, No. 2), indicating if you are treating one or more outfalls as "substantially identical", and an approximate outline of the areas draining to each outfall; (K) If applicable, municipal separate storm sewer systems and where the stormwater discharges to them; (L) Areas of federally-listed critical habitat for endangered or threatened species, if applicable. (M) Locations of the following activities where such activities are exposed to precipitation:
(a) fueling stations; (b) vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or
cleaning areas; (c) loading/unloading areas; (d) locations used for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of wastes; (e) liquid storage tanks; (f) processing and storage areas; (g) immediate access roads and rail lines used or
traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste material, or by products used or created by the facility;
Page 36 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
(h) transfer areas for substances in bulk; and (i) machinery (j) locations and sources of run-on to the site from
adjacent property that contains significant quantities of pollutants.
(N) Document in the SWPPP the locations of any of the following activities or sources that may be exposed to precipitation or surface runoff: storage tanks, scrap yards, and general refuse areas; short- and long-term storage of general materials (including but not limited to supplies, construction materials, paint equipment, oils, fuels, used and unused solvents, cleaning materials, paint, water treatment chemicals, fertilizer, and pesticides); landfills and construction sites; and stock pile areas (e.g., coal or limestone piles).
Potential Pollutant Sources:
The SWPPP must document areas at the facility where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater or from which allowable non-stormwater discharges may be released. Industrial materials or activities include, but are not limited to: material handling equipment or activities; industrial machinery; raw materials; industrial production and processes; and intermediate products, by-products, final products, and waste products. M a te ria l h a n d lin g a ctivities include, but are not limited to: the storage, loading and unloading, transportation, disposal, or conveyance of any raw material, intermediate product, final product or waste product. For structures located in areas of industrial activity, be aware that the structures themselves are potential sources of pollutants. This could occur, for example, when metals such as aluminum or copper are leached from the structures as a result of acid rain.
For each area identified, the description must include:
i. A c tiv itie s in the A rea. A list of the industrial activities exposed to stormwater (e.g., material storage; equipment fueling, maintenance, and cleaning; cutting steel beams).
ii. P ollutants. A list of the pollutant(s) or pollutant constituents (e.g., crankcase oil, zinc, sulfuric acid, and cleaning solvents) associated with each identified activity, which could be exposed to rainfall or snowmelt and could be discharged from the facility. The pollutant list must include all significant materials that have been handled, treated, stored, or disposed, and that have been
Page 37 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
exposed to stormwater in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended. S p ills a n d Leaks. The SWPPP must document where potential spills and leaks could occur that could contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges, and the corresponding outfall(s) that would be affected by such spills and leaks. The SWPPP must document all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a stormwater conveyance, in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended. N o n -S to rm w a te r D ischarges - The SWPPP must document that you have evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit. Any non storm water discharges have either been eliminated or incorporated into this permit. Documentation of non-storm water discharges shall include:
A written non-storm water assessment, including the following:
(1) The date of the evaluation; (2) A description of the evaluation criteria used; (3) A list of the outfalls or onsite drainage points that were
directly observed during the evaluation; and (4) The action(s) taken, such as a list of control measures
used to eliminate unauthorized discharge(s), or documentation that a separate NPDES permit was obtained. For example, a floor drain was sealed, a sink drain was re-routed to sanitary, or an NPDES permit application was submitted for an unauthorized cooling water discharge.
Salt Storage - The location of any storage piles containing salt used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes must be documented in the SWPPP. Sampling Data - All stormwater discharge sampling data collected at the facility during the previous permit term must be summarized in the SWPPP. Description of Control Measures to Meet Technology-Based Effluent Limits - The location and type of control measures you have specifically chosen and/or designed to comply with Permit Part I.D. must be documented in the SWPPP. Regarding the control measures, the following must be documented as appropriate:
(a) How the selection and design considerations of control measures were addressed.
Page 38 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
(b) How the control measures address the pollutant sources identified.
Schedules and Procedures
The following must be documented in the SWPPP:
i.
Good Housekeeping - A schedule for regular pickup and
disposal of waste materials, along with routine inspections for
leaks and conditions of drums, tanks and containers;
ii.
Maintenance - Preventative maintenance procedures, including
regular inspections, testing, maintenance and repair of all
control measures to avoid situations that may result in leaks,
spills, and other releases, and any back-up practices in place
should a runoff event occur while a control measure is off-line.
The SWPPP shall include the schedule or frequency for
maintaining all control measures used to comply with the storm
water requirements.
iii.
Spill Prevention and Response Procedures - Procedures for
preventing and responding to spills and leaks, including
notification procedures. For preventing spills, include in the
SWPPP the control measures for material handling and
storage, and the procedures for preventing spills that can
contaminate stormwater. Also specify cleanup equipment,
procedures and spill logs, as appropriate, in the event of spills.
You may reference the existence of other plans for Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) developed for
the facility under Section 311 of the CWA or BMP programs
otherwise required by an NPDES permit for the facility,
provided that you keep a copy of that other plan onsite and
make it available for review;
iv.
Erosion and Sediment Control - If you use polymers and/or
other chemical treatments as part of the controls, identify the
polymers and/or chemicals used and the purpose; and
v.
Employee Training - The elements of the employee training
plan shall include all, but not be limited to, the requirements set
forth in Permit Part.I.D., and also the following:1
(1) The content of the training; (2) The frequency/schedule of training for employees who have
duties in areas of industrial activities subject to this permit; (3) A log of the dates on which specific employees received
training.
Page 39 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
e. Pertaining to Inspections
Document in the SWPPP the procedures for performing, as appropriate, the types of inspections specified by this permit, including;
i. Routine facility inspections and; ii. Quarterly visual assessment of stormwater discharges.
For each type of inspection performed, the SWPPP must identify;
iii. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for inspection; iv. Schedules for conducting inspections, including tentative
schedule for irregular stormwater runoff discharges; and v. Specific items to be covered by the inspection, including
schedules for specific outfalls.
f.
Pertaining to Monitoring
Document in the SWPPP the procedures for conducting the five types of analytical monitoring specified by this permit, where applicable to the facility, including Benchmark monitoring;
For each type of monitoring, the SWPPP must document:
i. Locations where samples are collected, including any determination that two or more outfalls are substantially identical;
ii. Parameters for sampling and the frequency of sampling for each parameter;
iii. Schedules for monitoring at the facility, including schedule for alternate monitoring periods for climates with irregular stormwater runoff;
iv. Any numeric control values (effluent limitations guidelines, TMDL-related requirements, or other requirements) applicable to discharges from each outfall; and
v. Procedures (e.g., responsible staff, logistics, laboratory to be used) for gathering storm event data.
g. General Reguirements - The SWPPP must meet the following general requirements:
i. The SWPPP shall be prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and to industry standards. The SWPPP may be developed by either a person on the staff or a third party, and it shall be certified in accordance with the signature
Page 40 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
requirements, under Part II.C.6. ii. Retain a complete copy of the current SWPPP required by this
permit at the facility in any accessible format. A complete SWPPP includes any documents incorporated by reference and all documentation supporting parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit, as well as the signed and dated certification page. Regardless of the format, the SWPPP must be immediately available to facility employees, EPA, a state or tribe, the operator of an MS4 receiving discharges from the site; and representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at the time of an onsite inspection. The current SWPPP or certain information from the current SWPPP must also be made available to the public (except any confidential business information (CBI) or restricted information, but clearly identify those portions of the SWPPP that are being withheld from public access. iii. Where the SWPPP refers to procedures in other facility documents, such as a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan or an Environmental Management System (EMS), copies of the relevant portions of those documents must be kept with the SWPPP.
REOPENING CLAUSES
This permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing:
1. to comply with any applicable effluent limitation or standard issued or approved under 301 (b)(2)(C),(D) and (E), 304 (b)(2), and 307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent limitation or standard so issued or approved:
a. contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
b. controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
2. to incorporate any of the reopening clause provisions cited at 327 IAC 5-2 16.
3. to include a case-specific Limit of Detection (LOD) and/or Limit of Quantitation (LOQ). The permittee must demonstrate that such action is warranted in accordance with the procedures specified under Appendix B, 40 CFR Part 136, using the most sensitive analytical methods approved by EPA under 40 CFR Part 136, or approved by the Commissioner.
Page 41 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
4. to comply with any applicable standards, regulations and requirements issued or approved under section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. The required studies and information collection activities may take 36 months or longer to complete.
5. to incorporate IDEM approved Alternative Thermal Effluent Limitations (ATELs) supported by an updated 316(a) Demonstration. The required studies and information collection activities may take 36 months or longer to complete.
Page 42 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
A. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee shall comply with all terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(1) and all other requirements of 327 IAC 5-2-8. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and IC 13 and is grounds for enforcement action or permit termination, revocation and reissuance, modification, or denial of a permit renewal application.
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 conditions of the permit.
2. Duty to Mitigate
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(3), the permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact to the environment resulting from noncompliance with this permit. During periods of noncompliance, the permittee shall conduct such accelerated or additional monitoring for the affected parameters, as appropriate or as requested by IDEM, to determine the nature and impact of the noncompliance.
3. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must obtain and submit an application for renewal of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(2). It is the permittee's responsibility to obtain and submit the application. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-3(c), the owner of the facility or operation from which a discharge of pollutants occurs is responsible for applying for and obtaining the NPDES permit, except where the facility or operation is operated by a person other than an employee of the owner in which case it is the operator's responsibility to apply for and obtain the permit. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-3-2(a)(2), the application must be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit. This deadline may be extended if:
a. permission is requested in writing before such deadline;
b. IDEM grants permission to submit the application after the deadline; and
Page 43 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
c. the application is received no later than the permit expiration date. Under the terms of the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, the permittee may be required to submit its application for renewal electronically in the future.
4. Permit Transfers
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(4)(D), this permit is nontransferable to any person except in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(c). This permit may be transferred to another person by the permittee, without modification or revocation and reissuance being required under 327 IAC 5-2-16(c)(1) or 16(e)(4), if the following occurs:
a. the current permittee notified the Commissioner at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date;
b. a written agreement containing a specific date of transfer of permit responsibility and coverage between the current permittee and the transferee (including acknowledgment that the existing permittee is liable for violations up to that date, and the transferee is liable for violations from that date on) is submitted to the Commissioner;
c. the transferee certifies in writing to the Commissioner their intent to operate the facility without making such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility as would significantly change the nature or quantities of pollutants discharged and thus constitute cause for permit modification under 327 IAC 5-216(d). However, the Commissioner may allow a temporary transfer of the permit without permit modification for good cause, e.g., to enable the transferee to purge and empty the facility's treatment system prior to making alterations, despite the transferee's intent to make such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility; and
d. the Commissioner, within thirty (30) days, does not notify the current permittee and the transferee of the intent to modify, revoke and reissue, or terminate the permit and to require that a new application be filed rather than agreeing to the transfer of the permit.
The Commissioner may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to identify the new permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act or state law.
5. Permit Actions
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-16(b) and 327 IAC 5-2-8(4), this permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause, including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
Page 44 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
b. Failure of the permittee to disclose fully all relevant facts or misrepresentation of any relevant facts in the application, or during the permit issuance process; or
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or a permanent reduction or elimination of any discharge controlled by the permit, e.g., plant closure, termination of discharge by connection to a POTW, a change in state law that requires the reduction or elimination of the discharge, or information indicating that the permitted discharge poses a substantial threat to human health or welfare.
Filing of either of the following items does not stay or suspend any permit condition: (1) a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or (2) submittal of information specified in Part II.A.3 of the permit including planned changes or anticipated noncompliance.
The permittee shall submit any information that the permittee knows or has reason to believe would constitute cause for modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit at the earliest time such information becomes available, such as plans for physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility that:
1. could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged; or
1. the commissioner may request to evaluate whether such cause exists.
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-1-3(a)(5), the permittee must also provide any information reasonably requested by the Commissioner.
6. Property Rights
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(6) and 327 IAC 5-2-5(b), 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 persons or private property or invasion of other private rights, any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. The issuance of the permit also does not preempt any duty to obtain any other state, or local assent required by law for the discharge or for the construction or operation of the facility from which a discharge is made.
7. Severability
In accordance with 327 IAC 1-1-3, 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 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications of the permit which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Page 45 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
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 Clean Water Act or state law.
Penalties for Violation of Permit Conditions
Pursuant to IC 13-30-4, a person who violates any provision of this permit, the water pollution control laws; environmental management laws; or a rule or standard adopted by the Environmental Rules Board is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per day of any violation.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-5, a person who obstructs, delays, resists, prevents, or interferes with (1) the department; or (2) the department's personnel or designated agent in the performance of an inspection or investigation performed under IC 13 14-2-2 commits a class C infraction.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1.5(k), a person who willfully or recklessly violates any NPDES permit condition or filing requirement, any applicable standards or limitations of IC 13-18-3-2.4, IC 13-18-4-5, IC 13-18-8, IC 13-18-9, IC 13-18-10, IC 13-18-12, IC 13-18-14, IC 13-18-15, or IC 13-18-16, or who knowingly makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in any NPDES form, notice, or report commits a Class C misdemeanor.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1.5(1), an offense under IC 13-30-10-1.5(k) is a Class D felony if the offense results in damage to the environment that renders the environment unfit for human or vertebrate animal life. An offense under IC 13-3010-1,5(k) is a Class C felony if the offense results in the death of another person.
Penalties for Tampering or Falsification
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(10), the permittee shall comply with monitoring, recording, and reporting requirements of this permit. The Clean Water Act, as well as IC 13-30-10-1, provides that any person who knowingly or intentionally (a) destroys, alters, conceals, or falsely certifies a record that is required to be maintained under the terms of a permit issued by the department; and may be used to determine the status of compliance, (b) renders inaccurate or inoperative a
Page 46 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
recording device or a monitoring device required to be maintained by a permit issued by the department, or (c) falsifies testing or monitoring data required by a permit issued by the department commits a Class B misdemeanor.
12. Toxic Pollutants
If any applicable effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant injurious to human health, and that 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 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(5). Effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants injurious to human health are effective and must be complied with, if applicable to the permittee, within the time provided in the implementing regulations, even absent permit modification.
13. Wastewater treatment plant and certified operators
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant as required by IC 13-18-11-11 and 327 IAC 5-22. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7.
327 IAC 5-22-10.5(a) provides that a certified operator may be designated as being in responsible charge of more than one (1) wastewater treatment plant, if it can be shown that he will give adequate supervision to all units involved. Adequate supervision means that sufficient time is spent at the plant on a regular basis to assure that the certified operator is knowledgeable of the actual operations and that test reports and results are representative of the actual operations conditions. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-22-3(11), "responsible charge operator" means the person responsible for the overall daily operation, supervision, or management of a wastewater facility.
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-22-10(4), the permittee shall notify IDEM when there is a change of the person serving as the certified operator in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facility. The notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days after a change in the operator,
14. Construction Permit
In accordance with IC 13-14-8-11.6, a discharger is not required to obtain a state permit for the modification or construction of a water pollution treatment or control facility if the discharger has an effective NPDES permit.
Page 47 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
If the discharger modifies their existing water pollution treatment or control facility or constructs a new water pollution treatment or control facility for the treatment or control of any new influent pollutant or increased levels of any existing pollutant, then, within thirty (30) days after commencement of operation, the discharger shall file with the Department of Environment Management a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
The notice and design summary shall be sent to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251.
15. Inspection and Entry
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), the permittee shall allow the Commissioner, or an authorized representative, (including an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Commissioner) upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a point source, regulated facility, or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept pursuant to the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment or methods (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required pursuant to this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, any discharge of pollutants or internal wastestreams for the purposes of evaluating compliance with the permit or as otherwise authorized.
16. New or Increased Discharge of Pollutants
This permit prohibits the permittee from undertaking any action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless one of the following is completed prior to the commencement of the action:
a. Information is submitted to the Commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharges will not cause a significant lowering of water quality as defined under 327 IAC 2-1.3-2(50). Upon review of this information, the Commissioner may request additional information or may determine that the proposed increase is a
Page 48 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
significant lowering of water quality and require the submittal of an antidegradation demonstration.
b. An antidegradation demonstration is submitted to and approved by the Commissioner in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 327 IAC 2-1.3 6.
MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and efficiently operate all facilities and systems (and related appurtenances) for the collection and treatment which are installed or used by the permittee and which are necessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(9).
Neither 327 IAC 5-2-8(9), nor this provision, shall be construed to require the operation of installed treatment facilities that are unnecessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit.
2. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(12):
a. Terms as defined in 327 IAC 5-2-8(12)(A):
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of a waste stream from any portion of a treatment facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which would cause 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. The permittee may allow a bypass to occur that does not cause a violation of the effluent limitations in the permit, but only if it is also for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Part II.B.2.C., e, and f of this permit.
c. Bypasses, as defined in (a) above, are prohibited, and the Commissioner may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless the following occur:
Page 49 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage, as defined above;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, 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 that occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under Part II.B.2.e; or
(4) The condition under Part !I.B.2.b above is met.
d. Bypasses that result in death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans must be reported in accordance with the "Spill Response and Reporting Requirements" in 327 IAC 2-6.1, including calling 888/2337745 as soon as possible, but within two (2) hours of discovery. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the bypass are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
e. The permittee must provide the Commissioner with the following notice:
(1) If the permittee knows or should have known in advance of the need for a bypass (anticipated bypass), it shall submit prior written notice. If possible, such notice shall be provided at least ten (10) days before the date of the bypass for approval by the Commissioner.
(2) The permittee shall orally report an unanticipated bypass that exceeds any effluent limitations in the permit within 24 hours of becoming aware of the bypass noncompliance. The permittee must also provide a written report within five (5) days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the bypass event. The written report must contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; if the cause of noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent
Page 50 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
recurrence of the bypass event. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is provided within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the unanticipated bypass event then that report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirement. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.gov.
f.
The Commissioner may approve an anticipated bypass, after
considering its adverse effects, if the Commissioner determines that it
will meet the conditions listed above in Part II.B.2.C. The
Commissioner may impose any conditions determined to be
necessary to minimize any adverse effects.
Upset Conditions
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(13):
a. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable 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.
b. An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology-based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of Paragraph c of this section, are met.
c. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence, that:
(1) An upset occurred and the permittee has identified the specific cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated;
(3) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II.A.2; and
(4) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements," Part II.C.3, or 327 IAC 2-6.1, whichever is applicable. However, under 327 IAC 26.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or
Page 51 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
d. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof pursuant to 40 CFR 122.41 (n)(4).
4. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State and to be in compliance with all Indiana statutes and regulations relative to liquid and/or solid waste disposal. The discharge of pollutants in treated wastewater is allowed in compliance with the applicable effluent limitations in Part I. of this permit.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Planned Changes in Facility or Discharge
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(F), the permittee shall give notice to the Commissioner as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. In this context, permitted facility refers to a point source discharge, not a wastewater treatment facility. Notice is required only when either of the following applies:
a. The alteration or addition may meet one of the criteria for determining whether the facility is a new source as defined in 327 IAC 5-1.5.
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of, pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants that are subject neither to effluent limitations in Part I.A. nor to notification requirements in Part II.C.9. of this permit.
Following such notice, the permit may be modified to revise existing pollutant limitations and/or to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.
2. Monitoring Reports
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10) and 327 IAC 5-2-13 through 15, monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals and in the form specified in "Monthly Reporting", Part I.C.2.
Page 52 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(C), the permittee shall orally report to the Commissioner information on the following types of noncompliance within 24 hours from the time permittee becomes aware of such noncompliance. If the noncompliance meets the requirements of item b (Part II.C.3.b) or 327 IAC 2 6.1, then the report shall be made within those prescribed time frames. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge that is in noncompliance are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit;
b. Any noncompliance which may pose a significant danger to human health or the environment. Reports under this item shall be made as soon as the permittee becomes aware of the noncomplying circumstances;
c. Any upset (as defined in Part II.B.3 above) that causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation in the permit;
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the following toxic pollutants: mercury, arsenic, or selenium
The permittee can make the oral reports by calling (317)232-8670 during regular business hours or by calling (317) 233-7745 ((888)233-7745 toll free in Indiana) during non-business hours. 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 and eliminate the noncompliance and prevent its recurrence. The Commissioner may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. Alternatively the permittee may submit a "Bypass/Overflow Report" (State Form 48373) or a "Noncompliance 24-Hour Notification Report" (State Form 54215), whichever is appropriate, to IDEM at (317) 232-8637 orwwreports@idem.in.gov. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is sent within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the occurrence, then the fax report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirements.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
Page 53 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
4. Other Compliance/Noncompliance Reporting
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(D), the permittee shall report any instance of noncompliance not reported under the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements" in Part II.C.3, or any compliance schedules at the time the pertinent Discharge Monitoring Report is submitted. The report shall contain the information specified in Part II.C.3;
The permittee shall also give advance notice to the Commissioner of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements; and
All 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.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
5. Other Information
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(E), where the permittee becomes aware of a failure to submit any relevant facts or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report, the permittee shall promptly submit such facts or corrected information to the Commissioner.
6. Signatory Requirements
a. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Commissioner shall be signed and certified by a person described below or by a duly authorized representative of that person:1
(1) The manager of one (1) or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities provided the manager is authorized to make management decisions that govern the operation of the regulated facility including having the explicit or implicit duty to make major capital investment recommendations, and initiating and directing other comprehensive measures to assure long term environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations; the manager can ensure that the necessary systems are established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for permit application requirements; and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate procedures.
Page 54 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively; or
(3) For a Federal, State, or local governmental body or any agency or political subdivision thereof: by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
b. A person is 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, or position of equivalent responsibility. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The authorization is submitted to the Commissioner.
c. Electronic Signatures. If documents described in this section are submitted electronically by or on behalf of the NPDES-regulated facility, any person providing the electronic signature for such documents shall meet all relevant requirements of this section, and shall ensure that all of the relevant requirements of 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all cases, subpart D to part 3) (Cross-Media Electronic Reporting) and 40 CFR part 127 (NPDES Electronic Reporting Requirements) are met for that submission.
d. Certification. Any person signing a document identified under Part II.C.9., shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my 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 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."
Page 55 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
7. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under 327 IAC 12.1, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Clean Water Act, permit applications, permits, and effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
8. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
IC 13-30 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(15) 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, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 180 days per violation, or by both.
9. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.42(a)(1), 40 CFR 122.42(a)(2), and 327 IAC 5-2-9, the permittee shall notify the Commissioner 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 pollutant identified as toxic pursuant to Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act 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 (100pg/l);
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 pg/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500pg/l) for 2,4dinitrophenol and 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment
Page 56 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
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 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 pg/l);
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Sec. 122.21(g)(7).
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
c. That it has begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture, as an intermediate or final product or byproduct, any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application under 40 CFR 122.21(g)(9).
PART III Other Requirements
Page 57 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
A. Thermal Effluent Requirements The thermal effluent requirements can be found in Part I.A.4 of the permit. The facility is currently finishing a 316(a) study and will submit a modification request for a new 316(a) Alternate Thermal Effluent Limitations. The study and modification request is due by July 7, 2018.
B. Polychlorinated Biphenyl There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
Many electrical transformers manufactured prior to 1978 contained PCBs. Therefore, in order to determine compliance with the PCB prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB* data for Outfall[s] 001,002, and 003, within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the permit. The permittee shall submit the data to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 2251.
Parameter PCBs'
Test Method 608
LOP 0.1 ug/l
LOQ 0.3 ug/l
' PCB-1242, PCB-1254, PCB-1221, PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260, and PCB-1016
Page 58 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
Part IV Cooling Water Intake Structures
A. Best Technology Available (BTA) Determination
In accordance with 40 CFR 401.14, the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.
The EPA promulgated a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) regulation on August 15, 2014, that establishes standards for cooling water intake structures. 79 Fed. Reg. 48300 439 (August 15, 2014). The regulation establishes best technology available standards to reduce impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms at existing power generation and manufacturing facilities and it became effective on October 14, 2014.
For permits expiring prior to 45 months from the effective date (before July 2018), the permittee can (1) negotiate an alternative schedule for submitting required information with the Director (IDEM) after demonstrating need, or (2) request waiver(s) for submitting required information. An alternative schedule for submission of information required under the current CWA section 316(b), or waiver(s) of submittal requirements shall be reviewed by EPA Region 5 and approved by IDEM. Upon approval of such alternative schedules and /or waivers, or until the time the required information/reports are submitted and the permit is renewed or modified following public notice, the IDEM is required to make a BTA determination using Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) to comply with CWA Section 316(b) based on existing information. The BTA determination is subject to change after the required information is submitted in accordance with the federal regulations effective October 14, 2014.
Based on available information, IDEM has made a Best Technology Available (BTA) determination that the existing cooling water intake structures represent best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impact in accordance with Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326) at this time. This determination is based on Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) and will be reassessed at the next permit reissuance to ensure that the CWISs continue to meet the requirements of Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326).
B. Permit Requirements
In accordance with the recently promulgated rules at 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 125, the owner or operator of a facility that has CWIS with a Design intake Flow (DIF) or Actual Intake Flow (AIF) > 125 MGD must submit the information required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (13), including all of the associated supporting documentation and/or studies, no later than July 14, 2018, unless an alternate schedule for submission is approved or a waiver of a particular requirement is requested and granted under 40 CFR 125.95. In
Page 59 of 59 Permit No. IN0001759
addition, the permittee shall comply with requirements below:
1. In accordance with 40 CFR 125.98(b)(1), nothing in this permit authorizes take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
2. At all times properly operate and maintain the intake equipment.
3. Inform IDEM of any proposed changes to the CWIS or proposed changes to operations at the facility that affect the information taken into account in the current BTA evaluation.
4. There shall be no discharge of debris from intake screen washing which will settle to form objectionable deposits which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious, or which will produce colors or odors constituting a nuisance.
5. All required reports shall be submitted to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, NPDES Permits Branch.
6. The permittee shall submit all the information required by the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (r)(10) as described above and under CWA Section 316(b) as soon as practicable but no later than January 31, 2018.
PERMIT NO. MI0038172
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended; the "Federal Act"); Part 31, Water Resources Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended (NREPA); Part 41, Sewerage Systems, of the NREPA; and Michigan Executive Order 2011 -1,
DTE Electric Company One Energy Plaza Detroit, Ml 48226
is authorized to discharge from the Belle River Power Plant located at
4505 King Road China, Ml 48054
designated as DECO-Belle River Pit
to the receiving waters named the St. Clair River and an unnamed tributary of the Belle River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in this permit.
This permit is based on a complete application submitted on April 12, 2013, as amended through October 14, 2015.
This permit takes effect on November 1, 2017. The provisions of this permit are severable. After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be modified, suspended, or revoked in whole or in part during its term in accordance with applicable laws and rules. On its effective date this permit shall supersede NPDES Permit No. MI0038172, expiring October 1,2013.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, October 1, 2022. In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit an application which contains such information, forms, and fees as are required by the Department of Environmental Quality (Department) by April 4, 2022.
Issued: January 27. 2017
Original signed by Christine Alexander Christine Alexander, Acting Manager Permits Section Water Resources Division
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 2 of 39
PERMIT FEE REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Section 324.3120 of the NREPA, the permittee shall make payment of an annual permit fee to the Department for each October 1 the permit is in effect regardless of occurrence of discharge. The permittee shall submit the fee in response to the Department's annual notice. The fee shall be postmarked by January 15 for notices mailed by December 1. The fee is due no later than 45 days after receiving the notice for notices mailed after December 1.
Annual Permit Fee Classification: Industrial-Commercial Major
In accordance with Section 324.3118 of the NREPA, the permittee shall make payment of an annual storm water fee to the Department for each January 1 the permit is in effect regardless of occurrence of discharge. The permittee shall submit the fee in response to the Department's annual notice. The fee shall be postmarked by March 15 for notices mailed by February 1. The fee is due no later than 45 days after receiving the notice for notices mailed after February 1.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Unless specified otherwise, all contact with the Department required by this permit shall be made to the Southeast Michigan District Office of the Water Resources Division. The Southeast Michigan District Office is located at 27700 Donald Court, Warren, Ml 48092-2793, Telephone: 586-753-3700, Fax: 586-751-4690.
CONTESTED CASE INFORMATION
Any person who is aggrieved by this permit may file a sworn petition with the Michigan Administrative Hearing System within the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, c/o the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, setting forth the conditions of the permit which are being challenged and specifying the grounds for the challenge. The Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs may reject any petition filed more than 60 days after issuance as being untimely.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 3 of 39
PARTI
Section A. Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
1. Final Effluent Limitations, Monitoring Point 001A
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge a maximum of 964.6 MGD of noncontact cooling water, treated bottom ash transport water, treated nonchemical metal cleaning wastewater, treated low volume wastewater, treated contaminated groundwater, and treated combustion residual leachate, and an unspecified amount of storm water from Monitoring Point 001A through Outfall 001. Outfall 001 discharges to the St. Clair River at Latitude 42.767828, Longitude -82.470347. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
Parameter
Maximum Limits for Maximum Limits for Quantity or Loadina Quality or Concentration
Monthly Daily Units Monthly Daily Units
Monitoring Freauencv
Flow
(report) (report) MGD --
--
--
Daily
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
TRC Discharge Mode
Continuous (greater than 160 min/day)
--
--
38
ug/l 5x Weekly
Intermittent (less than/equal to 160 min/day) --
--
200
ug/l 5x Weekly
TRC Discharge Time
--
--
--
-- (report) min/day 5x Weekly
Thermal Discharge Temperature
Intake Effluent Total Copper Outfall Observation Total Mercury Corrected Uncorrected Field Duplicate Field Blank Laboratory Method Blank
pH
--
--
--
7,000 (report) MBTU/hr Daily
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
(report) --
--
--
(report) F
Daily
--
(report) F
Daily
--
(report) ug/l 2x Annually
--
--
--
Daily
(report) (report) Ibs/day (report) (report) ng/l
--
--
--
-- (report) ng/l
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l
--
--
--
TM (report) ng/l
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l
Minimum Daily
--
--
--
6.5
9.0
S.U.
Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly
Weekly
Sample Type
Report Total Daily Flow
Grab Grab Report Total Discharge Time Calculation
Reading Reading 24-Hr Composite Visual
Calculation Grab Grab
Preparation Preparation
Grab
a. Narrative Standard The receiving water shall contain no turbidity, color, oil films, floating solids, foams, settleable solids, suspended solids, or deposits as a result of this discharge in unnatural quantities which are or may become injurious to any designated use.
b. Monitoring Location Samples, measurements, and observations taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken at Monitoring Point 001A prior to discharge to the St. Clair River.
c. Outfall Observation Outfall observation shall be reported as "yes" or "no." The permittee shall report "yes" if this requirement was completed and "no" if this requirement was not completed. Any unusual characteristics of the discharge (i.e., unnatural turbidity, color, oil film, floating solids, foams, settleable solids, suspended solids, or deposits) shall be reported within 24 hours to the Department followed with a written report within five (51 davs detailing the findings of the investigation and the steps taken to correct the condition.
PERM IT NO. M10038172
Page 4 of 39
d. Quarterly and Twice Annually Monitoring Quarterly samples shall be collected during the months of January, April, July, and October. Twice annually samples shall be collected during the months of April and October. If the facility does not discharge during these months, the permittee shall sample the next discharge occurring during the period in question. If the facility does not discharge during the period in question, a sample is not required for that period. For any month in which a sample is not taken, the permittee shall enter "*G" on the Discharge Monitoring Report. Samples shall be collected to coincide with periods of discharge from the Range Road site.
e. Water Treatment Additives This permit does not authorize the discharge of water treatment additives without approval. Approval of water treatment additives is authorized under separate correspondence. Water treatment additives include any material that is added to water used at the facility or to a wastewater generated by the facility to condition or treat the water. In the event a permittee proposes to discharge water treatment additives, including an increased discharge concentration of a previously approved water treatment additive, the permittee shall submit a request for approval in accordance with Part I.A.5. of this permit.
f. Quantification Level for Total Copper The quantification level for total copper shall be 1 ug/l unless a higher level is appropriate because of sample matrix interference. Justification for higher quantification levels shall be submitted to the Department within 30 days of such determination. Upon approval of the Department, the permittee may use alternate analytical methods (for parameters with methods specified in 40 CFR 136, the alternate methods are restricted to those listed in 40 CFR 136).
g. Total Mercury Testing and Additional Reporting Requirements The analytical protocol for total mercury shall be in accordance with EPA Method 1631, Revision E, "Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry." The quantification level for total mercury shall be 0.5 ng/l, unless a higher level is appropriate because of sample matrix interference. Justification for higher quantification levels shall be submitted to the Department within 30 days of such determination.
The use of clean technique sampling procedures is required unless the permittee can demonstrate to the Department that an alternative sampling procedure is representative of the discharge. Guidance for clean technique sampling is contained in: EPA Method 1669, Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels (Sampling Guidance), EPA-821-R96-001, July 1996. Information and data documenting the permittee's sampling and analytical protocols and data acceptability shall be submitted to the Department upon request.
In order to demonstrate compliance with EPA Method 1631E and EPA Method 1669, the permittee shall report, on the daily sheet, the analytical results of all field blanks and field duplicates collected in conjunction with each sampling event, as well as laboratory method blanks when used for blank correction. The permittee shall collect at least one (1) field blank and at least one (1) field duplicate per sampling event. If more than ten (10) samples are collected during a sampling event, the permittee shall collect at least one (1) additional field blank AND field duplicate for every ten (10) samples collected. Only field blanks or laboratory method blanks may be used to calculate a concentration lower than the actual sample analytical results (i.e. a blank correction). Only one (1) blank (field OR laboratory method) may be used for blank correction of a given sample result, and only if the blank meets the quality control acceptance criteria. If blank correction is not performed on a given sample analytical result, the permittee shall report under Total Mercury - Corrected' the same value reported under Total Mercury - Uncorrected.' The field duplicate is for quality control purposes only; its analytical result shall not be averaged with the sample result.
The Department will review the mercury monitoring data using the reasonable potential process described in R 323.1211 of the Michigan Administrative Code to determine if there is a reasonable potential for the Water Quality Standard of 1.3 ng/l of total mercury to be exceeded in the effluent. If it is determined that the effluent has a reasonable potential to exceed 1.3 ng/l of total mercury, upon written notification by the Department, the permittee shall resume the Pollutant Minimization Program for Total Mercury in accordance with the provisions of Part I.A.6. of this permit. If, at any time during the life of the permit, the final effluent concentration exceeds 5 ng/l, the permittee shall notify the Department at the time of its next regular monthly monitoring report and shall resume the Pollutant Minimization Program for Total Mercury contained in Part 1.A.6. of this permit.
PERMIT NO. MI0038172
Page 5 of 39
h. Total Residual Chlorine Requirements Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) shall be analyzed in accordance with Part II.B.2. of this permit.
If chlorine discharge is intermittent, TRC monitoring is only required during periods of chlorine use and subsequent discharge. Limitations for the intermittent discharge of chlorine apply only when the discharge of chlorine is less than or equal to 160 minutes per day, otherwise the limitations for continuous discharge of chlorine apply.
During the intermittent discharge of chlorine, the daily concentration value reported for TRC shall be the average of a minimum of three (3) equally spaced grab samples taken during a chlorine discharge event, with the additional limitation that no single sample may exceed 300 ug/l.
For the purposes of TRC effluent limitation compliance, a week shall be defined as a calendar week from Monday through Sunday.
The permittee shall enter "*G" on the Discharge Monitoring Report for the TRC discharge modes not being used.
The permittee may use dechlorination techniques to achieve the applicable TRC limitations, using sodium thiosulfate, sodium sulfite, sodium bisulfite, or other dechlorinating reagents approved by the Department. The available concentration of the reagent(s) in the discharge shall be limited to 0.6 times the residual concentration of TRC for sodium thiosulfate, 1.6 times the residual concentration of TRC for sodium bisulfite, and 2.0 times the residual concentration of TRC for sodium sulfite. The TRC samples taken to determine the amount of each chemical to add shall be taken upstream of dechlorination. The Department may approve the use of additional quantities of reagents which are demonstrated to be protective of water quality standards.
i. Thermal Discharge Calculation Thermal Discharge shall be determined using the following calculation: (flow rate in MGD) times (the conversion factor of 8.34) times (discharge temperature in F minus intake temperature in F), divided by 24. The resulting value is the amount of thermal discharge in MBTU/hr.
j. Power Plants - PCB Prohibition The permittee shall not discharge any polychlorinated biphenyls to the receiving waters of the state of Michigan as a result of plant operations.
k. Use of Sodium Hypochlorite - Range Road Site Treated contaminated groundwater is discharged from the groundwater capture and treatment system installed at the Range Road site. The permittee is authorized to use sodium hypochlorite to control biofouling in and maintain optimal performance of this treatment system. The use of sodium hypochlorite shall be in accordance with the plan submitted by the permittee, entitled "Chlorination Procedure and Total Residual Chlorine Monitoring Plan," dated November 2009. The facility's log books shall maintain a record of any TRC monitoring data obtained from this discharge, as well as any additional information required under the aforementioned plan, and shall be available upon request for review by the Department.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
Page 6 of 39
2. Final Effluent Limitations, Monitoring Point 001B
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge a maximum of 20 MGD of treated bottom ash transport water, treated nonchemical metal cleaning wastewater, treated low volume wastewater, treated groundwater, and treated combustion residual leachate, and an unspecified amount of storm water from Monitoring Point 001B through Outfall 001, Outfall 001 discharges to the St. Clair River at Latitude 42.767828, Longitude -82.470347. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
Parameter
Maximum Limits for Quantity or Loading
Monthly Daily Units
Maximum Limits for Quality or Concentration
Monthly Daily Units
Monitoring Freauencv
Flow
(report) (report) MGD --
--
--
Daily
Total Suspended Solids
--
--
--
Oil & Grease
--
--
--
30 100 mg/l
15 20
mg/l
Weekly Weekly
Sample Type
Report Total Daily Flow
Grab
Grab
a. Monitoring Location Samples, measurements, and observations taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken at Monitoring Point 001B prior to mixing with other waste streams discharging through Monitoring Point 001A.
3. Final Effluent Limitations, Monitoring Point 001C
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge a maximum of 1.29 MGD of treated low volume wastewater and an unspecified amount of storm water from Monitoring Point 001C through Outfall 001. Outfall 001 discharges to the St. Clair River at Latitude 42.767828, Longitude -82.470347. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
Parameter
Maximum Limits for Quantity or Loading
Monthly Daily Units
Maximum Limits for Quality or Concentration
Monthly Daily Units
Monitoring Freouencv
Flow
(report) (report) MGD --
--
--
Daily
Total Suspended Solids --
--
--
Oil & Grease
--
--
--
30 100
mg/l
15 20
mg/l
Weekly Weekly
Sample Type
Report Total Daily Flow
Grab Grab
a. Monitoring Location Samples, measurements, and observations taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken at Monitoring Point 001C prior to mixing with any other waste streams discharging through Monitoring Point 001 A.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 7 of 39
4. Final Effluent Limitations, Monitoring Point 002A
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge a maximum of 140 MGY of treated bottom ash transport water, treated nonchemical metal cleaning wastewater, and treated low volume wastewater, and an unspecified amount of storm water, over a cumulative time period of approximately seven days annually from Monitoring Point 002A through Outfall 002. Outfall 002 discharges to an unnamed tributary of the Belle River (known locally as Webster Drain), at Latitude 42.778275, Longitude -82.497379. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
Parameter
Flow Total Suspended Solids Oil & Grease Total Silver Temperature (Jan - Feb) Discharge Duration Outfall Observation Total Mercury
Corrected Uncorrected Field Duplicate Field Blank Laboratory Method Blank
pH
Maximum Limits for
Maximum Limits for
Quantity or Loadina Quality or Concentration
Monthly Daily Units Monthly Daily Units
(report) (report) MGD
--
--
--
--
--
--
30
--
--
--
15
--
0.035 Ibs/day --
100 mg/l
20
mg/l
11
ug/l
--
--
--
--
(report) F
(report) (report) hours
--
--
--
(report) --
--
--
--
--
Monitoring Freauencv
Daily During Event See Part I.A.4.h. See Part I.A,4.h. See Part I.A.4.h.
Daily During Event
Event Daily During Event
Sample Type
Report Total Daily Flow
Grab Grab 24-Hr Composite
Reading
Calculation
Visual
(report) (report) Ibs/day (report) (report) ng/l See Part I.A.4.h.
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l See Part I.A.4.h.
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l See Part I.A.4.h.
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l See Part I.A.4.h.
--
--
--
--
(report) ng/l See Part l,A.4.h.
Minimum Daily
--
--
--
6.5
9.0 S.U. See Part I.A.4.h.
Calculation Grab Grab
Preparation Preparation
Grab
a. Narrative Standard The receiving water shall contain no turbidity, color, oil films, floating solids, foams, settleable solids, or deposits as a result of this discharge in unnatural quantities which are or may become injurious to any designated use.
b. Monitoring Location Samples, measurements, and observations taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken at Monitoring Point 002A prior to discharge to the unnamed tributary of the Belle River.
c. Definition of Event A discharge event is herein defined as beginning when a discharge of wastewater through Monitoring Point 002A commences, and ending when this discharge ceases and does not resume within 24 hours.
d. Outfall Observation Outfall observation shall be reported as "yes" or "no." The permittee shall report "yes" if this requirement was completed and "no" if this requirement was not completed. Any unusual characteristics of the discharge (i.e., unnatural turbidity, color, oil film, floating solids, foams, settleable solids, suspended solids, or deposits) shall be reported within 24 hours to the Department followed with a written report within five (5) days detailing the findings of the investigation and the steps taken to correct the condition.
PERM IT NO. M10038172
Page 8 of 39
e. Water Treatment Additives This permit does not authorize the discharge of water treatment additives without approval. Approval of water treatment additives is authorized under separate correspondence. Water treatment additives include any material that is added to water used at the facility or to a wastewater generated by the facility to condition or treat the water. In the event a permittee proposes to discharge water treatment additives, including an increased discharge concentration of a previously approved water treatment additive, the permittee shall submit a request for approval in accordance with Part I.A.5. of this permit.
f. Total Mercury Testing and Additional Reporting Requirements The analytical protocol for total mercury shall be in accordance with EPA Method 1631, Revision E, "Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry." The quantification level for total mercury shall be 0.5 ng/l, unless a higher level is appropriate because of sample matrix interference. Justification for higher quantification levels shall be submitted to the Department within 30 days of such determination.
The use of clean technique sampling procedures is required unless the permittee can demonstrate to the Department that an alternative sampling procedure is representative of the discharge. Guidance for clean technique sampling is contained in: EPA Method 1669, Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels (Sampling Guidance), EPA-821-R96-001, July 1996. Information and data documenting the permittee's sampling and analytical protocols and data acceptability shall be submitted to the Department upon request.
In order to demonstrate compliance with EPA Method 1631E and EPA Method 1669, the permittee shall report, on the daily sheet, the analytical results of all field blanks and field duplicates collected in conjunction with each sampling event, as well as laboratory method blanks when used for blank correction. The permittee shall collect at least one (1) field blank and at least one (1) field duplicate per sampling event. If more than ten (10) samples are collected during a sampling event, the permittee shall collect at least one (1) additional field blank AND field duplicate for every ten (10) samples collected. Only field blanks or laboratory method blanks may be used to calculate a concentration lower than the actual sample analytical results (i.e. a blank correction). Only one (1) blank (field OR laboratory method) may be used for blank correction of a given sample result, and only if the blank meets the quality control acceptance criteria. If blank correction is not performed on a given sample analytical result, the permittee shall report under Total Mercury - Corrected' the same value reported under Total Mercury - Uncorrected.' The field duplicate is for quality control purposes only; its analytical result shall not be averaged with the sample result.
The Department will review the mercury monitoring data using the reasonable potential process described in R 323.1211 of the Michigan Administrative Code to determine if there is a reasonable potential for the Water Quality Standard of 1.3 ng/l of total mercury to be exceeded in the effluent. If it is determined that the effluent has a reasonable potential to exceed 1.3 ng/l of total mercury, upon written notification by the Department, the permittee shall resume the Pollutant Minimization Program for Total Mercury in accordance with the provisions of Part I.A.6. of this permit. If, at any time during the life of the permit, the final effluent concentration exceeds 5 ng/l, the permittee shall notify the Department at the time of its next regular monthly monitoring report and shall resume the Pollutant Minimization Program for Total Mercury contained in Part 1.A.6. of this permit.
g. Power Plants - PCB Prohibition The permittee shall not discharge any polychlorinated biphenyls to the receiving waters of the state of Michigan as a result of plant operations.
PERM IT NO. MI0038172
Page 9 of 39
h. Priority Pollutant Monitoring Requirements The permittee shall sample the discharge through Monitoring Point 002A at least once per discharge event for a discharge event lasting four (4) days (i.e., 96 hours) or less, and at least twice per discharge event for a discharge event lasting more than four (4) days. (See the definition of "event" provided under Part I.A.4.C.). Samples required under this part shall be collected for selected pollutants identified in Table 2 - Organic Toxic Pollutants in Each GC/MS Fraction, and Table 3 - Other Toxic Pollutants (Metals and Cyanide) and Total Phenols. Pollutant selection shall be made in accordance with guidance provided in Table 1 - Testing Requirements for Organic Toxic Pollutants by Industrial Category. Test procedures shall conform with requirements set forth in Part II.B.2. of this permit, and with Table 7 - Quantification Levels and Analytical Methods for Selected Parameters. (Tables referenced under this part are found in the NPDES Permit Application Appendix, available at http://www.michiqan.gov/deanpdes. then under the Information banner click on How to Apply for an NPDES Permit, then under Downloadable Information click on Permit Application Appendix). With the exception of analytical results for Total Silver and Total Mercury (for which reporting is required through the Department's MiWaters system), analytical results obtained under this part shall be submitted on or before April 4, 2022. with the application for reissuance.
5. Request for Discharge of Water Treatment Additives
Prior to discharge of any water treatment additive, written approval shall be obtained by the permittee. Requests for such approval shall be submitted via the Department's MiWaters system. The MiWaters website is located at https://miwaters.deq.state.mi.us. Instructions for submitting such a request may be obtained via the Internet (http://www.michigan.gov/deqnpdes; then near the bottom of the page, click on one or both of the links located under the Water Treatment Additives banner). Additional monitoring and reporting may be required as a condition for the approval to discharge the additive.
A request to discharge water treatment additives shall include all of the following usage and discharge information for each water treatment additive proposed to be discharged:
a.
Safety Data Sheet (formerly known as Material Safety Data Sheet);
b.
the proposed water treatment additive discharge concentration with supporting calculations;
c.
the discharge frequency (i.e., number of hours per day and number of days per year);
d.
the outfall and monitoring point from which the product is to be discharged;
e.
the type of removal treatment, if any, that the water treatment additive receives prior to discharge;
f.
the product's function (i.e. microbiocide, flocculant, etc.);
g.
a 48-hour LC50 or EC50for a North American freshwater planktonic crustacean (either Ceriodaphnia sp.,
Daphnia sp., or S im ocephalus sp.); and
h.
the results of a toxicity test for one (1) other North American freshwater aquatic species (other than a
planktonic crustacean) that meets a minimum requirement of R 323.1057(2) of the Water Quality
Standards. Examples of tests that would meet this requirement include a 96-hour LC50for rainbow trout,
bluegill, or fathead minnow.
PERM IT NO. MI0038172
Page 10 of 39
6. Pollutant Minimization Program for Total Mercury
This condition is required, upon written notification by the Department or if the permittee notifies the Department that the final effluent concentration of total mercury has exceeded 5 ng/l, as specified in Part I.A.1. and Part I.A.4, The goal of the Pollutant Minimization Program is to maintain the effluent concentration of total mercury at or below 1.3 ng/l. Immediately following written notification by the Department or immediately after the permittee notifies the Department that the final effluent concentration of total mercury has exceeded 5 ng/l, the Pollutant Minimization Program approved by the Department on September 19, 2011 shall take effect. The Pollutant Minimization Program shall include the following:
a.
an annual review and semi-annual monitoring of potential sources of mercury entering the wastewater
collection system;
b.
a program for quarterly monitoring of influent for mercury; and
c.
implementation of reasonable cost-effective control measures when sources of mercury are discovered.
Factors to be considered include significance of sources, economic considerations, and technical and
treatability considerations.
On or before March 31 of each year following the Pollutant Minimization Program taking effect, the permittee shall submit a status report for the previous calendar year to the Department that includes 1) the monitoring results for the previous year, 2) an updated list of potential mercury sources, and 3) a summary of all actions taken to reduce or eliminate identified sources of mercury.
Any information generated as a result of the Pollutant Minimization Program set forth in this permit may be used to support a request to modify the approved program or to demonstrate that the Pollutant Minimization Program requirement has been completed satisfactorily.
A request for modification of the approved program and supporting documentation shall be submitted in writing to the Department for review and approval. The Department may approve modifications to the approved program (approval of a program modification does not require a permit modification), including a reduction in the frequency of the requirements under items a. & b.
This permit may be modified in accordance with applicable laws and rules to include additional mercury conditions and/or limitations as necessary.
7. Discharge Monitoring Report - Quality Assurance Study Program
The permittee shall participate in the Discharge Monitoring Report - Quality Assurance (DMR-QA) Study Program. The purpose of the DMR-QA Study Program is to annually evaluate the proficiency of all in-house and/or contract laboratory(ies) that perform, on behalf of the facility authorized to discharge under this permit, the analytical testing required under this permit. In accordance with Section 308 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1318); and R 323.2138 and R 323.2154 of Part 21, Wastewater Discharge Permits, promulgated under Part 31 of the NREPA, participation in the DMR-QA Study Program is required for all major facilities, and for minor facilities selected for participation by the Department.
Annually and in accordance with DMR-QA Study Program requirements and submittal due dates, the permittee shall submit to the Michigan DMR-QA Study Program state coordinator all documentation required by the DMRQA Study. DMR-QA Study Program participation is required only for the analytes required under this permit and only when those analytes are also identified in the DMR-QA Study.
If the permitted facility's status as a major facility should change, participation in the DMR-QA Study Program may be reevaluated. Questions concerning participation in the DMR-QA Study Program should be directed to the Michigan DMR-QA Study Program state coordinator.
All forms and instructions required for participation in the DMR-QA Study Program, including submittal due dates and state coordinator contact information, can be found at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/discharge-monitoring-report-quality-assurance-study-program.
PER M IT NO. MI0Q38172
P age 11 o f 39
8. Cooling Water Intake Structures - Interim Approval
The federal rules promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in 40 CFR Parts 122 and 125 establishing the requirements of section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act for Existing Facilities took effect October 14, 2014. Beginning October 14, 2014, any facility covered by the rules requesting permit reissuance shall submit an application in accordance with the rules and shall be subject to the best technology available (BTA) standards for impingement mortality and entrainment as defined in the rules. Since the application for permit reissuance was submitted prior to the effective date of the rules, for this reissuance the permittee is subject to site-specific requirements as determined on a case-by-case Best Professional Judgment Basis.
The cooling water intake structure operated by the permittee has been evaluated using all available information relating to its location, design, construction, and capacity. At this time, the Department has made an interim determination that the cooling water intake structure represents BTA to minimize adverse environmental impact in accordance with section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326). The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain the cooling water intake structure and associated equipment to minimize adverse environmental impact. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Department of any planned changes in the location, design, operation, or capacity of the intake structure. If the Department determines that additional technologies or control measures are necessary to reduce the impact of impingement or entrainment, the Department may revise the requirements of this condition. Nothing in this permit shall either be construed to relieve the permittee from civil or criminal penalties for previous or future fish losses, or authorize take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
If the federal rules promulgated under section 316(b) remain in effect at the time of application for reissuance, on or before April 4. 2022. with the application for reissuance, the permittee shall submit the appropriate information specified in 40 CFR 122.21 (r) for the cooling water intake structure at this facility. Any request for alternate application submittal requirements specific to the decommissioning of a facility or portions of a facility shall be approved by the Department prior to application submission.
9. Facility Contact
The "Facility Contact" was specified in the application. The permittee may replace the facility contact at any time, and shall notify the Department in writing within 10 days after replacement (including the name, address and telephone number of the new facility contact).
a.
The facility contact shall be (or a duly authorized representative of this person):
for a corporation, a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice president; or a designated
representative if the representative is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which
the discharge originates, as described in the permit application or other NPDES form,
for a partnership, a general partner,
for a sole proprietorship, the proprietor, or
for a municipal, state, or other public facility, either a principal executive officer, the mayor, village
president, city or village manager or other duly authorized employee.
b.
A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
the authorization is made in writing to the Department by a person described in paragraph a. of this
section; and
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 facility (a duly authorized representative may
thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position).
Nothing in this section obviates the permittee from properly submitting reports and forms as required by law.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 12 of 39
10. Schedule for Elimination of Bottom Ash Transport Water Discharge
The permittee shall eliminate the discharge of bottom ash transport water to surface waters of the state in accordance with the following schedule. All submittals shall be to the Department.
a.
On or before January 1. 2018. the permittee shall submit the completed technology feasibility evaluation
and the approach selected to achieve elimination of the discharge of bottom ash transport water to
surface waters of the state at Monitoring Point 001 A, Monitoring Point 001B, and Monitoring Point 002A,
specified in Part I.A.1., Part I.A.2., and Part I.A.4., respectively. The submittal shall include an
assessment of the ability to design and build the selected approach.
b.
On or before February 1, 2018. the permittee shall commence the engineering design process for the
selected approach.
c.
On or before February 1, 2019. the permittee shall submit a status report that describes the ongoing
engineering design process, and the procurement/fabrication processes, of the selected approach.
d.
On or before July 1. 2019, the permittee shall commence construction for the selected approach.
e.
On or before July 1, 2020, the permittee shall submit a status report of the ongoing construction, and
specify any impediments to meeting the final compliance date.
f.
On or before July 1, 2021. the permittee shall submit a status report of the ongoing construction, and
specify any impediments to meeting the final compliance date.
g.
On or before December 31,2021. the permittee shall eliminate the discharge of bottom ash transport
water to surface waters of the state at Monitoring Point 001 A, Monitoring Point 001B, and Monitoring
Point 002A, specified in Part I.A.1., Part I.A.2., and Part I.A.4., respectively.
11. Bottom Ash Transport Water Discharge Prohibition
Beginning on December 31, 2021, the permittee is prohibited from discharging newly generated bottom ash transport water from any outfall.
12. Intake Screen Backwash, Outfall 000
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge intake screen backwash from outfall 000 to the St. Clair River. The permittee shall collect and remove debris accumulated on intake trash bars and dispose of such material on land in an appropriate manner.
13. Zebra Mussel Control Program
The permittee is authorized to treat its service water system for the control of zebra mussels in accordance with the document titled, "Zebra Mussel Control Program - Service Water System," submitted to the Department on July 8, 1992. If it is necessary for the permittee to make changes to the program, the proposed changes must be submitted to and approved by the Department prior to implementation.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PARTI
Section B. Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Page 13 of 39
1. Final Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The permittee is authorized to discharge storm water associated with industrial activity, as defined under 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i-ix), to the surface waters of the state. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
a.
Narrative Standard
The receiving water shall contain no turbidity, color, oil films, floating solids, foams, settleable solids,
suspended solids, or deposits as a result of this discharge in unnatural quantities which are or may
become injurious to any designated use.
b.
Visual Assessment of Storm Water Discharges
To ensure that storm water discharges from the facility do not violate the narrative standard in the
receiving waters, storm water discharges shall be visually assessed in accordance with this permit.
c.
Implementation of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
The permittee shall implement an acceptable Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as
required by this permit.
d.
Certified Operator
The permittee shall have an Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator who has supervision over the
facility's storm water treatment and control measures included in the SWPPP.
PERM IT NO. M10038172
Page 14 of 39
The Storm W ater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) is a written procedure to reduce the exposure o f storm w ater to significant m aterials a n d to red u ce the am ount o f significant m aterials in the storm water discharge. An acceptable S W P P P shall identify potential so u rc e s o f contam ination and describe the controls n e ce ssa ry to reduce their im pacts in a ccordance with Part I.B.2. through Part I.B.8. o f this permit.
2. Source Identification
To identify potential sources of significant materials that can pollute storm water and subsequently be discharged from the facility, the SWPPP shall, at a minimum, include the following items:
a.
A site map identifying:
1)
buildings and other permanent structures;
2)
storage or disposal areas for significant materials;
3)
secondary containment structures and descriptions of the significant materials contained within
the primary containment structures;
4)
storm water discharge points (which include outfalls and points of discharge), numbered or
otherwise labeled for reference;
5)
location of storm water and non-storm water inlets (numbered or otherwise labeled for
reference) contributing to each discharge point;
6)
location of NPDES-permitted discharges other than storm water;
7)
outlines of the drainage areas contributing to each discharge point;
8)
structural controls or storm water treatment facilities;
9)
areas of vegetation (with brief descriptions such as lawn, old field,marsh, wooded, etc.);
10) areas of exposed and/or erodible soils and gravel lots;
11) impervious surfaces (e.g., roofs, asphalt, concrete, etc.);
12) name and location of receiving water(s); and
13) areas of known or suspected impacts on surface waters asdesignated under Part 201 (Environmental Response) of the NREPA.
b.
A list of all significant materials that could pollute storm water. For each material listed, the SWPPP
shall include each of the following descriptions:
1)
the ways in which each type of significant material has been, or has reasonable potential to
become, exposed to storm water (e.g., spillage during handling; leaks from pipes, pumps, and vessels;
contact with storage piles, contaminated materials, or soils; waste handling and disposal; deposits from
dust or overspray; etc.);
2)
identification of the discharge point(s) and the inlet(s) contributing the significant material to
each discharge point through which the significant material may be discharged if released; and
3)
an evaluation of the reasonable potential for contribution of significant materials to storm water
from at least the following areas or activities:
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
a)
loading, unloading, and other significant material-handling operations;
Page 15 of 39
b)
outdoor storage, including secondary containment structures;
c)
outdoor manufacturing or processing activities;
d)
significant dust- or particulate-generating processes;
e)
discharge from vents, stacks, and air emission controls;
f)
on-site waste disposal practices;
g)
maintenance and cleaning of vehicles, machines, and equipment;
h)
areas of exposed and/or erodible soils;
i)
Sites of Environmental Contamination listed under Part 201 (Environmental Response)
of the NREPA;
j)
areas of significant material residues;
k)
areas where animals (wild or domestic) congregate and deposit wastes; and
l)
other areas where storm water may come into contact with significant materials.
c.
A listing of significant spills and significant leaks of polluting materials that occurred in areas that are
exposed to precipitation or that discharge to a point source at the facility. The listing shall include spills
that occurred over the three (3) years prior to the effective date of a permit authorizing discharge. The
listing shall include the date, volume, and exact location of the release, and the action taken to clean up
the material and/or prevent exposure to storm water or contamination of surface waters of the state.
Any release that occurs after the SWPPP has been developed shall be controlled in accordance with the
SWPPP and is cause for the SWPPP to be updated as appropriate within 14 calendar days of obtaining
knowledge of the spill or loss.
d.
A determination as to whether its facility discharges storm water to a water body for which an EPA-
approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) has been established. If so, the permittee shall assess
whether the TMDL requirements for the facility's discharge are being met through the existing SWPPP
controls or whether additional control measures are necessary. The permitee's assessment of whether
the TMDL requirements are being met shall focus on the effectiveness, adequacy, and implementation
of the permitee's SWPPP controls.
e.
A summary of existing storm water discharge sampling data (if available), describing pollutants in storm
water discharges at the facility. This summary shall be accompanied by a description of the suspected
source(s) of the pollutants detected.
3. Nonstructural Controls
To prevent significant materials from contacting storm water at the source, the SWPPP shall, at a minimum, include each of the following nonstructural controls:
a.
Written procedures and a schedule for routine preventive maintenance. Preventive maintenance
procedures shall describe routine inspections and maintenance of storm water management and control
devices (e.g., cleaning of oil/water separators and catch basins, routine housekeeping activities, etc.), as
well as inspecting and testing plant equipment and systems to uncover conditions that could cause
breakdowns or failures resulting in discharges of pollutants to the storm sewer system or the surface
waters of the state. The routine inspection shall include areas of the facility in which significant materials
have the reasonable potential to contaminate storm water. A written report of the inspection and
corrective actions shall be retained in accordance with Record Keeping, below.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 16 of 39
b.
Written procedures and a schedule for good housekeeping to maintain a clean, orderly facility. Good
housekeeping procedures shall include routine inspections that focus on the areas of the facility that
have a reasonable potential to contaminate storm water entering the property. The routine
housekeeping inspections may be combined with the routine inspections for the preventive maintenance
program. A written report of the inspection and corrective actions shall be retained in accordance with
Record Keeping, below.
c.
Written procedures and a schedule for quarterly comprehensive site inspections, to be conducted by
the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator. At a minimum, one inspection shall be performed within
each of the following quarters: Januarv-March. April-June. Julv-Seotember. and October-Decernber.
The comprehensive site inspections shall include, but not be limited to, inspection of structural controls
in use at the facility, and the areas and equipment identified in the routine preventive maintenance and
good housekeeping procedures. These inspections shall also include a review of the routine preventive
maintenance reports, good housekeeping inspection reports, and any other paperwork associated with
the SWPPP, The permittee may request Department approval of an alternate schedule for
comprehensive site inspections. A written report of the inspection and corrective actions shall be
retained in accordance with Record Keeping, below, and the following shall be included on the
comprehensive inspection form/report:
1)
Date of the inspection.
2)
Name(s), title(s), and certification number(s) of the personnel conducting the inspection.
3)
Precipitation information (i.e., a description of recent rainfall/snowmelt events).
4)
All observations relating to the implementation of control measures. Items to include if
applicable:
a)
updates on corrective actions implemented due to previously identified pollutant and/or
discharge issues;
b)
any evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants to discharge to the drainage system or
receiving waters and the condition of and around the discharge point including flow
dissipation measures needing maintenance or repairs;
c)
any control measures needing maintenance or repairs; and
d)
any additional control measures needed to comply with permit requirements.
5)
Any required revisions to the SWPPP resulting from the inspection.
6)
A certification stating the facility is in compliance with this permit and the SWPPP, or, if there are
instances of noncompliance, they are identified.
7)
procedures and a schedule for quarterly visual assessments of storm water discharges. At a
minimum, one visual assessment shall be conducted within each of the following quarters: Januarv-
March. April-June, Julv-September. and October-December. These assessments shall be conducted as
part of the comprehensive site inspection within one month of control measure observations made in
accordance with 4), above. If the Department has approved an alternate schedule for the
comprehensive site inspection, the visual assessment may likewise be conducted in accordance with
the same approved alternate schedule.
The following are the requirements of the visual assessment. The permittee shall develop and clearly document, in writing, procedures for meeting these requirements:
a)
Within six (6) months of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall develop
written procedures for conducting the visual assessment and incorporate these
procedures into the SWPPP. If Qualified Personnel rather than an Industrial Storm
Water Certified Operator will collect storm water samples, these procedures shall
include a written description of the training given to these personnel to qualify them to
collect the samples, as well as documentation verifying that these personnel have
received this training. The first visual assessment shall be conducted in conjunction
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 17 of 39
with the next occurring comprehensive inspection, if changes resulting in altered drainage patterns occur at the facility, the permittee shall modify the procedures for conducting the visual assessment in accordance with the requirements of Keeping SWPPPs Current, below, and these modifications shall be incorporated into the SWPPP prior to conducting the next visual assessment.
b)
A visual assessment shall be conducted of a representative storm water sample
collected from each storm water discharge point. Storm water samples shall be
visually assessed for conditions that could cause a violation of water quality standards
as defined in Water Quality Standards, below. The visual assessment shall be made of
the storm water sample in a clean, clear glass or plastic container. Only an Industrial
Storm Water Certified Operator shall conduct this visual assessment. Visual
assessment of the storm water sample shall be conducted within 48 hours of sample
collection.
Representative storm water samples shall be collected:
(1) from each storm water discharge point identified as set forth under Source Identification, above. These samples may be collected by one or more of the following: an Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator; and/or an individual who meets qualifications acceptable to the Department and who is authorized by an Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator to collect the sample ("Qualified Personnel"); and/or an automated sampling device; and
(2) within the first 30 minutes of the start of a discharge from a storm event and on discharges that occur at least 72 hours (3 days) from the previous discharge. If it is not possible to collect the sample within the first 30 minutes of discharge, the sample shall be collected as soon thereafter as practicable, but not exceeding 60 minutes. In the case of snowmelt, samples shall be collected during a period with measurable discharge from the site.
c)
A visual assessment shall be conducted of the storm water discharge at each storm
water discharge point. (If an automated sampling device is used to collect the storm
water sample, this requirement is waived). Either an Industrial Storm Water Certified
Operator and/or Qualified Personnel may conduct this visual assessment. This visual
assessment may be conducted directly - by someone physically present at the storm
water discharge at each storm water discharge point; or it may be conducted indirectly -
through the use of a visual recording taken of the storm water discharge at each storm
water discharge point. Direct visual assessment shall be conducted at the same time
that the storm water sample is collected. Indirect visual assessment shall be conducted
using a visual recording taken of the storm water discharge at the same time that the
storm water sample was collected.
d)
Visual assessments shall be documented. This documentation shall be retained in
accordance with Record Keeping, below, and shall include the following:
(1) sampling location(s) at the storm water discharge point(s) identified on the site map (see Source Identification, above);
(2) storm event information (i.e., length of event expressed in hours, approximate size of event expressed in inches of precipitation, duration of time since previous event that caused a discharge, and date and time the discharge began);
(3) date and time of the visual assessment of each storm water discharge at each storm water discharge point;
(4) name(s) and title(s) of the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator or Qualified Personnel who conducted the visual assessment of the storm water discharge at each storm water discharge point. If an automated sampling device was used to collect the storm water sample associated with this discharge point, this documentation requirement is waived;
PERM IT NO. MI0038172
Page 18 of 39
(5) observations made during visual assessment of the storm water discharge at each storm water discharge point. If an automated sampling device was used to collect the storm water sample associated with this discharge point, this documentation requirement is waived;
(6) if applicable, any visual recordings used to conduct the visual assessment of the storm water discharge at each storm water discharge point;
(7) date and time of sample collection for each storm water sample;
(8) name(s) and title(s) of the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator or Qualified Personnel who collected the storm water sample. If an automated sampling device was used to collect the storm water sample, the permittee shall document that, instead;
(9) date and time of the visual assessment of each storm water sample;
(10) name(s), title(s), and operator number(s) of the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator(s) who conducted the visual assessment of each storm water sample;
(11) observations made during visual assessment of each storm water sample;
(12) full-color photographic evidence of the storm water sample against a white background;
(13) nature of the discharge (i.e., rainfall or snowmelt);
(14) probable sources of any observed storm water contamination; and
(15) if applicable, an explanation for why it was not possible to collect samples within the first 30 minutes of discharge .
e)
When adverse weather conditions prevent a visual assessment during the quarter, a
substitute visual assessment shall be conducted during the next qualifying storm event.
Documentation of the rationale for no visual assessment during a quarter shall be
included with the SWPPP records as described in Record Keeping, below. Adverse
conditions are those that are dangerous or create inaccessibility for personnel, such as
local flooding, high winds, electrical storms, or situations that otherwise make sampling
impractical such as drought or extended frozen conditions.
f)
If the facility has two (2) or more discharge points that are believed to discharge
substantially identical storm water effluents, the facility may conduct visual assessments
of the discharge at just one (1) of the discharge points and report that the results also
apply to the other substantially identical discharge point(s). The determination of
substantially identical discharge points is to be based on the significant material
evaluation conducted as set forth under Source Identification, above, and shall be
clearly documented in the SWPPP. Visual assessments shall be conducted on a
rotating basis of each substantially identical discharge point throughout the period of
coverage under this permit.
d.
A description of material handling procedures and storage requirements for significant materials.
Equipment and procedures for cleaning up spills shall be identified in the SWPPP and made available to
the appropriate personnel. The procedures shall identify measures to prevent spilled materials or
material residues from contaminating storm water discharges from the property. The SWPPP shall
include language describing what a reportable spill or release is and the appropriate reporting
requirements in accordance with Part II.C.6. and Part II.C.7. The SWPPP may include, by reference,
requirements of either a Pollution Incident Prevention Plan (PIPP) prepared in accordance with the
Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code); a Hazardous
Waste Contingency Plan prepared in accordance with 40 CFR 264 and 265 Subpart D, as required by
Part 111 of the NREPA; ora Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan prepared in
accordance with 40 CFR 112.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 19 of 39
e.
Identification of areas which, due to topography, activities, or other factors, have a high potential for
significant soil erosion. Gravel lots shall be included. The SWPPP shall also identify measures used to
control soil erosion and sedimentation.
f.
A description of the employee training program that will be implemented on an annual basis to inform
appropriate personnel at all levels of their responsibility as it relates to the components and goals of the
SWPPP. The SWPPP shall identify periodic dates for the employee training program. Records of the
employee training program shall be retained in accordance with Record Keeping, below.
g.
Identification of actions to limit the discharge of significant materials in order to comply with TMDL
requirements, if applicable.
h.
Identification of significant materials expected to be present in storm water discharges following
implementation of nonstructural preventive measures and source controls.
4. Structural Controls
Where implementation of the measures required by Nonstructural Controls, above, does not control storm water discharges in accordance with Water Quality Standards, below, the SWPPP shall provide a description of the location, function, design criteria, and installation/construction schedule of structural controls for prevention and treatment. Structural controls may be necessary:
a.
to prevent uncontaminated storm water from contacting, or being contacted by, significant materials; or
b.
if preventive measures are not feasible or are inadequate to keep significant materials at the site from
contaminating storm water. Structural controls shall be used to treat, divert, isolate, recycle, reuse, or
otherwise manage storm water in a manner that reduces the level of significant materials in the storm
water and provides compliance with water quality standards as identified in Water Quality Standards,
below.
5. Keeping SWPPPs Current
a.
The permittee and/or the industrial Storm Water Certified Operator shall review the SWPPP annually
after it is developed and maintain a written report of the review in accordance with Record Keeping,
below. Based on the review, the permittee or the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator shall amend
the SWPPP as needed to ensure continued compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.
The written report shall be submitted to the Department on or before January 10th of each year.
b.
The SWPPP developed under the conditions of a previous permit shall be amended as necessary to
ensure compliance with this permit,
c.
The SWPPP shall be updated or amended whenever changes at the facility have the potential to
increase the exposure of significant materials to storm water, significant spills occur at the facility, or
when the SWPPP is determined by the permittee or the Department to be ineffective in achieving the
general objectives of controlling pollutants in storm water discharges associated with industrial activity.
Updates based on increased activity or spills at the facility shall include a description of how the
permittee intends to control any new sources of significant materials, or respond to and prevent spills in
accordance with the requirements of this permit (see Source Identification; Nonstructural Controls; and
Structural Controls, above).
d.
The Department may notify the permittee at any time that the SWPPP does not meet minimum
requirements of this permit. Such notification shall identify why the SWPPP does not meet minimum
requirements of this permit. The permittee shall make the required changes to the SWPPP within 30
days after such notification from the Department or authorized representative and shall submit to the
Department a written certification that the requested changes have been made.
e.
Amendments to the SWPPP shall be signed and retained on-site with the SWPPP pursuant to Signature
and SWPPP Review, below.
PERM IT NO. MIQ038172
Page 20 of 39
6. Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator Update
If the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator is changed or an Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator is added, the permittee shall provide the name and certification number of the new Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator to the Department. If a facility has multiple Industrial Storm Water Certified Operators, the names and certification numbers of all shall be included in the SWPPP.
7. Signature and SWPPP Review
a.
The SWPPP shall be reviewed and signed by the Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator(s) and by
either the permittee or an authorized representative in accordance with 40 CFR 122.22. The SWPPP
and associated records shall be retained on-site at the facility that generates the storm water discharge.
b.
The permittee shall make the SWPPP, reports, log books, storm water discharge sampling data (if
collected), and items required by Record Keeping, below, available upon request to the Department.
The Department makes the non-confidential business information-portions of the SWPPP available to
the public upon request.
8. Record Keeping
The permittee shall maintain records of all SWPPP-related inspection and maintenance activities. Records shall also be kept describing incidents such as spills or other discharges that may affect the quality of storm water discharged from the property. All such records shall be retained for three (3) years. The following records are required by this permit (see Nonstructural Controls; and Keeping SWPPPs Current, above):
a.
routine preventive maintenance inspection reports
b.
routine good housekeeping inspection reports
c.
comprehensive site inspection reports
d.
documentation of visual assessments
e.
employee training records
f.
written summaries of the annual SWPPP review
9. Water Quality Standards
At the time of discharge, there shall be no violation of water quality standards in the receiving waters as a result of the storm water discharge. This requirement includes, but is not limited to, the following conditions:
a.
In accordance with R 323.1050 of the Part 4 Rules promulgated pursuant to Part 31 of the NREPA, the
receiving waters shall not have any of the following unnatural physical properties as a result of this
discharge in quantities which are, or may become, injurious to any designated use: turbidity, color, oil
films, floating solids, foams, settleable solids, suspended solids, or deposits.
b.
Any unusual characteristics of the discharge (i.e., unnatural turbidity, color, oil film, floating solids,
foams, settleable solids, suspended solids, or deposits) shall be reported within 24 hours to the
Department, followed by a written report within five (5) days detailing the findings of the investigation
and the steps taken to correct the condition.
c.
Any pollutant for which a level of control is specified to meet a TMDL established by the Department
shall be controlled at the facility so that its discharge is reduced by/to the amount specified in the TMDL.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
P age 21 o f 39
10. Prohibition of Non-Storm Water Discharges
Discharges of material other than storm water shall be in compliance with an NPDES permit issued for the discharge. Storm water shall be defined to include all of the following non-storm water discharges, provided pollution prevention controls for the non-storm water component are identified in the SWPPP:
a.
discharges from fire hydrant flushing;
b.
potable water sources, including water line flushing;
c.
water from fire system testing and fire-fighting training without burned materials or chemical fire
suppressants;
d.
irrigation drainage;
e.
lawn watering;
f.
routine building wash-down that does not use detergents or other compounds;
g.
pavement wash waters where contamination by toxic or hazardous materials has not occurred (unless
all contamination by toxic or hazardous materials has been removed) and where detergents are not
used;
h.
uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside
storage of refrigerated gases or liquids;
i.
springs;
j.
uncontaminated groundwater;
k.
foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials such as solvents;
and
l.
discharges from fire-fighting activities. Discharges from fire-fighting activities are exempted from the
requirement to be identified in the SWPPP.
11. Tracer Dye Discharges
This permit does not authorize the discharge of tracer dyes without approval from the Department. Requests to discharge tracer dyes shall be submitted to the Department in accordance with Rule 1097 (R 323.1097 of the Michigan Administrative Code).
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PART II
Page 22 of 39
Part II may include terms and /or conditions not applicable to discharges covered under this permit.
Section A. Definitions
Acute toxic unit (TUA) means 100/LC50 where the LC50 is determined from a whole effluent toxicity (WET) test which produces a result that is statistically or graphically estimated to be lethal to 50% of the test organisms.
Annual monitoring frequency refers to a calendar year beginning on January 1 and ending on December 31. When required by this permit, an analytical result, reading, value or observation shall be reported for that period if a discharge occurs during that period.
Authorized public agency means a state, local, or county agency that is designated pursuant to the provisions of section 9110 of Part 91 of the NREPA to implement soil erosion and sedimentation control requirements with regard to construction activities undertaken by that agency.
Best management practices (BMPs) means structural devices or nonstructural practices that are designed to prevent pollutants from entering into storm water, to direct the flow of storm water, or to treat polluted storm water.
Bioaccumulative chemical o f concern (BCC) means a chemical which, upon entering the surface waters, by itself or as its toxic transformation product, accumulates in aquatic organisms by a human health bioaccumulation factor of more than 1000 after considering metabolism and other physiochemical properties that might enhance or inhibit bioaccumulation. The human health bioaccumulation factor shall be derived according to R 323.1057(5). Chemicals with half-lives of less than 8 weeks in the water column, sediment, and biota are not BCCs. The minimum bioaccumulation concentration factor (BAF) information needed to define an organic chemical as a BCC is either a field-measured BAF or a BAF derived using the biota-sediment accumulation factor (BSAF) methodology. The minimum BAF information needed to define an inorganic chemical as a BCC, including an organometal, is either a field-measured BAF or a laboratory-measured bioconcentration factor (BCF). The BCCs to which these rules apply are identified in Table 5 of R 323.1057 of the Water Quality Standards.
Biosolids are the solid, semisolid, or liquid residues generated during the treatment of sanitary sewage or domestic sewage in a treatment works. This includes, but is not limited to, scum or solids removed in primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment processes and a derivative of the removed scum or solids.
Bulk biosolids means biosolids that are not sold or given away in a bag or other container for application to a lawn or home garden.
Certificate o f Coverage (COC) is a document, issued by the Department, which authorizes a discharge under a general permit.
Chronic toxic unit (TUC) means 100/M ATC or IOO/IC25, where the maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (MATC) and IC25 are expressed as a percent effluent in the test medium.
Class B biosolids refers to material that has met the Class B pathogen reduction requirements or equivalent treatment by a Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens (PSRP) in accordance with the Part 24 Rules. Processes include aerobic digestion, composting, anaerobic digestion, lime stabilization and air drying.
Combined sewer system is a sewer system in which storm water runoff is combined with sanitary wastes.
PERM IT NO. M10038172
Page 23 of 39
Daily concentration is the sum of the concentrations of the individual samples of a parameter divided by the number of samples taken during any calendar day. If the parameter concentration in any sample is less than the quantification limit, regard that value as zero when calculating the daily concentration. The daily concentration will be used to determine compliance with any maximum and minimum daily concentration limitations (except for pH and dissolved oxygen). When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated daily concentration for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs).
For pH, report the maximum value of any individual sample taken during the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs and the minimum value of any individual sample taken during the month in the "MINIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs. For dissolved oxygen, report the minimum concentration of any individual sample in the "MINIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs.
Daily loading is the total discharge by weight of a parameter discharged during any calendar day. This value is calculated by multiplying the daily concentration by the total daily flow and by the appropriate conversion factor. The daily loading will be used to determine compliance with any maximum daily loading limitations. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated daily loading for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUANTITY OR LOADING" on the DMRs.
Daily monitoring frequency refers to a 24-hour day. When required by this permit, an analytical result, reading, value or observation shall be reported for that period if a discharge occurs during that period.
Department means the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.
Detection level means the lowest concentration or amount of the target analyte that can be determined to be different from zero by a single measurement at a stated level of probability.
Discharge means the addition of any waste, waste effluent, wastewater, pollutant, or any combination thereof to any surface water of the state.
EC50 means a statistically or graphically estimated concentration that is expected to cause 1 or more specified effects in 50% of a group of organisms under specified conditions.
Fecal coliform bacteria monthly FOR WWSLs THAT COLLECT AND STORE WASTEWATER AND ARE AUTHORIZED TO DISCHARGE ONLY IN THE SPRING AND/OR FALL ON AN INTERMITTENT BASIS - Fecal coliform bacteria monthly is the geometric mean of all daily concentrations determined during a discharge event. Days on which no daily concentration is determined shall not be used to determine the calculated monthly value. The calculated monthly value will be used to determine compliance with the maximum monthly fecal coliform bacteria limitations. When required by the permit, report the calculated monthly value in the "AVERAGE" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMR. If the period in which the discharge event occurred was partially in each of two months, the calculated monthly value shall be reported on the DMR of the month in which the last day of discharge occurred.
FOR ALL OTHER DISCHARGES - Fecal coliform bacteria monthly is the geometric mean of all daily concentrations determined during a reporting month. Days on which no daily concentration is determined shall not be used to determine the calculated monthly value. The calculated monthly value will be used to determine compliance with the maximum monthly fecal coliform bacteria limitations. When required by the permit, report the calculated monthly value in the "AVERAGE" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMR.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
Page 24 of 39
Fecal coliform bacteria 7-day FOR WWSLs THAT COLLECT AND STORE WASTEWATER AND ARE AUTHORIZED TO DISCHARGE ONLY IN THE SPRING AND/OR FALL ON AN INTERMITTENT BASIS - Fecal coliform bacteria 7-day is the geometric mean of the daily concentrations determined during any 7 consecutive days of discharge during a discharge event. If the number of daily concentrations determined during the discharge event is less than 7 days, the number of actual daily concentrations determined shall be used for the calculation. Days on which no daily concentration is determined shall not be used to determine the value. The calculated 7-day value will be used to determine compliance with the maximum 7-day fecal coliform bacteria limitations. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7-day geometric mean value for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs. If the 7-day period was partially in each of two months, the value shall be reported on the DMR of the month in which the last day of discharge occurred.
FOR ALL OTHER DISCHARGES - Fecal coliform bacteria 7-day is the geometric mean of the daily concentrations determined during any 7 consecutive days in a reporting month. If the number of daily concentrations determined is less than 7, the actual number of daily concentrations determined shall be used for the calculation. Days on which no daily concentration is determined shall not be used to determine the value. The calculated 7-day value will be used to determine compliance with the maximum 7-day fecal coliform bacteria limitations. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7-day geometric mean for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs. The first calculation shall be made on day 7 of the reporting month, and the last calculation shall be made on the last day of the reporting month.
Flow-proportioned sample is a composite sample with the sample volume proportional to the effluent flow.
General permit means a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued authorizing a category of similar discharges.
Geometric mean is the average of the logarithmic values of a base 10 data set, converted back to a base 10 number.
Grab sample is a single sample taken at neither a set time nor flow.
IC25 means the toxicant concentration that would cause a 25% reduction in a nonquantal biological measurement for the test population.
Illicit connection means a physical connection to a municipal separate storm sewer system that primarily conveys non-storm water discharges other than uncontaminated groundwater into the storm sewer; or a physical connection not authorized or permitted by the local authority, where a local authority requires authorization or a permit for physical connections.
Illicit discharge means any discharge to, or seepage into, a municipal separate storm sewer system that is not composed entirely of storm water or uncontaminated groundwater. Illicit discharges include non-storm water discharges through pipes or other physical connections; dumping of motor vehicle fluids, household hazardous wastes, domestic animal wastes, or litter; collection and intentional dumping of grass clippings or leaf litter; or unauthorized discharges of sewage, industrial waste, restaurant wastes, or any other non-storm water waste directly into a separate storm sewer.
Individual permit means a site-specific NPDES permit.
Inlet means a catch basin, roof drain, conduit, drain tile, retention pond riser pipe, sump pump, or other point where storm water or wastewater enters into a closed conveyance system prior to discharge off site or into waters of the state.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
Page 25 of 39
Interference is a discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: 1) inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal; and 2) therefore, is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation) or, of the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal in compliance with the following statutory provisions and regulations or permits issued thereunder (or more stringent state or local regulations): Section 405 of the Clean Water Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) (including Title II, more commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and including state regulations contained in any state sludge management plan prepared pursuant to Subtitle D of the SWDA), the Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. [This definition does not apply to sample matrix interference].
Land application means spraying or spreading biosolids or a biosolids derivative onto the land surface, injecting below the land surface, or incorporating into the soil so that the biosolids or biosolids derivative can either condition the soil or fertilize crops or vegetation grown in the soil.
LCS0means a statistically or graphically estimated concentration that is expected to be lethal to 50% of a group of organisms under specified conditions.
Maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (MATC) means the concentration obtained by calculating the geometric mean of the lower and upper chronic limits from a chronic test. A lower chronic limit is the highest tested concentration that did not cause the occurrence of a specific adverse effect. An upper chronic limit is the lowest tested concentration which did cause the occurrence of a specific adverse effect and above which all tested concentrations caused such an occurrence.
Maximum extent practicable means implementation of best management practices by a public body to comply with an approved storm water management program as required by a national permit for a municipal separate storm sewer system, in a manner that is environmentally beneficial, technically feasible, and within the public body's legal authority.
MGD means million gallons per day.
Monthly concentration is the sum of the daily concentrations determined during a reporting period divided by the number of daily concentrations determined. The calculated monthly concentration will be used to determine compliance with any maximum monthly concentration limitations. Days with no discharge shall not be used to determine the value. When required by the permit, report the calculated monthly concentration in the "AVERAGE" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMR.
For minimum percent removal requirements, the monthly influent concentration and the monthly effluent concentration shall be determined. The calculated monthly percent removal, which is equal to 100 times the quantity [1 minus the quantity (monthly effluent concentration divided by the monthly influent concentration)], shall be reported in the "MINIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMRs.
Monthly loading is the sum of the daily loadings of a parameter divided by the number of daily loadings determined during a reporting period. The calculated monthly loading will be used to determine compliance with any maximum monthly loading limitations. Days with no discharge shall not be used to determine the value. When required by the permit, report the calculated monthly loading in the "AVERAGE" column under "QUANTITY OR LOADING" on the DMR.
Monthly monitoring frequency refers to a calendar month. When required by this permit, an analytical result, reading, value or observation shall be reported for that period if a discharge occurs during that period.
Municipal separate storm sewer means a conveyance or system of conveyances designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water which is not a combined sewer and which is not part of a publicly-owned treatment works as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR 122.2.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 26 of 39
Municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) means all separate storm sewers that are owned or operated by the United States, a state, city, village, township, county, district, association, or other public body created by or pursuant to state law, having jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, storm water, or other wastes, including special districts under state law, such as a sewer district, flood control district, or drainage district, or similar entity, or a designated or approved management agency under Section 208 of the Federal Act that discharges to the waters of the state. This term includes systems similar to separate storm sewer systems in municipalities, such as systems at military bases, large hospital or prison complexes, and highways and other thoroughfares. The term does not include separate storm sewers in very discrete areas, such as individual buildings.
National Pretreatment Standards are the regulations promulgated by or to be promulgated by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section 307(b) and (c) of the Federal Act. The standards establish nationwide limits for specific industrial categories for discharge to a POTW.
No observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) means the highest tested dose or concentration of a substance which results in no observed adverse effect in exposed test organisms where higher doses or concentrations result in an adverse effect.
Noncontact cooling water is water used for cooling which does not come into direct contact with any raw material, intermediate product, by-product, waste product or finished product.
Nondomestic user is any discharger to a POTW that discharges wastes other than or in addition to watercarried wastes from toilet, kitchen, laundry, bathing or other facilities used for household purposes.
Outfall is the location at which a point source discharge enters the surface waters of the state.
Part 91 agency means an agency that is designated by a county board of commissioners pursuant to the provisions of section 9105 of Part 91 of the NREPA; an agency that is designated by a city, village, or township in accordance with the provisions of section 9106 of Part 91 of the NREPA; or the Department for soil erosion and sedimentation activities under Part 615, Part 631, or Part 632 pursuant to the provisions of section 9115 of Part 91 of the NREPA.
Part 91 permit means a soil erosion and sedimentation control permit issued by a Part 91 agency pursuant to the provisions of Part 91 of the NREPA.
Partially treated sewage is any sewage, sewage and storm water, or sewage and wastewater, from domestic or industrial sources that is treated to a level less than that required by the permittee's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, or that is not treated to national secondary treatment standards for wastewater, including discharges to surface waters from retention treatment facilities.
Point o f discharge is the location of a point source discharge where storm water is discharged directly into a separate storm sewer system.
Point source discharge means a discharge from any discernible, confined, discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, or rolling stock. Changing the surface of land or establishing grading patterns on land will result in a point source discharge where the runoff from the site is ultimately discharged to waters of the state.
Polluting material means any material, in solid or liquid form, identified as a polluting material under the Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code).
POTW is a publicly owned treatment work.
Pretreatment is reducing the amount of pollutants, eliminating pollutants, or altering the nature of pollutant properties to a less harmful state prior to discharge into a public sewer. The reduction or alteration can be by physical, chemical, or biological processes, process changes, or by other means. Dilution is not considered pretreatment unless expressly authorized by an applicable National Pretreatment Standard for a particular industrial category.
PERMIT NO. M10038172
Page 27 of 39
Public (as used in the MS4 individual permit) means all persons who potentially could affect the authorized storm water discharges, including, but not limited to, residents, visitors to the area, public employees, businesses, industries, and construction contractors and developers.
Public body means the United States; the state of Michigan; a city, village, township, county, school district, public college or university, or single-purpose governmental agency; or any other body which is created by federal or state statute or law.
Qualified Personnel means an individual who meets qualifications acceptable to the Department and who is authorized by an Industrial Storm Water Certified Operator to collect the storm water sample.
Qualifying storm event means a storm event causing greater than 0.1 inch of rainfall and occurring at least 72 hours after the previous measurable storm event that also caused greater than 0.1 inch of rainfall. Upon request, the Department may approve an alternate definition meeting the condition of a qualifying storm event.
Quantification level means the measurement of the concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a specified laboratory procedure calculated at a specified concentration above the detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at which a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a specified laboratory procedure for monitoring of the contaminant.
Quarterly monitoring frequency refers to a three month period, defined as January through March, April through June, July through September, and October through December. When required by this permit, an analytical result, reading, value or observation shall be reported for that period if a discharge occurs during that period.
Regional Adm inistrator is the Region 5 Administrator, U.S. EPA, located at R-19J, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Regulated area means the permittee's urbanized area, where urbanized area is defined as a place and its adjacent densely-populated territory that together have a minimum population of 50,000 people as defined by the United States Bureau of the Census and as determined by the latest available decennial census.
Secondary containment structure means a unit, other than the primary container, in which significant materials are packaged or held, which is required by State or Federal law to prevent the escape of significant materials by gravity into sewers, drains, or otherwise directly or indirectly into any sewer system or to the surface or ground waters of this state.
Separate storm sewer system means a system of drainage, including, but not limited to, roads, catch basins, curbs, gutters, parking lots, ditches, conduits, pumping devices, or man-made channels, which is not a combined sewer where storm water mixes with sanitary wastes, and is not part of a POTW.
Significant industrial user is a nondomestic user that: 1) is subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 CFR 403.6 and 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N; or 2) discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to a POTW (excluding sanitary, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); contributes a process waste stream which makes up five (5) percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant; or is designated as such by the permittee as defined in 40 CFR 403.12(a) on the basis that the industrial user has a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the POTW's treatment plant operation or violating any pretreatment standard or requirement (in accordance with 40 CFR 403.8(f)(6)).
Significant materials Significant Materials means any material which could degrade or impair water quality, including but not limited to: raw materials; fuels; solvents, detergents, and plastic pellets; finished materials such as metallic products; hazardous substances designated under Section 101(14) of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (see 40 CFR 372.65); any chemical the facility is required to report pursuant to Section 313 of Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); polluting materials as identified under the Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code); Hazardous Wastes as defined in Part 111 of the NREPA; fertilizers; pesticides; and waste products such as ashes, slag, and sludge that have the potential to be released with storm water discharges.
Significant spills and significant leaks means any release of a polluting material reportable under the Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code).
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
Page 28 of 39
Special-use area means secondary containment structures required by state or federal law; lands on Michigan's List of Sites of Environmental Contamination pursuant to Part 201, Environmental Remediation, of the NREPA; and/or areas with other activities that may contribute pollutants to the storm water for which the Department determines monitoring is needed.
Stoichiometric means the quantity of a reagent calculated to be necessary and sufficient for a given chemical reaction.
Storm water means storm water runoff, snow melt runoff, surface runoff and drainage, and non-storm water included under the conditions of this permit.
Storm water discharge point is the location where the point source discharge of storm water is directed to surface waters of the state or to a separate storm sewer. It includes the location of all point source discharges where storm water exits the facility, including outfalls which discharge directly to surface waters of the state, and points o f discharge which discharge directly into separate storm sewer systems.
SWPPP means the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan prepared in accordance with this permit.
Tier I value means a value for aquatic life, human health or wildlife calculated under R 323.1057 of the Water Quality Standards using a tier I toxicity database.
Tier II value means a value for aquatic life, human health or wildlife calculated under R 323.1057 of the Water Quality Standards using a tier II toxicity database.
Total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) are required by the Federal Act for waterbodies that do not meet water quality standards. TMDLs represent the maximum daily load of a pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate and meet water quality standards, and an allocation of that load among point sources, nonpoint sources, and a margin of safety.
Toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) means a site-specific study conducted in a stepwise process designed to identify the causative agents of effluent toxicity, isolate the sources of toxicity, evaluate the effectiveness of toxicity control options, and then confirm the reduction in effluent toxicity.
Water Quality Standards means the Part 4 Water Quality Standards promulgated pursuant to Part 31 of the NREPA, being R 323.1041 through R 323.1117 of the Michigan Administrative Code.
Weekly monitoring frequency refers to a calendar week which begins on Sunday and ends on Saturday. When required by this permit, an analytical result, reading, value or observation shall be reported for that period if a discharge occurs during that period.
WWSL is a wastewater stabilization lagoon.
WWSL discharge event is a discrete occurrence during which effluent is discharged to the surface water up to 10 days of a consecutive 14 day period.
3-portion composite sample is a sample consisting of three equal-volume grab samples collected at equal intervals over an 8-hour period.
7-day concentration FOR WWSLs THAT COLLECT AND STORE WASTEWATER AND ARE AUTHORIZED TO DISCHARGE ONLY IN THE SPRING AND/OR FALL ON AN INTERMITTENT BASIS - The 7-day concentration is the sum of the daily concentrations determined during any 7 consecutive days of discharge during a WWSL discharge event divided by the number of daily concentrations determined. If the number of daily concentrations determined during the WWSL discharge event is less than 7 days, the number of actual daily concentrations determined shall be used for the calculation. The calculated 7-day concentration will be used to determine compliance with any maximum 7-day concentration limitations. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7day concentration for the WWSL discharge event in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMR. If the WWSL discharge event was partially in each of two months, the value shall be reported on the DMR of the month in which the last day of discharge occurred.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
Page 29 of 39
FOR ALL OTHER DISCHARGES - The 7-day concentration is the sum of the daily concentrations determined during any 7 consecutive days in a reporting month divided by the number of daily concentrations determined. If the number of daily concentrations determined is less than 7, the actual number of daily concentrations determined shall be used for the calculation. The calculated 7-day concentration will be used to determine compliance with any maximum 7-day concentration limitations in the reporting month. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7-day concentration for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUALITY OR CONCENTRATION" on the DMR. The first 7-day calculation shall be made on day 7 of the reporting month, and the last calculation shall be made on the last day of the reporting month.
7-day loading FOR WWSLs THAT COLLECT AND STORE WASTEWATER AND ARE AUTHORIZED TO DISCHARGE ONLY IN THE SPRING AND/OR FALL ON AN INTERMITTENT BASIS - The 7-day loading is the sum of the daily loadings determined during any 7 consecutive days of discharge during a WWSL discharge event divided by the number of daily loadings determined. If the number of daily loadings determined during the WWSL discharge event is less than 7 days, the number of actual daily loadings determined shall be used for the calculation. The calculated 7-day loading will be used to determine compliance with any maximum 7-day loading limitations. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7-day loading for the WWSL discharge event in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUANTITY OR LOADING" on the DMR. If the WWSL discharge event was partially in each of two months, the value shall be reported on the DMR of the month in which the last day of discharge occurred
FOR ALL OTHER DISCHARGES - The 7-day loading is the sum of the daily loadings determined during any 7 consecutive days in a reporting month divided by the number of daily loadings determined. If the number of daily loadings determined is less than 7, the actual number of daily loadings determined shall be used for the calculation. The calculated 7-day loading will be used to determine compliance with any maximum 7-day loading limitations in the reporting month. When required by the permit, report the maximum calculated 7-day loading for the month in the "MAXIMUM" column under "QUANTITY OR LOADING" on the DMR. The first 7-day calculation shall be made on day 7 of the reporting month, and the last calculation shall be made on the last day of the reporting month.
24-hour composite sample is a flow-proportioned composite sample consisting of hourly or more frequent portions that are taken over a 24-hour period. A time-proportioned composite sample may be used upon approval of the Department if the permittee demonstrates it is representative of the discharge.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PART II Section B. Monitoring Procedures
Page 30 of 39
1. Representative Samples
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
2. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 304(h) of the Federal Act (40 CFR Part 136 - Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants), unless specified otherwise in this permit. Test procedures used shall be sufficiently sensitive to determine compliance with applicable effluent limitations. Requests to use test procedures not promulgated under 40 CFR Part 136 for pollutant monitoring required by this permit shall be made in accordance with the Alternate Test Procedures regulations specified in 40 CFR 136.4. These requests shall be submitted to the Chief of the Permits Section, Water Resources Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 30458, Lansing, Michigan, 48909-7958. The permittee may use such procedures upon approval.
The permittee shall periodically calibrate and perform maintenance procedures on all analytical instrumentation at intervals to ensure accuracy of measurements. The calibration and maintenance shall be performed as part of the permittee's laboratory Quality Control/Quality Assurance program.
3. Instrumentation
The permittee shall periodically calibrate and perform maintenance procedures on all monitoring instrumentation at intervals to ensure accuracy of measurements.
4. Recording Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall record the following information: 1) the exact place, date, and time of measurement or sampling; 2) the person(s) who performed the measurement or sample collection; 3) the dates the analyses were performed; 4) the person(s) who performed the analyses; 5) the analytical techniques or methods used; 6) the date of and person responsible for equipment calibration; and 7) the results of all required analyses.
5. Records Retention
All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recordings from continuous monitoring instrumentation shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years, or longer if requested by the Regional Administrator or the Department.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PART il Section C. Reporting Requirements
P age 31 o f 39
1. Start-up Notification
If the permittee will not discharge during the first 60 days following the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall notify the Department within 14 days following the effective date of this permit, and then 60 days prior to the commencement of the discharge.
2. Submittal Requirements for Self-Monitoring Data
Part 31 of the NREPA (specifically Section 324.3110(7)); and R 323.2155(2) of Part 21, Wastewater Discharge Permits, promulgated under Part 31 of the NREPA, allow the Department to specify the forms to be utilized for reporting the required self-monitoring data. Unless instructed on the effluent limitations page to conduct "Retained Self-Monitoring," the permittee shall submit self-monitoring data via the Department's MiWaters system.
The permittee shall utilize the information provided on the MiWaters website, located at https://miwaters.deq.state.mi.us, to access and submit the electronic forms. Both monthly summary and daily data shall be submitted to the Department no later than the 20th day of the month following each month of the authorized discharge period(s). The permittee may be allowed to submit the electronic forms after this date if the Department has granted an extension to the submittal date.
3. Retained Self-Monitoring Requirements
If instructed on the effluent limits page (or otherwise authorized by the Department in accordance with the provisions of this permit) to conduct retained self-monitoring, the permittee shall maintain a year-to-date log of retained self-monitoring results and, upon request, provide such log for inspection to the staff of the Department. Retained self-monitoring results are public information and shall be promptly provided to the public upon request.
The permittee shall certify, in writing, to the Department, on or before January 10th (April 1st for animal feeding operation facilities) of each year, that: 1) all retained self-monitoring requirements have been complied with and a year-to-date log has been maintained; and 2) the application on which this permit is based still accurately describes the discharge. With this annual certification, the permittee shall submit a summary of the previous year's monitoring data. The summary shall include maximum values for samples to be reported as daily maximums and/or monthly maximums and minimum values for any daily minimum samples.
Retained self-monitoring may be denied to a permittee by notification in writing from the Department. In such cases, the permittee shall submit self-monitoring data in accordance with Part II.C.2., above. Such a denial may be rescinded by the Department upon written notification to the permittee. Reissuance or modification of this permit or reissuance or modification of an individual permittee's authorization to discharge shall not affect previous approval or denial for retained self-monitoring unless the Department provides notification in writing to the permittee.
4. Additional Monitoring by Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the Discharge Monitoring Report. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated.
Monitoring required pursuant to Part 41 of the NREPA or Rule 35 of the Mobile Home Park Commission Act (Act 96 of the Public Acts of 1987) for assurance of proper facility operation shall be submitted as required by the Department.
PERM IT NO. MI0038172
Page 32 of 39
5. Compliance Dates Notification
Within 14 days of every compliance date specified in this permit, the permittee shall submit a written notification to the Department indicating whether or not the particular requirement was accomplished. If the requirement was not accomplished, the notification shall include an explanation of the failure to accomplish the requirement, actions taken or planned by the permittee to correct the situation, and an estimate of when the requirement will be accomplished. If a written report is required to be submitted by a specified date and the permittee accomplishes this, a separate written notification is not required.
6. NoncomplianceNotification
Compliance with all applicable requirements set forth in the Federal Act, Parts 31 and 41 of the NREPA, and related regulations and rules is required. All instances of noncompliance shall be reported as follows:
a.
24-Hour Reporting
Any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment (including maximum and/or
minimum daily concentration discharge limitation exceedances) shall be reported, verbally, within 24
hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the noncompliance. A written submission shall
also be provided within five (5) days.
b.
Other Reporting
The permittee shall report, in writing, all other instances of noncompliance not described in a. above a|
the time monitoring reports are submitted: or, in the case of retained self-monitoring, within five (5) days
from the time the permittee becomes aware of the noncompliance.
Written reporting shall include: 1) a description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and 2) the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, or, if not yet corrected, the anticipated time the noncompliance is expected to continue, and the steps taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncomplying discharge.
7. Spill Notification
The permittee shall immediately report any release of any polluting material which occurs to the surface waters or groundwaters of the state, unless the permittee has determined that the release is not in excess of the threshold reporting quantities specified in the Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code), by calling the Department at the number indicated on the second page of this permit (or, if this is a general permit, on the COC); or, if the notice is provided after regular working hours, call the Department's 24-hour Pollution Emergency Alerting System telephone number, 1-800-292-4706 (calls from outof-state dial 1-517-373-7660).
Within ten (10) days of the release, the permittee shall submit to the Department a full written explanation as to the cause of the release, the discovery of the release, response (clean-up and/or recovery) measures taken, and preventative measures taken or a schedule for completion of measures to be taken to prevent reoccurrence of similar releases.
PERM IT NO. MIQ038172
Page 33 of 39
8. Upset Noncompliance Notification
If a process "upset" (defined as an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee) has occurred, the permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset, shall notify the Department by telephone within 24 hours of becoming aware of such conditions; and within five (51 days, provide in writing, the following information:
a.
that an upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the specific cause(s) of the upset;
b.
that the permitted wastewater treatment facility was, at the time, being properly operated and maintained
(note that 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); and
c.
that the permittee has specified and taken action on all responsible steps to minimize or correct any
adverse impact in the environment resulting from noncompliance with this permit.
No determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final administrative action subject to judicial review.
In any enforcement proceedings, the permittee, seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset, has the burden of proof.
9. Bypass Prohibition and Notification
a.
Bypass Prohibition
Bypass is prohibited, and the Department may take an enforcement action, unless:
1)
bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage;
2)
there were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment
facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime.
This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup equipment should have been installed in the exercise
of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass; and
3)
the permittee submitted notices as required under 9.b. or 9.c. below.
b.
Notice of Anticipated Bypass
If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice to the
Department, if possible at least ten (10) days before the date of the bypass, and provide information
about the anticipated bypass as required by the Department. The Department may approve an
anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if it will meet the three (3) conditions listed in
9.a. above.
c.
Notice of Unanticipated Bypass
The permittee shall submit notice to the Department of an unanticipated bypass by calling the
Department at the number indicated on the second page of this permit (if the notice is provided after
regular working hours, use the following number: 1-800-292-4706) as soon as possible, but no later
than 24 hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances.
PERM IT NO. M10038172
Page 34 of 39
d.
Written Report of Bypass
A written submission shall be provided within five (5) working days of commencing any bypass to the
Department, and at additional times as directed by the Department. The written submission shall
contain a description of the bypass and its cause; the period of bypass, including exact dates and times,
and if the bypass has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; steps taken or
planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the bypass; and other information as required
by the Department.
e.
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 ensure efficient operation. These bypasses are not
subject to the provisions of 9.a., 9,b., 9.c., and 9.d., above. This provision does not relieve the permittee
of any notification responsibilities under Part II.C.11. of this permit.
f.
Definitions
1)
Bypass means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment 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.
10. Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern (BCC)
Consistent with the requirements of R 323.1098 and R 323.1215 of the Michigan Administrative Code, the permittee is prohibited from undertaking any action that would result in a lowering of water quality from an increased loading of a BCC unless an increased use request and antidegradation demonstration have been submitted and approved by the Department.
11. Notification of Changes in Discharge
The permittee shall notify the Department, in writing, as soon as possible but no later than 10 days of knowing, or having reason to believe, that any activity or change has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge of: 1) detectable levels of chemicals on the current Michigan Critical Materials Register, priority pollutants or hazardous substances set forth in 40 CFR 122.21, Appendix D, or the Pollutants of Initial Focus in the Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative specified in 40 CFR 132.6, Table 6, which were not acknowledged in the application or listed in the application at less than detectable levels; 2) detectable levels of any other chemical not listed in the application or listed at less than detection, for which the application specifically requested information; or 3) any chemical at levels greater than five times the average level reported in the complete application (see the first page of this permit, for the date(s) the complete application was submitted). Any other monitoring results obtained as a requirement of this permit shall be reported in accordance with the compliance schedules.
PERMIT NO. M I0038172
Page 35 of 39
12. Changes in Facility Operations
Any anticipated action or activity, including but not limited to facility expansion, production increases, or process modification, which will result in new or increased loadings of pollutants to the receiving waters must be reported to the Department by a) submission of an increased use request (application) and all information required under R 323.1098 (Antidegradation) of the Water Quality Standards or b) by notice if the following conditions are met: 1) the action or activity will not result in a change in the types of wastewater discharged or result in a greater quantity of wastewater than currently authorized by this permit; 2) the action or activity will not result in violations of the effluent limitations specified in this permit; 3) the action or activity is not prohibited by the requirements of Part II.C.10.; and 4) the action or activity will not require notification pursuant to Part II.C.11. Following such notice, the permit or, if applicable, the facility's COC may be modified according to applicable laws and rules to specify and limit any pollutant not previously limited.
13. Transfer of Ownership or Control
In the event of any change in control or ownership of facilities from which the authorized discharge emanates, the permittee shall submit to the Department 30 days prior to the actual transfer of ownership or control a written agreement between the current permittee and the new permittee containing: 1) the legal name and address of the new owner; 2) a specific date for the effective transfer of permit responsibility, coverage and liability; and 3) a certification of the continuity of or any changes in operations, wastewater discharge, or wastewater treatment.
If the new permittee is proposing changes in operations, wastewater discharge, or wastewater treatment, the Department may propose modification of this permit in accordance with applicable laws and rules.
14. Operations and Maintenance Manual
For wastewater treatment facilities that serve the public (and are thus subject to Part 41 of the NREPA), Section 4104 of Part 41 and associated Rule 2957 of the Michigan Administrative Code allow the Department to require an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manual from the facility. An up-to-date copy of the O&M Manual shall be kept at the facility and shall be provided to the Department upon request. The Department may review the O&M Manual in whole or in part at its discretion and require modifications to it if portions are determined to be inadequate.
At a minimum, the O&M Manual shall include the following information: permit standards; descriptions and operation information for all equipment; staffing information; laboratory requirements; record keeping requirements; a maintenance plan for equipment; an emergency operating plan; safety program information; and copies of all pertinent forms, as-built plans, and manufacturer's manuals.
Certification of the existence and accuracy of the O&M Manual shall be submitted to the Department at least sixty days prior to start-up of a new wastewater treatment facility. Recertification shall be submitted sixty days prior to start-up of any substantial improvements or modifications made to an existing wastewater treatment facility.
PERM IT NO. MIQ038172
Page 36 of 39
15. Signatory Requirements
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Department in accordance with the conditions of this permit and that require a signature shall be signed and certified as described in the Federal Act and the NREPA.
The Federal 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 6 months per violation, or by both.
The NREPA (Section 3115(2)) provides that a person who at the time of the violation knew or should have known that he or she discharged a substance contrary to this part, or contrary to a permit, COC, or order issued or rule promulgated under this part, or who intentionally makes a false statement, representation, or certification in an application for or form pertaining to a permit or COC or in a notice or report required by the terms and conditions of an issued permit or COC, or who intentionally renders inaccurate a monitoring device or record required to be maintained by the Department, is guilty of a felony and shall be fined not less than $2,500.00 or more than $25,000.00 for each violation. The court may impose an additional fine of not more than $25,000.00 for each day during which the unlawful discharge occurred. If the conviction is for a violation committed after a first conviction of the person under this subsection, the court shall impose a fine of not less than $25,000.00 per day and not more than $50,000.00 per day of violation. Upon conviction, in addition to a fine, the court in its discretion may sentence the defendant to imprisonment for not more than 2 years or impose probation upon a person for a violation of this part. With the exception of the issuance of criminal complaints, issuance of warrants, and the holding of an arraignment, the circuit court for the county in which the violation occurred has exclusive jurisdiction. However, the person shall not be subject to the penalties of this subsection if the discharge of the effluent is in conformance with and obedient to a rule, order, permit, or COC of the Department. In addition to a fine, the attorney general may file a civil suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to recover the full value of the injuries done to the natural resources of the state and the costs of surveillance and enforcement by the state resulting from the violation.
16. Electronic Reporting
Upon notice by the Department that electronic reporting tools are available for specific reports or notifications, the permittee shall submit electronically all such reports or notifications as required by this permit.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PART II Section D. Management Responsibilities
Page 37 of 39
1. Duty to Comply
All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit, more frequently than, or at a level in excess of, that authorized, shall constitute a violation of the permit.
It is the duty of the permittee to comply with all the terms and conditions of this permit. Any noncompliance with the Effluent Limitations, Special Conditions, or terms of this permit constitutes a violation of the NREPA and/or the Federal Act and constitutes grounds for enforcement action; for permit or Certificate of Coverage (COC) termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of an application for permit or COC renewal.
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 conditions of this permit.
2. Operator Certification
The permittee shall have the waste treatment facilities under direct supervision of an operator certified at the appropriate level for the facility certification by the Department, as required by Sections 3110 and 4104 of the NREPA. Permittees authorized to discharge storm water shall have the storm water treatment and/or control measures under direct supervision of a storm water operator certified by the Department, as required by Section 3110 of the NREPA.
3. Facilities Operation
The permittee shall, at all times, properly operate and maintain all treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures.
4. Power Failures
In order to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations of this permit and prevent unauthorized discharges, the permittee shall either:
a.
provide an alternative power source sufficient to operate facilities utilized by the permittee to maintain
compliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this permit; or
b.
upon the reduction, loss, or failure of one or more of the primary sources of power to facilities utilized by
the permittee to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this permit, the
permittee shall halt, reduce or otherwise control production and/or all discharge in order to maintain
compliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this permit.
5. Adverse Impact
The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any adverse impact to the surface waters or groundwaters of the state resulting from noncompliance with any effluent limitation specified in this permit including, but not limited to, such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the nature and impact of the discharge in noncompliance.
PERM IT NO. MI0038172
Page 38 of 39
6. Containment Facilities
The permittee shall provide facilities for containment of any accidental losses of polluting materials in accordance with the requirements of the Part 5 Rules (R 324.2001 through R 324.2009 of the Michigan Administrative Code). For a Publicly Owned Treatment Work (POTW), these facilities shall be approved under Part 41 of the NREPA.
7. Waste Treatment Residues
Residuals (i.e. solids, sludges, biosolids, filter backwash, scrubber water, ash, grit, or other pollutants or wastes) removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters, including those that are generated during treatment or left over after treatment or control has ceased, shall be disposed of in an environmentally compatible manner and according to applicable laws and rules. These laws may include, but are not limited to, the NREPA, Part 31 for protection of water resources, Part 55 for air pollution control, Part 111 for hazardous waste management, Part 115 for solid waste management, Part 121 for liquid industrial wastes, Part 301 for protection of inland lakes and streams, and Part 303 for wetlands protection. Such disposal shall not result in any unlawful pollution of the air, surface waters or groundwaters of the state.
8. Right of Entry
The permittee shall allow the Department, any agent appointed by the Department, or the Regional Administrator, upon the presentation of credentials and, for animal feeding operation facilities, following appropriate biosecurity protocols:
a.
to enter upon the permittee's premises where an effluent source is located or any place in which records
are required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; and
b.
at reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under the terms and
conditions of this permit; to inspect process facilities, treatment works, monitoring methods and
equipment regulated or required under this permit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.
9. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 308 of the Federal Act and Rule 2128 (R 323.2128 of the Michigan Administrative Code), all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit, shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Department and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Federal Act, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Federal Act and Sections 3112, 3115, 4106 and 4110 of the NREPA.
10. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Department, within a reasonable time, any information which the Department may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit or the facility's COC, or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Department, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit.
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the Department, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
PERM IT NO. M I0038172
PART II Section E. Activities Not Authorized by This Permit
Page 39 of 39
1. Discharge to the Groundwaters
This permit does not authorize any discharge to the groundwaters. Such discharge may be authorized by a groundwater discharge permit issued pursuant to the NREPA.
2. POTW Construction
This permit does not authorize or approve the construction or modification of any physical structures or facilities at a POTW. Approval for the construction or modification of any physical structures or facilities at a POTW shall be by permit issued under Part 41 of the NREPA.
3. Civil and Criminal Liability
Except as provided in permit conditions on "Bypass" (Part II.C.9. pursuant to 40 CFR 122.41(m)), nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance, whether or not such noncompliance is due to factors beyond the permittee's control, such as accidents, equipment breakdowns, or labor disputes.
4. 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 may be subject under Section 311 of the Federal Act except as are exempted by federal regulations.
5. 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 Federal Act.
6. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize violation of any federal, state or local laws or regulations, nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining such permits, including any other Department of Environmental Quality permits, or approvals from other units of government as may be required by law.
Ld
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment.
100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204
(800)451-6027 (317)232-8603 www.idem.IN.gov
Michael R. Pence Governor
Carol S. Corner ( 'ommissioner
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Mr. Mark D. Peacock, Senior EHS Professional Duke Energy Indiana, LLC 15424 East State Road 358 Edwardsport, IN 47528
March 30, 2016
Dear Mr. Peacock:
Re: Final NPDES Permit No. IN0002780 Edwardsport IGCC Generating Station Edwardsport, Knox County, Indiana
Your application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for authorization to discharge into the waters of the State of Indiana has been processed in accordance with Section 402 and 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.), and IC 13-15, IDEM's permitting authority. All discharges from this facility shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
One condition of your permit requires periodic reporting of several effluent parameters. Reporting is to be done using the state Monthly Monitoring Report form. This form can be found on the internet at the following web site:
http://in.Qov/idem/cleanwater/2339.htm
Once you are on this page, select the "IDEM Forms" page and locate the "Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR) for Industrial Discharge Permits-30530" under the Wastewater Facilities heading. We recommend selecting the "XLS" version because it will complete all of the calculations when you enter the data.
Additionally, if you are not already using NetDMR, you will soon be receiving an e-mail with a supply of the federal NPDES DMR forms attached. Both the state and federal forms need to be completed and submitted on a routine basis. If you do not receive the DMR forms in a timely manner, please call this office at 317-232-8670. Please note that IDEM will no longer accept paper DMR or MMR forms after December 31, 2016. After that date all NPDES and IWP permit holders are required to submit their monitoring data to IDEM using NetDMR.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
0
AState that Works
0 Recycled Paper
Another condition, which needs to be clearly understood, concerns violation of the effluent limitations in the permit. Exceeding the limitations constitutes a violation of the permit and may subject the permittee to criminal or civil penalties. (See Part II A.2.) It is therefore urged that your office and treatment operator understand this part of the permit.
A response to the comments contained in the letter dated December 22, 2015, from Patrick Coyle of Duke Energy, pertaining to the draft NPDES permit is contained in the Post Public Notice Addendum. The Post Public Notice Addendum is located at the end of the Fact Sheet.
It should also be noted that any appeal must be filed under procedures outlined in IC 13-15-6, IC 4-21.5, and the enclosed Public Notice. The appeal must be initiated by filing a petition for administrative review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within eighteen (18) days of the mailing of this letter by filing at the following address:
Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North 100 North Senate Avenue, Room 501 Indianapolis, IN 46204
Please send a copy of any written appeal to me at the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2251.
If you have any questions concerning the permit, please contact Richard Hamblin at 317/232-8696. Questions concerning appeal procedures should be directed to the Office of Environmental Adjudication, at 317/232-8591.
Sincerely,
Paul Higginbotham, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Office of Water Quality
Enclosures cc: Knox County Health Department
Page 1 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
STATE OF INDIANA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the "Act"), and IDEM's authority under IC 13-15,
DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, LLC - EDWARDSPORT IGCC STATION
is authorized to discharge from the IGCC station that is located at 15424 East State Road 358, Edwardsport, Indiana, to receiving waters identified as the West Fork of the White River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III hereof. This permit may be revoked for the nonpayment of applicable fees in accordance with IC 13-18-20.
Effective Date:
April 1,2016__________ .
Expiration Date:
March 31, 2021_________.
In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information and forms as are required by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management no later than 180 days prior to the date of expiration.
Signed March 30, 2016, for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Paul Higginbotham, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Office of Water Quality
Page 2 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
PARTI
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
1. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 002. The discharge is limited to coal pile runoff, coal pile runoff pond effluent, site storm water, treated sanitary wastewater, oil/water separator water, cooling tower blowdown, gasification and power block quenches and drains, softener regenerant, `grey-water' treatment flow, and other wastewater treatment flows. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the West Fork of the White River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1][2][11]
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Average
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
O+G
-------
TSS
-------
Temperature[8] Report
[9]
TRC[4][5]
-----
Copper[3]
------
lron[3]
-------
Cadmium[3] -------
Selenium[3][5] ------
Zinc[3]
-------
Mercury[7] ------
Total Chromium [3]--
Ammonia, as N -------
Free Cyanide[5][6]--
Whole Effluent Toxicity Tests[10]
Units MGD
op
--
--
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaqe
Maximum
--
15
20
30
100
0.02 0.042 1.0 0.011 0.13 0.25
12 0.2
12 0.022
0.04 0.084 1.0 0.022 0.26 0.51
20 0.2
24 0.044
Units
mg/l mg/l
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l ng/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 x Daily
24 Hour Total
1 x Weekly Grab
1 x Weekly Grab
2 x Monthly Grab
1 x Weekly Grab
1 x Weekly 24-Hr. Comp.
1 x Weekly 24-Hr. Comp.
2 x Monthly 24-Hr. Comp.
2 x Monthly 24-Hr. Comp.
1 x Weekly 24-Hr. Comp.
1 x Bimonthly Grab
1 x Weekly 24-Hr. Comp.
2 x Monthly 24-Hr. Comp.
1 x Weekly Grab
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample Frequency Type 1 x Weekly Grab
[1] See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
[2] In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates contributing to this Outfall, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this
Page 3 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
The water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL) for TRC is less than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) as specified below. Compliance with this permit will be demonstrated if the effluent concentrations measured are less than the LOQ.
If the measured concentration of TRC is greater than the water quality based effluent limitations and above the respective LOD specified in the table below in any three (3) consecutive analyses, or any five (5) out of nine (9) analyses, then the discharger shall:
(1) Determine the source of the parameter through an evaluation of sampling techniques, analytical/laboratory procedures, and waste streams (including internal waste streams); and re-examine the chlorination /dechlorination procedures.
(2) The sampling and analysis for TRC shall be increased to 4 X weekly and remain at this increased sampling frequency until:
(a) The increased sampling frequency for TRC has been in place for at least three (3) consecutive analyses, or any five (5) out of nine (9) analyses.
(b) At least nine (9) samples have been taken under this increased sampling frequency; and
(c) The measured concentration of TRC is less than the LOD specified in the table above in at least seven (7) out of the nine (9) most recent analyses.
The following EPA test methods and/or Standard Methods and associated LODs and LOQs are to be used in the analysis of the effluent samples. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM.
Parameter Mercury Selenium Selenium Selenium
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B or 3114B 200.8 200.9
LOD 0.2 ng/l 2 ug/l 2.1 ug/l 0.6 ug/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l 6.4 ug/l 6.7 ug/l 1.9 ug/l
Page 4 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Chlorine Cyanide, Free Cyanide, Free
45oo-c i-d ,e or 45oo-c i-g
4500-CN-G 1677
0.02 mg/l 5 ug/l 0.5 ug/l
0.06mg/l 16 ug/l 1.6 ug/l
Case-Specific LOD/LOQ The permittee may determine a case-specific LOD or LOQ using the analytical method specified above, or any other test method which is approved by the Commissioner prior to use. The LOD shall be derived by the procedure specified for method detection limits contained in 40 CFR Part 136, Appendix B, and the LOQ shall be set equal to 3.18 times the LOD. Other methods may be used if first approved by the Commissioner.
[6] Sample preservation procedures and maximum allowable holding times for total cyanide, or available (free) cyanide are prescribed in Table II of 40 CFR Part 136. Note the footnotes specific to cyanide. Preservation and holding time information in Table II takes precedence over information in specific methods or elsewhere.
[7] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit using EPATest Method 1631, Revision E.
[8] The following conditions apply for Temperature outside the mixing zone:
(1) There shall be no abnormal temperature changes that may adversely affect aquatic life unless caused by natural conditions.
(2) The normal daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations that existed before the addition of heat due to other than natural causes shall be maintained.
(3) The maximum temperature rise at any time or place above natural temperatures shall not exceed five (5) degrees Fahrenheit (two and eighttenths (2.8) degrees Celsius) in streams.
[9] The discharge from Outfall 002, as determined at the edge of the mixing zone described in 327 IAC 2-1-4, shall not exceed the maximum limits in the following table by more than three degrees Fahrenheit (3F) (one and seven-tenths degrees Celsius (1.7C)).
Table 1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec F 50 50 60 70 80 90 90 90 90 78 70 57 C 10 10 15.6 21.1 26.7 32.2 32.2 32.2 32.2 25.5 21.1 14
The permittee will have the option of either meeting the above limits at the end of pipe, or by meeting the limits with a mixed river temperature that takes into account
Page 5 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
the mixing zone allowed by 327 IAC 2-1-6(b). The mixed river temperature is to be determined by employing the following mathematical model:
where:
Q e ( T e - T u) T mr= T u + --------------
127+ Qe
T mr = mixed river temperature (F) T u = upstream river temperature (F) T e = effluent temperature (F) Qe = effluent flow (MGD) 127 = one-half of the Q7i10 low flow value of the receiving stream in MGD
[10] The permittee shall continue the biomonitoring program for Outfall 002 using the procedures contained in Part I.F. of this permit.
[11] The discharge of cooling tower blowdown is regulated by 40 CFR 423.15. 40 CFR 423.15(j)(1) prohibits the discharge, in detectable amounts, of the 126 priority pollutants listed in Appendix A of such regulation contained in chemicals added for cooling tower maintenance with the exception of total zinc and total chromium which have specific numeric limits. In accordance with 423.15(j)(3), instead of monitoring specified in 40 CFR 122.48(b), compliance with the limitations for the 126 priority pollutants may be determined by engineering calculations which demonstrate that the regulated pollutants are not detectable in the final discharge by the analytical methods in 40 CFR 136. However, compliance with the above limitations for the 126 priority pollutants (with the exception of zinc and chromium) must be reported each time there is a change in the chemicals added for cooling tower operation and/or maintenance.
Parameter Flow TSS CBODg
Page 6 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
2. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the internal outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 201. The discharge is limited to treated sanitary effluent. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to co-mingling with other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Units MGD
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
30
60
25
50
Units
mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv 1 x Weekly
Ivee
24 Hour Tot;
1 x Weekly Grab
1 x Weekly Grab
3. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the internal outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 401. The discharge is limited to emergency overflow from the Southeast Pond. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to co-mingling with other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing[1]
Units MGD
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-------
--------
Units ----
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
Daily
Est. Total
[1] The permittee shall continue the biomonitoring program for Internal Outfall 401 using the procedures contained in Part I.G. of this permit.
Page 7 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
4. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the internal outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 501. The discharge is limited to gasification process wastewater. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to co-mingling with other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored[1] by the permittee as specified below:
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
Arsenic[2]
Interim
--
Final[1]
--
Selenium[2]
Interim
Finalft]
Mercury[2]
Interim
--
Final[1]
Total Dissolved Solids
Interim
------
Final[1]
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Units MGD
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
--
0.004
--
Report
Report
0.227
0.453
Report 1.3
Report 1.8
Report 22
Report 38
Units
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
ly g e
2 X Weekly 24 Hour Total
mg/l 2 X Monthly mg/l 2 X Weekly
Grab Grab
mg/l 2 X Monthly mg/l 2 X Weekly
Grab Grab
ng/l 2 X Monthly ng/l 2 X Weekly
Grab Grab
mg/l 2 X Monthly mg/l 2 X Weekly
Grab Grab
[1] The effective date of the final monitoring conditions and effluent limitations for this outfall become effective on April 1, 2021. The permittee shall report from the effective date of the permit until the limits become final on an interim basis as indicated above.
[2] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
Page 8 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
5. The permittee is authorized to discharge storm water from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfalls 003, 004, and 005. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into West Fork of the White River and/or unnamed tributary (for Outfall 004). Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1] [2]
Parameter Flow Total Suspended Solids pH Oil & Grease COD CBODs Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Nitrate plus Nitrite Nitrogen Total Phosphorus
Daily Maximum Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Units MGD mg/l s.u. mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample Freauencv Type 1 x Quarterly Estimate Total 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab 1 x Quarterly Grab
[1] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[2] All samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches and at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event.
For each sample taken, the permittee shall record the duration and total rainfall of the storm event, the number of hours between beginning of the storm measured and the end of the previous measurable rain event, and the outside temperature at the time of sampling.
A grab sample shall be taken during the first thirty (30) minutes of the discharge (or as soon thereafter as practicable).
Page 9 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
B. NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
At all times the discharge from any and all point sources specified within this permit shall not cause receiving waters:
t . including the mixing zone, to contain substances, materials, floating debris, oil, scum, or other pollutants:
a. which will settle to form putrescent, or otherwise objectionable deposits;
b. which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
c. which produce color, visible oil sheen, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance;
d. which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans;
e. which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants or algae to such a degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated uses.
2 . outside the mixing zone, to contain substances in concentrations which on the basis of available scientific data are believed to be sufficient to injure, be chronically toxic to, or be carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic to humans, animals, aquatic life, or plants.
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING
1. Representative Sampling
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge flow and shall be taken at times which reflect the full range and concentration of effluent parameters normally expected to be present. Samples shall not be taken at times to avoid showing elevated levels of any parameters.
2. Monthly Reporting
The permittee shall submit monitoring reports to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) containing results obtained during the previous month and shall be postmarked no later than the 28th day of the month following each completed monitoring period. The first report shall be
Page 10 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
submitted by the 28th day of the month following the month in which the permit becomes effective. These reports shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and the Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). Until December 31, 2016, all reports shall be either mailed to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, Compliance Data Section, 100 North Senate Ave., Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2251 or submitted electronically by using the NetDMR application, upon registration and approval receipt. Electronically submitted reports (using NetDMR) have the same deadline as mailed reports. After December 31, 2016, all reports shall be submitted using NetDMR and paper reports will no longer be accepted. The Regional Administrator may request the permittee to submit monitoring reports to the Environmental Protection Agency if it is deemed necessary to assure compliance with the permit.
a. Calculations that require averaging of measurements of daily values (both concentrations and mass) shall use an arithmetic mean, except the monthly average for E. co li shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
b. Daily effluent values (both mass and concentration) that are less than the LOQ that are used to determine the monthly average effluent level shall be accommodated in calculation of the average using statistical methods that have been approved by the Commissioner.
c. Effluent concentrations less than the LOD shall be reported on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms as < (less than) the value of the LOD. For example, if a substance is not detected at a concentration of 0.1 pg/l, report the value as <0.1 pg/l.
d. Effluent concentrations greater than or equal to the LOD and less than the LOQ that are reported on a DMR shall be reported as the actual value and annotated on the DMR to indicate that the value is not quantifiable.
e. Mass discharge values which are calculated from concentrations reported as less than the value of the limit of detection shall be reported as less than the corresponding mass discharge value.
f.
Mass discharge values that are calculated from effluent
concentrations reported as greater than or equal to the LOQ shall be
reported as the calculated value. Mass discharge values that are
calculated from effluent concentrations reported as greater than or
equal to the LOD, but less than the LOQ, shall be reported as the
calculated value and annotated on the DMR to indicate that the value
is not quantifiable.
Page 11 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Definitions
a. "Monthly Average" means the total mass or flow-weighted concentration of all daily discharges during a calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled or measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such calendar month.
The monthly average discharge limitation is the highest allowable average monthly discharge for any calendar month.
b. "Daily Discharge" means the total mass of a pollutant discharged during the calendar day or, in the case of a pollutant limited in terms other than mass pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-11(e), the average concentration or other measurement of the pollutant specified over the calendar day or any twenty-four hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day for the purposes of sampling.
c. "Daily Maximum" means the maximum allowable daily discharge for any calendar day.
d. A "24-hour composite sample" means a sample consisting of at least 3 individual flow-proportioned samples of wastewater, taken by the grab sample method or by an automatic sampler, which are taken at approximately equally spaced time intervals for the duration of the discharge within a 24-hour period and which are combined prior to analysis. A flow-proportioned composite sample may be obtained by:
( 1 ) recording the discharge flow rate at the time each individual sample is taken,
(2 ) adding together the discharge flow rates recorded from each individuals sampling time to formulate the "total flow" value,
(3) the discharge flow rate of each individual sampling time is divided by the total flow value to determine its percentage of the total flow value,
(4) then multiply the volume of the total composite sample by each individual sample's percentage to determine the volume of that individual sample which will be included in the total composite sample.
e. "Concentration" means the weight of any given material present in a unit volume of liquid. Unless otherwise indicated in this permit, concentration values shall be expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/l).
Page 12 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
f.
The "Regional Administrator" is defined as the Region 5 Administrator,
U.S. EPA, located at 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604.
g. The "Commissioner" is defined as the Commissioner of the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management, which is located at the
following address: 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana
46204.
h. "Limit of Detection" or "LOD" means the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero (0 ) for a particular analytical method and sample matrix.
i.
"Limit of Quantitation" or "LOQ" means a measurement of the
concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a specified
laboratory procedure calibrated at a specified concentration above the
method detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at
which a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a
specified laboratory procedure for monitoring of the contaminant. This
term is also sometimes called limit of quantification or quantification
level.
j.
"Method Detection Level" or "MDL" means the minimum concentration
of an analyte (substance) that can be measured and reported with a
ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is
greater than zero (0) as determined by procedure set forth in 40 CFR
136, Appendix B. The method detection level or MDL is equivalent to
the LOD.
k. "Grab Sample" means a sample which is taken from a wastestream on a one-time basis without consideration of the flow rate of the wastestream and without considerations of time.
Test Procedures
The analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the current version of 40 CFR 136. Multiple editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater are currently approved for most methods, however, 40 CFR Part 136 should be checked to ascertain if a particular method is approved for a particular analyte. The approved methods may be included in the texts listed below. However, different but equivalent methods are allowable if they receive the prior written approval of the Commissioner and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Page 13 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
a. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 18th, 19th, or 20th Editions, 1992, 1995, or 1998, American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. 20005.
b. A.S.T.M. Standards. Parts 23, Water; Atmosphere Analysis 1972 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
c. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes June 1974, Revised, March 1983, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, 1014 Broadway, Cincinnati, OH 45202.
5. Recording of Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall maintain records of all monitoring information and monitoring activities, including:
a. The date, exact place and time of sampling or measurement;
b. The person(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed;
d. The person(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such measurements and analyses.
6 . Additional Monitoring by Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. Other monitoring data not specifically required in this permit (such as internal process or internal waste stream data) which is collected by or for the permittee need not be submitted unless requested by the Commissioner.
Page 14 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
7. Records Retention
All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit, including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recording from continuous monitoring instrumentation, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years. In cases where the original records are kept at another location, a copy of all such records shall be kept at the permitted facility. The three years shall be extended:
a. automatically during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the permittee or regarding promulgated effluent guidelines applicable to the permittee; or
b. as requested by the Regional Administrator or the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
STORM WATER MONITORING AND NON-NUMERIC EFFLUENT LIMITS
Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall implement the non-numeric permit conditions in this Section of the permit for the entire site as it relates to storm water associated with industrial activity regardless which outfall the storm water is discharged from.
1. Control Measures and Effluent Limits
In the technology-based limits included in Part D.2-4., the term "minimize" means reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable using control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practice.
2. Control Measures
Select, design, install, and implement control measures (including best management practices) to address the selection and design considerations in Part D.3 to meet the non-numeric effluent limits in Part D.4. The selection, design, installation, and implementation of these control measures must be in accordance with good engineering practices and manufacturer's specifications. Any deviation from the manufacturer's specifications shall be documented. If the control measures are not achieving their intended effect in minimizing pollutant discharges, the control measures must be modified as expeditiously as practicable. Regulated storm water discharges from the facility include storm water run-on that commingles with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity at the facility.
Page 15 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
3. Control Measure Selection and Design Considerations
When selecting and designing control measures consider the following:
a. preventing storm water from coming into contact with polluting materials is generally more effective, and cost-effective, than trying to remove pollutants from storm water;
b. use of control measures in combination is more effective than use of control measures in isolation for minimizing pollutants in storm water discharge;
c. assessing the type and quantity of pollutants, including their potential to impact receiving water quality, is critical to designing effective control measures that will achieve the limits in this permit;
d. minimizing impervious areas at your facility and infiltrating runoff onsite (including bioretention cells, green roofs, and pervious pavement, among other approaches), can reduce runoff and improve groundwater recharge and stream base flows in local streams, although care must be taken to avoid ground water contamination;
e. flow can be attenuated by use of open vegetated swales and natural depressions;
f.
conservation and/or restoration of riparian buffers will help protect
streams from storm water runoff and improve water quality; and
g. use of treatment interceptors (e.g. swirl separators and sand filters) may be appropriate in some instances to minimize the discharge of pollutants.
4. Technology-Based Effluent Limits (BPT/BAT/BCT): Non-Numeric Effluent Limits
a. Minimize Exposure
Minimize the exposure of raw, final, or waste materials to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. To the extent technologically available and economically practicable and achievable, either locate industrial materials and activities inside or protect them with storm resistant coverings in order to minimize exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff (although significant enlargement of impervious surface area is not recommended). In minimizing exposure, pay particular attention to the following areas:
Loading and unloading areas: locate in roofed or covered areas where
Page 16 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
feasible; use grading, berming, or curbing around the loading area to divert run-on; locate the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems.
Material storage areas: locate indoors, or in roofed or covered areas where feasible; install berms/dikes around these areas; use dry cleanup methods.
Note: Industrial materials do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from affected areas will not be discharged to receiving waters.
b. Good Housekeeping
Keep clean all exposed areas that are potential sources of pollutants, using such measures as sweeping at regular intervals, keeping materials orderly and labeled, and stowing materials in appropriate containers.
As part of the developed good housekeeping program, include a cleaning and maintenance program for all impervious areas of the facility where particulate matter, dust, or debris may accumulate, especially areas where material loading and unloading, storage, handling, and processing occur; and where practicable, the paving of areas where vehicle traffic or material storage occur but where vegetative or other stabilization methods are not practicable (institute a sweeping program in these areas too). For unstabilized areas where sweeping is not practicable, consider using storm water management devices such as sediment traps, vegetative buffer strips filter fabric fence, sediment filtering boom, gravel outlet protection, or other equivalent measures that effectively trap or remove sediment.
c. Maintenance
Maintain all control measures which are used to achieve the effluent limits required by this permit in effective operating condition. Nonstructural control measures must also be diligently maintained (e.g., spill response supplies available, personnel appropriately trained). If control measures need to be replaced or repaired, make the necessary repairs or modifications as expeditiously as practicable
d. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
You must minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective
Page 17 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
response to such spills if or when they occur. At a minimum, you must implement:
(1) Procedures for plainly labeling containers (e.g., "Used Oil", "Spent Solvents", "Fertilizers and Pesticides", etc.) that could be susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper handling and facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur;
(2) Preventive measures such as barriers between material storage and traffic areas, secondary containment provisions, and procedures for material storage and handling;
(3) Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning up leaks, spills, and other releases. Employees who may cause, detect or respond to a spill or leak must be trained in these procedures and have necessary spill response equipment available. If possible, one of these individuals should be a member of your storm water pollution prevention team;
(4) Procedures for notification of appropriate facility personnel, emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. State or local requirements may necessitate reporting spills or discharges to local emergency response, public health, or drinking water supply agencies. Contact information must be in locations that are readily accessible and available;
(5) Procedures for documenting where potential spills and leaks could occur that could contribute pollutants to storm water discharges, and the corresponding outfalls that would be affected by such spills and leaks; and
(6 ) A procedure for documenting all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a storm water conveyance.
Erosion and Sediment Controls
Through the use of structural and/or non-structural control measures stabilize, and contain runoff from, exposed areas to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants. Among other actions to meet this limit, place flow velocity dissipation devices at discharge locations and within outfall channels where necessary to reduce erosion and/or settle out pollutants. In selecting, designing, installing, and implementing appropriate control measures, you are encouraged to check out information from both the State and
Page 18 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
EPA websites. The following two websites are given as information sources:
http://www.in.qov/idem/stormwater/2363.htm and http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/
Management of Runoff
Divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the discharge.
Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt
Enclose or cover storage piles of salt, or piles containing salt, used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces. You must implement appropriate measures (e.g., good housekeeping, diversions, containment) to minimize exposure resulting from adding to or removing materials from the pile. Piles do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from the piles is not discharged.
Waste, Garbage, and Floatable Debris
Ensure that waste, garbage, and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged.
Employee Training
Train all employees who work in areas where industrial material or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of your Pollution Prevention Team. Training must cover the specific control measures used to achieve the effluent limits in this part, and monitoring, inspection, planning, reporting, and documentation requirements in other parts of this permit.
Non-Storm water Discharges
You must determine if any non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit exist. Any non-storm water discharges discovered must either be eliminated or modified into this permit.
Page 19 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
The following non-storm water discharges are authorized and should be documented when they occur in accordance with Part I.E.2.C. of the permit:
Discharges from fire-fighting activities; Fire Hydrant flushings; Potable water, including water line flushings; Uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside storage of refrigerated gases or liquids; Irrigation drainage; Landscape watering provided all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer have been applied in accordance with the approved labeling; Pavement wash water where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous material have occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed); Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents; Uncontaminated ground water or spring water; Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; Incidental windblown mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of the facility, but not intentional discharges from cooling towers (e.g., "piped cooling tower blowdown or drains); Vehicle wash- waters where uncontaminated water without detergents or solvents is utilized; and Runoff from the use of dust suppressants approved for use by IDEM.
k. Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial Materials
You must minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials.
I.
Fugitive Dust Emission.
Minimize fugitive dust emissions from coal handling areas. To minimize the tracking of coal dust offsite, consider procedures such as installing specially designed tires or washing vehicles in a designated area before they leave the site and controlling the wash water.
Page 20 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
m. Delivery Vehicles
Minimize contamination of storm water runoff from delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site. Consider procedures to inspect delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site and ensure overall integrity of the body or container and procedures to deal with leakage or spillage from vehicles or containers.
n. Fuel Oil Unloading Areas
Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from fuel oil unloading areas. Consider using containment curbs in unloading areas, having personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures present during deliveries to ensure that any leaks or spills are immediately contained and cleaned up, and using spill and overflow protection devices (e.g., drip pans, drip diapers, or other containment devices placed beneath fuel oil connectors to contain potential spillage during deliveries or from leaks at the connectors).
o. Chemical Loading and Unloading
Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from chemical loading and unloading areas. Consider using containment curbs at chemical loading and unloading areas to contain spills, having personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures present during deliveries to ensure that any leaks or spills are immediately contained and cleaned up, and loading and unloading in covered areas and storing chemicals indoors.
p. Miscellaneous Loading and Unloading Areas
Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from loading and unloading areas. Consider covering the loading area; grading, berming, or curbing around the loading area to divert run-on; locating the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems; or equivalent procedures.
q. Liquid Storage Tanks
Minimize contamination of surface runoff from above-ground liquid storage tanks. Consider protective guards around tanks, containment curbs, spill and overflow protection, dry cleanup methods, or equivalent measures.
Page 21 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
r. Large Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks
Minimize contamination of surface runoff from large bulk fuel storage tanks. Consider containment berms (or their equivalent). You must also comply with applicable State and Federal laws, including Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements.
s. Spill Reduction Measures
Minimize the potential for an oil or chemical spill, or reference the appropriate part of your SPCC plan. Visually inspect as part of your routine facility inspection the structural integrity of all above-ground tanks, pipelines, pumps, and related equipment that may be exposed to storm water, and make any necessary repairs immediately.
t.
Oil-Bearing Eguipment in Switchyards
Minimize contamination of surface runoff from oil-bearing equipment in switchyard areas. Consider using level grades and gravel surfaces to retard flows and limit the spread of spills, or collecting runoff in perimeter ditches.
u. Residue-Hauling Vehicles
Inspect all residue-hauling vehicles for proper covering over the load, adequate gate sealing, and overall integrity of the container body. Repair vehicles without load covering or adequate gate sealing, or with leaking containers or beds.
v. Ash Loading Areas
Reduce or control the tracking of ash and residue from ash loading areas. Clear the ash building floor and immediately adjacent roadways of spillage, debris, and excess water before departure of each loaded vehicle.
w. Areas Adjacent to Disposal Ponds or Landfills
Minimize contamination of surface runoff from areas adjacent to disposal ponds or landfills. Reduce ash residue that may be tracked on to access roads traveled by residue handling vehicles, and reduce ash residue on exit roads leading into and out of residue handling areas.
Page 22 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
x. Landfills. Scrap yards. Surface Impoundments. Open Dumps. General Refuse Sites
Minimize the potential for contamination of runoff from these areas.
5. Annual Review
At least once every 12 months, the permittee must review the selection, design, installation, and implementation of its control measures to determine if modifications are necessary to meet the effluent limitations in this permit. The permittee must document the results of its review in a report that shall be retained within the SWPPP. The permittee must also submit the report to the Industrial NPDES Permit Section on an annual basis.
6 . Corrective Actions - Conditions Requiring Review
a. If any of the following conditions occur, the permittee must review and revise the selection, design, installation, and implementation of its control measures to ensure that the condition is eliminated and will not be repeated:
(1 ) an unauthorized release or discharge (e.g., spill, leak, or discharge of non-storm water not authorized by this NPDES permit) occurs at this facility;
(2 ) it is determined that your control measures are not stringent enough for the discharge to meet applicable water quality standards;
(3) it is determined in the routine facility inspection, an inspection by EPA or IDEM, comprehensive site evaluation, or the Annual Review required in Part D.5 that modifications to the control measures are necessary to meet the effluent limits in this permit or that the control measures are not being properly operated and maintained; or
(4) Upon written notice by the Commissioner that the control measures prove to be ineffective in controlling pollutants in storm water discharges exposed to industrial activity.
b. If any of the following conditions occur, the permittee must review and revise the selection, design, installation, and implementation of its control measures to determine if modifications are necessary to meet the effluent limits in this permit:
Page 23 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(1 ) construction or a change in design, operation, or maintenance at your facility that significantly changes the nature of pollutants discharged in storm water from your facility, or significantly increases the quantity of pollutants discharge.
7. Corrective Action Deadlines
You must document your discovery of any of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6 within thirty (30) days of making such discovery. Subsequently, within one-hundred and twenty (1 2 0 ) days of such discovery, you must document any corrective action(s) to be taken to eliminate or further investigate the deficiency or if no corrective action is needed, the basis for that determination. Specific documentation required within 30 and 120 days is detailed below. If you determine that changes to your control measures are necessary following your review, any modifications to your control measures must be made before the next storm event if possible, or as soon as practicable following that storm event. These time intervals are not grace periods, but schedules considered reasonable for the documenting of your findings and for making repairs and improvements. They are included in this permit to ensure that the conditions prompting the need for these repairs and improvements are not allowed to persist indefinitely.
8 . Corrective Action Report
Within 30 days of a discovery of any condition listed in Part I.D.6 , you must document the following information:
a. Brief description of the condition triggering corrective action;
b. Date condition identified; and
c. How deficiency identified.
Within 120 days of discovery of any condition listed in Part I.D.6 , you must document the following information:
a. Summary of corrective action taken or to be taken (or, for triggering events identified in Part I.D.6.b.(1), where you determine that corrective action is not necessary, the basis for this determination)
b. Notice of whether SWPPP modifications are required as a result of this discovery or corrective action;
c. Date corrective action initiated; and
d. Date corrective action completed or expected to be completed.
Page 24 of 63 Permit No. INQ002780
Inspections
The inspections in this Part must be conducted at this facility when the facility is operating. At least once during the calendar year, the routine facility inspection in Part 9.b of this subsection must be done when a discharge is occurring.
a. Monthly Site Compliance Inspection
The following areas shall be inspected monthly: coal handling areas, loading or unloading areas, switchyards, fueling areas, bulk storage areas, ash handling areas, areas adjacent to disposal ponds and landfills, maintenance areas, liquid storage tanks, and long term and short term material storage areas.
Areas contributing to a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity shall be visually inspected for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system. Measures to reduce pollutant loadings shall be evaluated to determine whether they are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with the terms of the permit or whether additional control measures are needed. Structural storm water management measures, sediment and erosion control measures, and other structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be observed to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of equipment needed to implement the plan, such as spill response equipment, shall be made.
Each Comprehensive Site Inspection shall address all potential sources of pollutants, including (if applicable) air pollution control equipment (e.g., baghouses, electrostatic precipitator, scrubbers, and cyclones), for any signs of degradation (e.g., leaks, corrosion, or improper operation) that could limit their efficiency and lead to excessive emissions. Considering monitoring air flow at inlets and outlets (or use equivalent measures) to check for leaks (e.g., particulate deposition) or blockage in ducts. Also inspect all process and material handling equipment (e.g., conveyors, cranes, and vehicles) for leaks, drips, or the potential loss of material; and material storage areas (e.g., piles, bins, or hoppers for storing coke, coal, scrap, or slag, as well as chemicals stored in tanks and drums) for signs of material loss due to wind or storm water runoff.
Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6 of this permit.
Page 25 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
b. Routine Facility Inspections (Once per Calendar Quarter)
i. Routine Facility Inspection - At a minimum, quarterly routine inspections of the storm water management measures and storm water run-off conveyances. The routine inspections must be performed by qualified personnel with at least one member of your storm water pollution prevention team.
ii. Routine Facility Inspection Documentation - You must document the findings of each routine facility inspection performed and maintain this documentation within your SWPPP or have the on-site record keeping location referenced in the SWPPP. At a minimum, your documentation must include:
AA. The inspection date and time;
BB. The name(s) and signature(s) of the inspectors;
CC. Weather information and a description of any discharges occurring at the time of the inspection;
DD. Any previously unidentified discharges of pollutants from the site;
EE. Any control measures needing maintenance or repairs;
FF. Any failed control measures that need replacement;
GG. Any incidents of noncompliance observed; and
HH. Any additional control measures needed to comply with the permit requirements.
Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6 of this permit.
c.
Comprehensive Site Inspections (Once per Calendar Year)
Comprehensive Site Inspection - Qualified personnel and at least one member of your Pollution Prevention Team shall conduct a comprehensive site inspection, at least once per calendar year, to confirm the accuracy of the description of potential pollution sources contained in the plan, determine the effectiveness of the plan, and assess compliance with the permit. Each Comprehensive Site Inspection shall include:
Page 26 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
i. Based on the results of the inspection, the description of potential pollutant sources identified in the SWPPP in accordance with Part I.E.2.b of this permit and pollution prevention measures and controls identified in the SWPPP in accordance with Part I.D.4. of this permit shall be revised as appropriate within the timeframes contained in Part I.D.7 of this permit.
ii. A report summarizing the scope of the inspection, personnel conducting the inspection, the date(s) of the inspection, major observations relating to the implementation of the storm water pollution prevention plan, and actions taken in accordance with the above paragraph must be documented and either contained in, or have on-site record keeping location referenced in, the SWPPP at least 3 years after the date of the inspection. The report shall identify any incidents of noncompliance. Where a report does not identify any incidents of noncompliance, the report shall contain a certification that the facility is in compliance with the storm water pollution prevention plan and this permit. The report shall be signed in accordance with the signatory requirements of Part II.C.6 of this permit.
iii. Where the inspection schedules overlap under this section, the Comprehensive Site Inspection may be conducted in place of one such inspection.
iv. Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6 of this permit.
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
1. Development of Plan
Within 12 months from the effective date of this permit, the permittee is required to revise and update the current Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the permitted facility. The plan shall at a minimum include the following:
a. Identify potential sources of pollution, which may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of storm water discharges associated with industrial activity from the facility. Storm water associated with industrial activity (defined in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)) includes, but is not limited to, the discharge from any conveyance which is used for collecting and conveying storm water and which is directly related to
Page 27 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
manufacturing, processing or materials storage areas at an industrial plant;
b. Describe practices and measure to be used in reducing the potential for pollutants to be exposed to storm water; and
c. Assure compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.
Contents
The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:
a. Pollution Prevention Team -The plan shall list, by position title, the member or members of the facility organization as members of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Team who are responsible for developing the storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and assisting the facility or plant manager in its implementation, maintenance, and revision. The plan shall clearly identify the responsibilities of each storm water pollution prevention team member. Each member of the storm water pollution prevention team must have ready access to either an electronic or paper copy of applicable portions of this permit and your SWPPP.
b. Description of Potential Pollutant Sources - The plan shall provide a description of areas at the site exposed to industrial activity and have a reasonable potential for storm water to be exposed to pollutants. The plan shall identify all activities and significant materials (defined in 40 CFR 122.26(b)), which may potentially be significant pollutant sources. As a minimum, the plan shall contain the following:
(1) A soils map indicating the types of soils found on the facility property and showing the boundaries of the facility property.
(2) A graphical representation, such as an aerial photograph or site layout maps, drawn to an appropriate scale, which contains a legend and compass coordinates, indicating, at a minimum, the following:
(A) All on-site storm water drainage and discharge conveyances, which may include pipes, ditches, swales, and erosion channels, related to a storm water discharge.
(B) Known adjacent property drainage and discharge conveyances, if directly associated with run-off from the facility.
Page 28 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(C) All on-site and known adjacent property water bodies, including wetlands and springs.
(D) An outline of the drainage area for each outfall.
(E) An outline of the facility property, indicating directional flows, via arrows, of surface drainage patterns.
(F) An outline of impervious surfaces, which includes pavement and buildings, and an estimate of the impervious and pervious surface square footage for each drainage area placed in a map legend.
(G) On-site injection wells, as applicable.
(H) On-site wells used as potable water sources, as applicable.
(I) All existing major structural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm water run-off.
(J) All existing and historical underground or aboveground storage tank locations, as applicable.
(K) All permanently designated plowed or dumped snow storage locations.
(L) All loading and unloading areas for solid and liquid bulk materials.
(M) All existing and historical outdoor storage areas for raw materials, intermediary products, final products, and waste materials. Include materials handled at the site that potentially may be exposed to precipitation or runoff, areas where deposition of particulate matter from process air emissions or losses during material-handling activities.
(N) All existing or historical outdoor storage areas for fuels, processing equipment, and other containerized materials, for example, in drums and totes.
(O) Outdoor processing areas.
(P) Dust or particulate generating process areas.
Page 29 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(Q) Outdoor assigned waste storage or disposal areas.
(R) Pesticide or herbicide application areas.
(S) Vehicular access roads.
(T) Identify any storage or disposal of wastes such as spent solvents and baths, sand, slag and dross; liquid storage tanks and drums; processing areas including pollution control equipment (e.g., baghouses); and storage areas of raw material such as coal, coke, scrap, sand, fluxes, refractories, or metal in any form. In addition, indicate where an accumulation of significant amounts of particulate matter could occur from such sources as furnace or oven emissions, losses from coal and coke handling operation, etc., and could result in a discharge of pollutants.
(U) The mapping of historical locations is only required if the historical locations have a reasonable potential for storm water exposure to historical pollutants.
(3) An area site map that indicates:
(A) The topographic relief or similar elevations to determine surface drainage patterns;
(B) The facility boundaries;
(C) All receiving waters; and
(D) All known drinking water wells; and
Includes at a minimum, the features in clauses (A), (C), and (D) within a one-fourth (1/4) mile radius beyond the property boundaries of the facility. This map must be to scale and include a legend and compass coordinates.
(4) A narrative description of areas that generate storm water discharges exposed to industrial activity including descriptions for any existing or historical areas listed in subdivision 2.b.(2)(J) through (T) of this Part, and any other areas thought to generate storm water discharges exposed to industrial activity. The narrative descriptions for each identified area must include the following:
Page 30 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(A) Type and typical quantity of materials present in the area.
(B) Methods of storage, including presence of any secondary containment measures.
(C) Any remedial actions undertaken in the area to eliminate pollutant sources or exposure of storm water to those sources. If a corrective action plan was developed, the type of remedial action and plan date shall be referenced.
(D) Any significant release or spill history dating back a period of three (3) years from the effective date of this permit, in the identified area, for materials spilled outside of secondary containment structures and impervious surfaces in excess of their reportable quantity, including the following: i. The date and type of material released or spilled.
ii. The estimated volume released or spilled.
iii. A description of the remedial actions undertaken, including disposal or treatment.
Depending on the adequacy or completeness of the remedial actions, the spill history shall be used to determine additional pollutant sources that may be exposed to storm water. In subsequent permit terms, the history shall date back for a period of five (5) years from the date of the permit renewal application.
(E) Where the chemicals or materials have the potential to be exposed to storm water discharges, the descriptions for each identified area must include a risk identification analysis of chemicals or materials stored or used within the area. The analysis must include the following:
i. Toxicity data of chemicals or materials used within the area, referencing appropriate material safety data sheet information locations.
ii. The frequency and typical quantity of listed chemicals or materials to be stored within the area.
Page 31 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
iii. Potential ways in which storm water discharges may be exposed to listed chemicals and materials.
iv. The likelihood of the listed chemicals and materials to come into contact with water.
A narrative description of existing and planned management practices and measures to improve the quality of storm water run-off entering a water of the state. Descriptions must be created for existing or historical areas listed in subdivision 2.b.(2)(J) through (T) and any other areas thought to generate storm water discharges exposed to industrial activity. The description must include the following:
(A) Any existing or planned structural and nonstructural control practices and measures.
(B) Any treatment the storm water receives prior to leaving the facility property or entering a water of the state.
(C) The ultimate disposal of any solid or fluid wastes collected in structural control measures other than by discharge.
Describe areas that due to topography, activities, or other factors have a high potential for significant soil erosion.
Document the location of any storage piles containing salt used for deicing.
Information or other documentation required under subsection (d) of this plan.
The results of storm water monitoring. The monitoring data must include completed field data sheets, chain-of-custody forms, and laboratory results. If the monitoring data are not placed into the facility's SWPPP, the on-site location for storage of the information must be reference in the SWPPP.
Drainage Area Site Map. Document in your SWPPP the locations of any of the following activities or sources that may be exposed to precipitation or surface runoff: storage tanks, scrap yards, and general refuse areas; short- and long-term storage of general materials (including but not limited to
Page 32 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
supplies, construction materials, paint equipment, oils, fuels, used and unused solvents, cleaning materials, paint, water treatment chemicals, fertilizer, and pesticides); landfills and construction sites; and stock pile areas (e.g., coal or limestone piles).
(11) Documentation of Good Housekeeping Measures. You must document in your SWPPP the good housekeeping measures implemented to meet the effluent limits in Part I.D.4 of this NPDES permit.
Non-Storm water Discharges - You must document that you have evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit. Any non-storm water discharges have either been eliminated or incorporated into this permit. Documentation of non-storm water discharges shall include:
(1) A written non-storm water assessment, including the following:
(A) A certification letter stating that storm water discharges entering a water of the state have been evaluated for the presence of illicit discharges and non-storm water contributions.
(B) Detergent or solvent-based washing of equipment or vehicles that would allow washwater additives to enter any storm water only drainage system shall not be allowed at this facility unless appropriately permitted under this NPDES permit.
(C) All interior maintenance area floor drains with the potential for maintenance fluids or other materials to enter storm water only storm sewers must be either sealed, connected to a sanitary sewer with prior authorization, or appropriately permitted under this NPDES permit. The sealing, sanitary sewer connecting, or permitting of drains under this item must be documented in the written non-storm water assessment program.
(D) The certification shall include a description of the method used, the date of any testing, and the on-site drainage points that were directly observed during the test.
Page 33 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
General Requirements - The SWPPP must meet the following general requirements:
(1) The plan shall be certified by a qualified professional. The term qualified professional means an individual who is trained and experienced in water treatment techniques and related fields as may be demonstrated by state registration, professional certification, or completion of course work that enable the individual to make sound, professional judgments regarding storm water control/treatment and monitoring, pollutant fate and transport, and drainage planning.
(2) The plan shall be retained at the facility and be available for review by a representative of the Commissioner upon request. IDEM may provide access to portions of your SWPPP to the public.
(3) The plan must be revised and updated as required. Revised and updated versions of the plan must be implemented on or before three hundred sixty-five (365) days from the effective date of this permit. The Commissioner may grant an extension of this time frame based on a request by the person showing reasonable cause.
(4) if the permittee has other written plans, required under applicable federal or state law, such as operation and maintenance, spill prevention control and countermeasures (SPCC), or risk contingency plans, which fulfill certain requirements of an SWPPP, these plans may be referenced, at the permittee's discretion, in the appropriate sections of the SWPPP to meet those section requirements.
(5) The permittee may combine the requirements of the SWPPP with another written plan if:
(A) The plan is retained at the facility and available for review;
(B) All the requirements of the SWPPP are contained within the plan; and
(C) A separate, labeled section is utilized in the plan for the SWPPP requirements.
Page 34 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
CHRONIC BIOMONITORING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
The 1977 Clean Water Act explicitly states, in Section 101(3) that it is the national policy that the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited. In support of this policy the U.S. EPA in 1995 amended 40 CFR 136.3 (Tables IA and II) by adding testing method for measuring acute and short-term chronic toxicity of whole effluents and receiving waters. To adequately assess the character of the effluent, and the effects of the effluent on aquatic life, the permittee shall conduct Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing. Part 1 of this section describes the testing procedures, Part 2 describes the Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) which is only required if the effluent demonstrated toxicity, as described in section 1 .f.
1. Whole Effluent Toxicity Tests
Within 90 days of the effective date of the permit, the permittee shall initiate the series of bioassay tests described below to monitor the toxicity of the discharge from Outfall(s). The permittee shall continue the bioassay tests described below to monitor the toxicity of the discharge from Outfall 002. If toxicity is demonstrated as defined under section f. below, the permittee is required to conduct a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE).
a. Bioassay Test Procedures and Data Analysis
(1) All test organisms, test procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be in accordance with the Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Water to Freshwater Organisms; Fourth Edition Section 13, Cladoceran (C e rio d a o h n ia d u b ia ) Survival and Reproduction Test Method 1002.0; and Section 11, Fathead Minnow (P im e o h a le s p ro m e la s ) Larval Survival and Growth Test Method, (1000.0) EPA 821-R-02-013, October 2002, or most recent update.
(2) Any circumstances not covered by the above methods, or that required deviation from the specified methods shall first be approved by the IDEM's Permit Branch.
(3) The determination of effluent toxicity shall be made in accordance with the Data Analysis general procedures for chronic toxicity endpoints as outlined in Section 9, and in Sections 11 and 13 of the respective Test Method (1000.0 and 1002.0) of Short-term Methods of Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluent and Receiving Water to Freshwater Organisms (EPA-821-R-02-013L Fourth Edition, October 2002, or most recent update.
Page 35 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
b. Types of Bioassay Tests
(1) The permittee shall conduct 7-day Daphnid (C e riodao hnia d ub ia) Survival and Reproduction Test and a 7-day Fathead Minnow (P im e o h a le s p ro m e la s ) Larval Survival and Growth Test on samples of final effluent. All tests will be conducted on 24-hour composite samples of final effluent. All test solutions shall be renewed daily. On days three and five fresh 24-hour composite samples of the effluent collected on alternate days shall be used to renew the test solutions.
(2) If, in any control, more than 10% of the test organisms die in 96 hours, or more than 20% of the test organisms die in 7 days, that test shall be repeated. In addition, if in the C eriodaohnia d u b ia test control the number of newborns produced per surviving female is less than 15, or if 60% of surviving control females have less than three broods; and in the fathead minnow test if the mean dry weight of 7-day old surviving fish in the control group is less than 0.25 mg, that test shall also be repeated. Such testing will determine whether the effluent affects the survival, reproduction, and/or growth of the test organisms. Results of all tests regardless of completion must be reported to IDEM.
c. Effluent Sample Collection and Chemical Analysis
(1) Samples taken for the purposes of Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing will be taken at a point that is representative of the discharge, but prior to discharge. The maximum holding time for whole effluent is 36 hours for a 24 hour composite sample. Bioassay tests must be started within 36 hours after termination of the 24 hour composite sample collection. Bioassay of effluent sampling may be coordinated with other permit sampling requirements as appropriate to avoid duplication.
(2) Chemical analysis must accompany each effluent sample taken for bioassay test, especially the sample taken for the repeat or confirmation test as outlined in section f.3. below. The analysis detailed under Part I.A. should be conducted for the effluent sample. Chemical analysis must comply with approved EPA test methods.
d. Testing Frequency and Duration
The chronic toxicity test specified in section b. above shall be conducted at least once annually for the duration of the permit. After
Page 36 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
three tests have been completed, and if no toxicity is demonstrated, as defined in section f. below, the permittee may reduce the number of species tested to only include the most sensitive to the toxicity in the effluent. In the absence of toxicity with either species in the annual testing for three (3) consecutive tests, sensitive species will be selected based on frequency and failure of whole effluent toxicity tests with one or the other species in the immediate past.
If toxicity is demonstrated as defined under section f., the permittee is required to conduct a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) as specified in Section 2.
e. Reporting
(1) Results shall be reported according to EPA 821-R-02-013, October 2002, Section 10 (Report Preparation). The completed report for each test shall be submitted to the Compliance Data Section of IDEM no later than 60 days after completion of the test.
In lieu of mailing reports, reports may be submitted to IDEM electronically as an e-mail attachment. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.qov.
(2) For quality control, the report shall include the results of appropriate standard reference toxic pollutant tests for chronic endpoints and historical reference toxic pollutant data with mean values and appropriate ranges for the respective test species C e rio d a p h n ia d u b ia and P im e o h a le s o ro m e la s . Biomonitoring reports must also include copies of Chain-ofCustody Records and Laboratory raw data sheets.
(3) Statistical procedures used to analyze and interpret toxicity data including critical values of significance to evaluate each point of toxicity should be described and included as part of the biomonitoring report.
f.
Demonstration of Toxicity
(1) Acute toxicity will be demonstrated if the effluent is observed to have exceeded 1.0 TUa (acute toxic units) based on 1 0 0 % effluent for the test organism in 48 and 96 hours for C e rio d a p h n ia d u b ia or P im e p h a le s p ro m e la s , respectively.
Page 37 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(2) Chronic toxicity will be demonstrated if the effluent is observed to have exceeded 16.0 TUC (chronic toxic units) for C eriodaphnia dubia or Pim ephales prom elas.
(3) If toxicity is found in any of the tests as specified above, a confirmation toxicity test using the specified methodology and same test species shall be conducted within two weeks of the completion of the failed test to confirm results. During the sampling for any confirmation test the permittee shall also collect and preserve sufficient effluent samples for use in any Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) and/or Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE), if necessary. If any two (2) consecutive tests, including any and all confirmation tests, indicate the presence of toxicity, the permittee must begin the implementation of a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) as described below. The whole effluent toxicity tests required above may be suspended (upon approval from IDEM) while the TRE/TIE are being conducted.
Definitions
(1) TUc is defined as 100/NOEC or IOO/IC25, where the NOEC or IC25 are expressed as a percent effluent in the test medium.
(2 ) TUa is defined as 100/l_C5o where the LC50 is expressed as a percent effluent in the test medium of an acute whole effluent toxicity (WET) test that is statistically or graphically estimated to be lethal to fifty percent (50%) of the test organisms.
(3) "Inhibition concentration 25" or "IC25" means the toxicant (effluent) concentration that would cause a twenty-five percent (25%) reduction in a nonquantal biological measurement for the test population. For example, the IC25 is the concentration of toxicant (effluent) that would cause a twenty-five percent (25%) reduction in mean young per female or in growth for the test population.
(4) "No observed effect concentration" or "NOEC" is the highest concentration of toxicant (effluent) to which organisms are exposed in a full life cycle or partial life cycle (short term) test, that causes no observable adverse effects on the test organisms, that is, the highest concentration of toxicant (effluent) in which the values for the observed responses are not statistically significantly different from the controls.
Page 38 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) Schedule of Compliance The development and implementation of a TRE (including any post-TRE biomonitoring requirements) is only required if toxicity is demonstrated as defined in Part 1, section f. above.
a. Development of TRE Plan
Within 90 days of determination of toxicity, the permittee shall submit plans for an effluent toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM. The TRE plan shall include appropriate measures to characterize the causative toxicants and the variability associated with these compounds. Guidance on conducting effluent toxicity reduction evaluations is available from EPA and from the EPA publications list below:
(1) Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations:
Phase I Toxicity Characteristics Procedures, Second Edition (EPA/600/6-91/003, February 1991.
Phase II Toxicity Identification Procedures (EPA 600/R-92/080), September 1993.
Phase III Toxicity Confirmation Procedures (EPA 600/R92/081), September 1993.
(2) Toxicity Identification Evaluation: Characterization of Chronically Toxic Effluents, Phase I. EPA/600/6-91/005F, May 1992.
(3) Generalized Methodology for Conducting Industrial Toxicity Reduction Evaluations (TREs), (EPA/600/2-88/070), April 1989.
(4) Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Protocol for Municipal Wastewater Treatments Plants (EPA/833-B-99-022) August 1999.
b. Conduct the Plan
Within 30 days after the submission of the TRE plan to IDEM, the permittee must initiate an effluent TRE consistent with the TRE plan. Progress reports shall be submitted every 90 days to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM beginning 90 days after initiation of the TRE study.
Page 39 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
c. Reporting
Within 90 days of the TRE study completion, the permittee shall submit to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM, the final study results and a schedule for reducing the toxicity to acceptable levels through control of the toxicant source or treatment of whole effluent.
d. Compliance Date
The permittee shall complete items a, b, and c from Section 2 above and reduce the toxicity to acceptable levels as soon as possible, but no later than three years after the dateofdetermination of toxicity.
e. Post-TRE Biomonitoring Requirements(Only Required After Completion of a TRE)
After the TRE, the permittee shall conduct monthly toxicity tests with 2 or more species for a period of three months. Should three consecutive monthly tests demonstrate no toxicity, the permittee may reduce the number of species tested to only include the species demonstrated to be most sensitive to the toxicity in the effluent, (see section 1 .d. above for more specifics on this topic), and conduct chronic tests quarterly for the duration of the permit.
If toxicity is demonstrated, as defined in paragraph 1.f. above, after the initial three month period, testing must revert to a TRE as described in Part 2 (TRE) above.
f.
In lieu of mailing reports, reports may be submitted to IDEM
electronically via e-mail. E-mails should be sent to
wwreports@idem.in.gov.
ACUTE BIOMONITORING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
The 1977 Clean Water Act explicitly states, in Section 101(3) that it is the national policy that the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts must be prohibited. In support of this policy the U.S. EPA in 1995 amended 40 CFR 136.3 (Tables IA and II) by adding testing methods for measuring acute and short-term chronic toxicity of whole effluents and receiving waters. To adequately assess the character of the effluent, and the effects of the effluent on aquatic life, the permittee shall conduct Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing. Part 1 of this section describes the testing procedures, Part 2 describes the Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) which is only required if the effluent demonstrated toxicity, as described in paragraph f.
Page 40 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Whole Effluent Toxicity Tests
Within 90 days of the effective date of the permit, the permittee shall initiate the series of bioassay tests described below to monitor the toxicity of the discharge from Outfall(s). The permittee shall perform the bioassay tests described below to monitor the toxicity of the discharge from Internal Outfall 401. If toxicity is demonstrated as defined under section f. below, the permittee is required to conduct a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE).
a. Bioassay Test Procedures and Data Analysis
(1) All test organisms, test procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be in accordance with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. Fifth Edition, EPA-821R-02-012, October 2002, or most recent update.
(2) Any circumstances not covered by the above methods, or that required deviation from the specified methods shall first be approved by the IDEM's Permit Branch .
(3) The determination of effluent toxicity shall be made in accordance with the Data Analysis general procedures as outlined in Section 11, "Acute Toxicity Data Analysis" of Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. Fifth Edition, EPA-821 -R-02-012, October 2002.
b. Types of Bioassay Tests
(1) The permittee shall conduct a 96-hour definitive static-renewal LC50 bioassay using Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas). The test shall be conducted on a 24-hour composite sample of the final effluent. All test solutions shall be renewed daily. On day three, at the end of 48 hours test duration, a second 24hour composite sample of the effluent shall be used to renew the test solutions.
(2) The permittee shall conduct a 48-hour definitive static renewal LC50 bioassav using C e rio d a o h n ia d u b ia (D a p h n id ) and D a p h n ia p u le x (D a p h n id ). The tests shall be conducted on a 24-hour composite sample of final effluent. All test solutions shall be renewed daily.
(3) If additional toxicity tests are needed, the permittee shall conduct a definitive static-renewal LC50 bioassav using another
Page 41 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
suitable species, representative of the aquatic community of the receiving stream, from the list of recommended in Section 6, page 27, and in Appendix B, page 238 of Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. Fifth Edition, EPA-821R-02-012, October 2002. The test shall be conducted on a 24hour composite sample of final effluent. All test solutions shall be renewed daily. If the length of the test is greater than 48hours, a second 24-hour composite sample of the effluent collected on the second day of the test shall be used to renew the test solutions on day three.
c. Effluent Sample Collection and Chemical Analysis
(1) Samples taken for the purposes of Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing will be at a point that is representative of the effluent but prior to discharge. The maximum holding time for Whole Effluent is 36 hours for a 24-hour composite sample. Bioassay tests must be started within 36 hours after termination of the 24-hour composite sample collection. Bioassay of effluent sampling may be coordinated with other permit sampling requirements as appropriate to avoid duplication.
(2) Chemical analysis must accompany each effluent sample taken for bioassay analysis, especially the sample taken for the repeat or confirmation test as outlined in section f.2. below. The analysis detailed under Part I.A.3 should be conducted for the effluent sample. Chemical analysis must comply with approved EPA test methods.
d. Testing Frequency and Duration
The acute toxicity tests with the three (3) species identified in section b above shall initially be conducted daily whenever there is a discharge from Internal Outfall 401. After three (3) tests have been completed and provided no toxicity is shown, the permittee may reduce the number of species tested to only include the species demonstrated to be the most sensitive to the toxicity in the effluent. See Section 2.e below on Post-TRE monitoring for discussion and selection of the most sensitive species.
If toxicity is demonstrated as defined under section f, the permittee is required to conduct a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) as specified in Section 2 below.
Page 42 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
e. Reporting
(1) Results shall be reported according to Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition, EPA-821-R02-012, Section 12, "Report Preparation". The completed report for each test shall be submitted to the Compliance Data Section of IDEM no later than 60 days after completion of the test.
In lieu of mailing reports, reports may be submitted to IDEM electronically as an e-mail attachment. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.qov.
(2) For quality control the report shall include the results of appropriate standard reference toxicant tests and historical reference toxicant data with mean values and appropriate ranges for the respective test species Ceriodaphnia, Daphnia, and Pimephales promelas. Biomonitoring reports must include copies of Chain-of-Custody Records and Laboratory raw data sheets.
f.
Demonstration of Toxicity
(1) Acute toxicity will be demonstrated if the effluent is observed to have exceeded 1.0 TUa (acute toxic units) based on 100% effluent for the test organism in 48 and 96 hours for C eriodaphnia dubia. D aphnia puilex, or P im ephales prom elas. respectively.
(2) If toxicity is found in any of the tests specified above, a confirmation acute toxicity test using the specified methodology and same test species shall be conducted within two weeks of the completion of the failed test to confirm results. During the sampling for any confirmation test the permittee shall also collect and preserve sufficient effluent samples for use in any Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) and/or Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE), if necessary. If any two consecutive acute tests, including any and all confirmation tests, indicate the presence of toxicity, the permittee must begin the implementation of a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) as described below. The whole effluent toxicity tests required above may be suspended (upon approval by IDEM) while the TRE/TIE are being conducted.
Page 43 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
g. Definitions
TUa is defined as IOO/LC50 where the LC50 is expressed as a percent effluent in the test medium of an acute whole effluent toxicity (WET) test that is statistically or graphically estimated to be lethal to fifty percent (50% ) of the test organisms.
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) Schedule of Compliance
The development and implementation of a TRE (including any post-TRE biomonitoring requirements) is only required if toxicity is demonstrated as defined by Part 1, section f. above.
a. Development of TRE Plan
Within 90 days of determination of toxicity, the permittee shall submit plans for an effluent toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM. The TRE plan shall include appropriate measures to characterize the causative toxicants and the variability associated with these compounds. Guidance on conducting effluent toxicity reduction evaluations is available from EPA and from the EPA publications list below:
(1) Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations:
Phase I Toxicity Characteristics Procedures, Second Edition (EPA/600-6-91/003, February 1991.
Phase II Toxicity Identification Procedures (EPA 600/R-92/080), September 1993.
Phase III Toxicity Confirmation Procedures (EPA 600/R92/081), September 1993.
(2) Generalized Methodology for Conducting Industrial Toxicity Reduction Evaluations (EPA/600/2-88/070), April 1989.
(3) Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Protocol for Municipal Wastewater Treatments Plants (EPA/833-B-99-022) August 1999.
b. Conduct the Plan
Within 30 days after the submission of the TRE plan to the IDEM, the permittee must initiate an effluent TRE consistent with the TRE plan.
Page 44 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Progress reports shall be submitted every 90 days to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM beginning 90 days after initiation of the TRE study.
c. Reporting
Within 90 days of the TRE study completion, the permittee shall submit to the Compliance Data Section, Office of Water Quality of the IDEM the final study results, and a schedule for reducing the toxicity to acceptable levels through control of the toxicant source or treatment of whole effluent.
d. Compliance Date
The permittee shall complete items a, b, and c from Section 2 above, and reduce the toxicity to acceptable levels as soon as possible but no later than three years after the date of determination of toxicity.
e. Post-TRE Biomonitoring Requirements (Only Required After Completion of a TRE.)
After the TRE, the permittee shall conduct monthly toxicity tests with the three species for a period of six months. After three tests have been completed and provided no toxicity is shown, the permittee may reduce the number of species tested to only include the species demonstrated to be most sensitive to the toxicity in the effluent. After the first six tests have been completed and provided no toxicity is shown, acute toxicity tests shall be conducted every six months thereafter, for the remainder of the permit.
If toxicity is demonstrated, as defined in paragraph 1.f. above, after the initial three month period, testing must revert to a TRE as in Part 2 (TRE) above.
The toxicity tests shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures under Part 1, "Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing" above.
f.
In lieu of mailing reports, reports may be submitted to IDEM
electronically via e-mail. E-mails should be sent to
wwreports@idem.in.gov.
Page 45 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
REOPENING CLAUSES
This permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing:
1. to comply with any applicable effluent limitation or standard issued or approved under 301 (b)(2)(C),(D) and (E), 304 (b)(2), and 307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent limitation or standard so issued or approved:
a. contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
b. controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
2. to incorporate any of the reopening clause provisions cited at 327 IAC 5-2 16.
3. to include whole effluent toxicity limitations or to include limitations for specific toxicants if the results of the biomonitoring and/or the TRE study indicate that such limitations are necessary to meet Indiana Water Quality Standards.
4. to include a case-specific Limit of Detection (LOD) and/or Limit of Quantitation (LOQ). The permittee must demonstrate that such action is warranted in accordance with the procedures specified under Appendix B, 40 CFR Part 136, using the most sensitive analytical methods approved by EPA under 40 CFR Part 136, or approved by the Commissioner.
5. to comply with any applicable standards, regulations and requirements issued or approved under section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. The required studies and information collection activities may take 36 months or longer to complete.
6. to delete or modify effluent limitations for gasification wastewater contained in the permit that are based on 40 CFR 423.13(j) as established by Effluent Limitation Guidelines for the Steam Electric Generating Point Source Category published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 67838 (November 3, 2015) for the application of best available technology economically achievable (BAT) to such wastewater ("Steam Electric ELGs"), if the Steam Electric ELGs are stayed or vacated and remanded by order of a federal court as a result of a judicial review proceeding concerning the Steam Electric ELGs or are otherwise stayed or suspended by action of the EPA Administrator.
7. to extend the date set in the permit on which effluent limitations for gasification wastewater contained in the permit that are based on 40 CFR
Page 46 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
423.13(j) of the Steam Electric ELGs are to become effective and enforceable to permittee's facility to a date not later than December 31,2023, if adequate justification is submitted.
to revise effluent limitations for gasification wastewater contained in the permit based on the Steam Electric ELGs to incorporate:
a. revisions to the Steam Electric ELGs, including but not limited to revisions resulting in less stringent effluent limitations, whether resulting from a judicial review proceeding concerning these regulations or other judicial proceedings or administrative actions; or
b. a fundamentally different factor variance from the Steam Electric ELGs concerning gasification wastewaters.
Page 47 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
A. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee shall comply with all terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(1) and all other requirements of 327 IAC 5-2-8. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and IC 13 and is grounds for enforcement action or permit termination, revocation and reissuance, modification, or denial of a permit renewal application.
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 conditions of the permit.
2. Duty to Mitigate
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(3), the permittee shall take ail reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact to the environment resulting from noncompliance with this permit. During periods of noncompliance, the permittee shall conduct such accelerated or additional monitoring for the affected parameters, as appropriate or as requested by IDEM, to determine the nature and impact of the noncompliance.
3. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must obtain and submit an application for renewal of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(2). It is the permittee's responsibility to obtain and submit the application. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-3(c), the owner of the facility or operation from which a discharge of pollutants occurs is responsible for applying for and obtaining the NPDES permit, except where the facility or operation is operated by a person other than an employee of the owner in which case it is the operator's responsibility to apply for and obtain the permit. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-3-2(a)(2), the application must be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit. This deadline may be extended if:
a. permission is requested in writing before such deadline;
b. IDEM grants permission to submit the application after the deadline; and
c. the application is received no later than the permit expiration date.
Page 48 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Under the terms of the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, the permittee may be required to submit its application for renewal electronically in the future.
4. Permit Transfers
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(4)(D), this permit is nontransferable to any person except in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(c). This permit may be transferred to another person by the permittee, without modification or revocation and reissuance being required under 327 IAC 5-2-16(c)(1) or 16(e)(4), if the following occurs:
a. the current permittee notified the Commissioner at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date;
b. a written agreement containing a specific date of transfer of permit responsibility and coverage between the current permittee and the transferee (including acknowledgment that the existing permittee is liable for violations up to that date, and the transferee is liable for violations from that date on) is submitted to the Commissioner;
c. the transferee certifies in writing to the Commissioner their intent to operate the facility without making such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility as would significantly change the nature or quantities of pollutants discharged and thus constitute cause for permit modification under 327 IAC 5-216(d). However, the Commissioner may allow a temporary transfer of the permit without permit modification for good cause, e.g., to enable the transferee to purge and empty the facility's treatment system prior to making alterations, despite the transferee's intent to make such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility; and
d. the Commissioner, within thirty (30) days, does not notify the current permittee and the transferee of the intent to modify, revoke and reissue, or terminate the permit and to require that a new application be filed rather than agreeing to the transfer of the permit.
The Commissioner may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to identify the new permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act or state law.
5. Permit Actions
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-16(b) and 327 IAC 5-2-8(4), this permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause, including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
Page 49 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
b. Failure of the permittee to disclose fully all relevant facts or misrepresentation of any relevant facts in the application, or during the permit issuance process; or
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or a permanent reduction or elimination of any discharge controlled by the permit, e.g., plant closure, termination of discharge by connection to a POTW, a change in state law that requires the reduction or elimination of the discharge, or information indicating that the permitted discharge poses a substantial threat to human health or welfare.
Filing of either of the following items does not stay or suspend any permit condition: (1) a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or (2) submittal of information specified in Part II.A.3 of the permit including planned changes or anticipated noncompliance.
The permittee shall submit any information that the permittee knows or has reason to believe would constitute cause for modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit at the earliest time such information becomes available, such as plans for physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility that:
1. could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged; or
2. the commissioner may request to evaluate whether such cause exists.
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-1-3(a)(5), the permittee must also provide any information reasonably requested by the Commissioner.
6. Property Rights
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(6) and 327 IAC 5-2-5(b), 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 persons or private property or invasion of other private rights, any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. The issuance of the permit also does not preempt any duty to obtain any other state, or local assent required by law for the discharge or for the construction or operation of the facility from which a discharge is made.
7. Severability
In accordance with 327 IAC 1-1-3, 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 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications of the permit which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Page 50 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
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 Clean Water Act or state law.
Penalties for Violation of Permit Conditions
Pursuant to IC 13-30-4, a person who violates any provision of this permit, the water pollution control laws; environmental management laws; or a rule or standard adopted by the Environmental Rules Board is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per day of any violation.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-5, a person who obstructs, delays, resists, prevents, or interferes with (1) the department; or (2) the department's personnel or designated agent in the performance of an inspection or investigation performed under IC 13 14-2-2 commits a class C infraction.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1,5(k), a person who willfully or recklessly violates any NPDES permit condition or filing requirement, any applicable standards or limitations of IC 13-18-3-2.4, IC 13-18-4-5, IC 13-18-8, IC 13-18-9, IC 13-18-10, IC 13-18-12, IC 13-18-14, IC 13-18-15, or IC 13-18-16, or who knowingly makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in any NPDES form, notice, or report commits a Class C misdemeanor.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1.5(1), an offense under IC 13-30-10-1,5(k) is a Class D felony if the offense results in damage to the environment that renders the environment unfit for human or vertebrate animal life. An offense under IC 13-3010-1.5(k) is a Class C felony if the offense results in the death of another person.
Penalties for Tampering or Falsification
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(9), the permittee shall comply with monitoring, recording, and reporting requirements of this permit. The Clean Water Act, as well as IC 13-30-10-1, provides that any person who knowingly or intentionally (a) destroys, alters, conceals, or falsely certifies a record that is required to be maintained under the terms of a permit issued by the department; and may be used to determine the status of compliance, (b) renders inaccurate or inoperative a recording device or a monitoring device required to be maintained by a permit
Page 51 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
issued by the department, or (c) falsifies testing or monitoring data required by a permit issued by the department commits a Class B misdemeanor.
12. Toxic Pollutants
If any applicable effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant injurious to human health, and that 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 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(5). Effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants injurious to human health are effective and must be complied with, if applicable to the permittee, within the time provided in the implementing regulations, even absent permit modification.
13. Wastewater treatment plant and certified operators
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant as required by IC 13-18-11-11 and 327 IAC 5-22. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7.
327 IAC 5-22-10.5(a) provides that a certified operator may be designated as being in responsible charge of more than one (1) wastewater treatment plant, if it can be shown that he will give adequate supervision to all units involved. Adequate supervision means that sufficient time is spent at the plant on a regular basis to assure that the certified operator is knowledgeable of the actual operations and that test reports and results are representative of the actual operations conditions. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-22-3(11), "responsible charge operator means the person responsible for the overall daily operation, supervision, or management of a wastewater facility.
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-22-10(4), the permittee shall notify IDEM when there is a change of the person serving as the certified operator in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facility. The notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days after a change in the operator.
14. Construction Permit
In accordance with IC 13-14-8-11.6, a discharger is not required to obtain a state permit for the modification or construction of a water pollution treatment or control facility if the discharger has an effective NPDES permit.
Page 52 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
If the discharger modifies their existing water pollution treatment or control facility or constructs a new water pollution treatment or control facility for the treatment or control of any new influent pollutant or increased levels of any existing pollutant, then, within thirty (30) days after commencement of operation, the discharger shall file with the Department of Environment Management a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
The notice and design summary shall be sent to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251.
15. Inspection and Entry
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(7), the permittee shall allow the Commissioner, or an authorized representative, (including an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Commissioner) upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a point source, regulated facility, or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept pursuant to the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment or methods (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required pursuant to this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, any discharge of pollutants or internal wastestreams for the purposes of evaluating compliance with the permit or as otherwise authorized.
16. New or Increased Discharge of Pollutants
This permit prohibits the permittee from undertaking any action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless one of the following is completed prior to the commencement of the action:
a. Information is submitted to the Commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharges will not cause a significant lowering of water quality as defined under 327 IAC 2-1.3-2(50). Upon review of this information, the Commissioner may request additional information or may determine that the proposed increase is a
Page 53 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
significant lowering of water quality and require the submittal of an antidegradation demonstration.
b. An antidegradation demonstration is submitted to and approved by the Commissioner in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 327 IAC 2-1.3 6.
MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and efficiently operate all facilities and systems (and related appurtenances) for the collection and treatment which are installed or used by the permittee and which are necessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(8).
Neither 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), nor this provision, shall be construed to require the operation of installed treatment facilities that are unnecessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit.
2. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11):
a. Terms as defined in 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(A):
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of a waste stream from any portion of a treatment facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which would cause 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. The permittee may allow a bypass to occur that does not cause a violation of the effluent limitations in the permit, but only if it is also for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Part II.B.2.C., e, and f of this permit.
c. Bypasses, as defined in (a) above, are prohibited, and the Commissioner may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless the following occur:
Page 54 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage, as defined above;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, 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 that occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under Part II.B.2.e; or
(4) The condition under Part II.B.2.b above is met.
d. Bypasses that result in death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans must be reported in accordance with the "Spill Response and Reporting Requirements" in 327 IAC 2-6.1, including calling 888/2337745 as soon as possible, but within two (2) hours of discovery. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the bypass are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
e. The permittee must provide the Commissioner with the following notice:
(1) If the permittee knows or should have known in advance of the need for a bypass (anticipated bypass), it shall submit prior written notice. If possible, such notice shall be provided at least ten (10) days before the date of the bypass for approval by the Commissioner.
(2) The permittee shall orally report an unanticipated bypass that exceeds any effluent limitations in the permit within 24 hours of becoming aware of the bypass noncompliance. The permittee must also provide a written report within five (5) days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the bypass event. The written report must contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; if the cause of noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent
Page 55 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
recurrence of the bypass event. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is provided within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the unanticipated bypass event, then that report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirement. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.gov.
f.
The Commissioner may approve an anticipated bypass, after
considering its adverse effects, if the Commissioner determines that it
will meet the conditions listed above in Part II.B.2.C. The
Commissioner may impose any conditions determined to be
necessary to minimize any adverse effects.
Upset Conditions
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(12):
a. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable 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.
b. An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology-based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of Paragraph c of this section, are met.
c. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence, that:
(1) An upset occurred and the permittee has identified the specific cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated;
(3) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II.A.2; and
(4) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements," Part II.C.3, or 327 IAC 2-6.1, whichever is applicable. However, under 327 IAC 26.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or
Page 56 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
d. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof pursuant to 40 CFR 122.41 (n)(4).
4. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State and to be in compliance with all Indiana statutes and regulations relative to liquid and/or solid waste disposal. The discharge of pollutants in treated wastewater is allowed in compliance with the applicable effluent limitations in Part I. of this permit.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Planned Changes in Facility or Discharge
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10)(F), the permittee shall give notice to the Commissioner as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. In this context, permitted facility refers to a point source discharge, not a wastewater treatment facility. Notice is required only when either of the following applies:
a. The alteration or addition may meet one of the criteria for determining whether the facility is a new source as defined in 327 IAC 5-1.5.
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of, pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants that are subject neither to effluent limitations in Part I.A. nor to notification requirements in Part II.C.9. of this permit.
Following such notice, the permit may be modified to revise existing pollutant limitations and/or to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.
2. Monitoring Reports
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(9) and 327 IAC 5-2-13 through 15, monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals and in the form specified in "Monthly Reporting", Part I.C.2.
Page 57 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10)(C), the permittee shall orally report to the Commissioner information on the following types of noncompliance within 24 hours from the time permittee becomes aware of such noncompliance. If the noncompliance meets the requirements of item b (Part II.C.3.b) or 327 IAC 2 6.1, then the report shall be made within those prescribed time frames. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge that is in noncompliance are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit;
b. Any noncompliance which may pose a significant danger to human health or the environment. Reports under this item shall be made as soon as the permittee becomes aware of the noncomplying circumstances;
c. Any upset (as defined in Part II.B.3 above) that causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation in the permit;
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the following toxic pollutants: copper, cadmium, selenium, zinc, mercury, and free cyanide.
The permittee can make the oral reports by calling (317)232-8670 during regular business hours or by calling (317) 233-7745 ((888)233-7745 toll free in Indiana) during non-business hours. 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 and eliminate the noncompliance and prevent its recurrence. The Commissioner may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. Alternatively the permittee may submit a "Bypass/Overflow Report" (State Form 48373) or a "Noncompliance 24-Hour Notification Report" (State Form 54215), whichever is appropriate, to IDEM at (317) 232-8637 or wwreports@idem.in.gov. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is sent within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the occurrence, then the fax report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirements.
Page 58 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
4. Other Compliance/Noncompliance Reporting
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10)(D), the permittee shall report any instance of noncompliance not reported under the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements" in Part II.C.3, or any compliance schedules at the time the pertinent Discharge Monitoring Report is submitted. The report shall contain the information specified in Part II.C.3;
The permittee shall also give advance notice to the Commissioner of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompiiance with permit requirements; and
All 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.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
5. Other Information
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10)(E), where the permittee becomes aware of a failure to submit any relevant facts or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report, the permittee shall promptly submit such facts or corrected information to the Commissioner.
6. Signatory Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-22 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(14):
a. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Commissioner shall be signed and certified by a person described below or by a duly authorized representative of that person:
(1 ) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer defined as a president, secretary, treasurer, any vice-president of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who performs similar policymaking or decision making functions for the corporation or the manager of one or more manufacturing, production or operating facilities employing more than two hundred fifty (250) persons or having the gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) (in second quarter 1980 dollars), if
Page 59 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
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 Federal, State, or local government body or any agency or political subdivision thereof: by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
(4) Under the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, a method will be developed for submittal of all affected reports and documents using electronic signatures that is compliant with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR). Enrollment and use of NetDMR currently provides for CROMERR-compliant report submittal.
b. 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, or a position of equivalent responsibility. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The authorization is submitted to the Commissioner.
c. Certification. Any person signing a document identified under Part II.C.6. shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my 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."
Page 60 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
7. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under 327 IAC 12.1, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Clean Water Act, permit applications, permits, and effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
8. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
IC 13-30 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(14) 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, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 180 days per violation, or by both.
9. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.42(a)(1), 40 CFR 122.42(a)(2), and 327 IAC 5-2-9, the permittee shall notify the Commissioner 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 pollutant identified as toxic pursuant to Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act 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 (1OOpig/l);
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 pg/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500pg/l)for2,4dinitrophenol and 2-methyl-4,6-dinitophenol; and one milligram per liter (1mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment
Page 61 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
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 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 pg/l);
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Sec. 122.21(g)(7).
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
c. That it has begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture, as an intermediate or final product or byproduct, any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application under 40 CFR 122.21(g)(9).
Page 62 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
PART III Other Requirements
A. Thermal Effluent Requirements There are no 316(a) Alternate Thermal Effluent Limitations associated with this permit. Temperature requirements are found in Part I.A.1 of this permit.
B. Polychlorinated Biphenyl There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
Many electrical transformers manufactured prior to 1978 contained PCBs. Therefore, in order to determine compliance with the PCB prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB* data for Outfall 002 for the next permit renewal. As part of this renewal, the facility provided data that fulfills the requirement for this permit cycle.
Parameter PCBs*
Test Method 608
LOP 0.1 ug/l
LOQ 0.3 ug/l
*PCB-1242, PCB-1254, PCB-1221, PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260, and PCB-1016
C. Intake Screen Wash
The discharge of Intake Screen Backwash shall meet the Narrative Water Quality Standards contained in Part I.B. of the permit.
D. The facility owns an intake structure on the West Fork of the White River. This intake structure was utilized as a cooling water intake structure (CWIS) at the facility (Legacy Station) prior to the retirement of this facility in 2013 for the purpose of providing cooling water for one-through non-contact cooling. The Station currently obtains its service water, including makeup water for the closed cycle cooling water system, from two (2) subsurface groundwater collector wells located adjacent to the West Fork of the White River. The Station does not withdraw surface water from a water of the United States for cooling water purposes. Since intake structure 801 is only operated for the purpose of collecting fire protection water for the facility as needed, and the Station does not withdraw surface water from a water of the United States for cooling water purposes, Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. sections 1326) is not applicable to the facility's intake structure at this time. Intake Structure 801 shall remain in service only for the purpose of collecting fire protection water for the facility as needed. In the future, if the permittee decides to operate the intake structure 801 for the purpose of providing cooling water for the Stations operations, the permittee shall submit all the applicable requirements of the Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. sections 1326) with the permit modification application to IDEM and obtain a modification to its current
Page 63 of 63 Permit No. IN0002780
NPDES permit at the time, prior to withdrawing from water of the United States for cooling water purposes. The IGCC Station is prohibited from operating the existing intake structure for cooing water purposes without prior approval from IDEM.
Water Resources
environmental quality
Septem ber 9, 2016
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN Director
Mr. H arry Sideris, Senior Vice P resident Environm ental, H ealth and Safety D uke E nergy C arolinas, LLC Mail Code EC13K P.O. Box 1006 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit Permit NC0004987 M arshall Steam Station Catawba County Facility Class I
D ear Mr. Sideris:
The Division of W ater R esources is forw arding herew ith the Final NPDES perm it for Riverbend Steam Station. This perm it renew al is issued p u rsu a n t to the requirem ents of North Carolina General S tatute 143-215.1 and the M em orandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
A public hearing w as held on Ju n e 22, 2016 in Hickory seeking com m ents on the Draft p erm it. T his Final p erm it in co rp o rates re c o m m en d atio n s of th e DWR H earing Officer an d EPA a s well as other changes:
Clarifying lan g u ag e w as ad d ed to th e p erm it in S ection A. (2.)/N ote 2 to sta te th a t continuous m onitoring of Total Suspended Solids is only required when decanting via pum ps.
Clarifying lan g u ag e w as ad d e d to th e p erm it in S ection A. (2.) to specify th a t lim its a n d co n d itio n s in S ection A. (3.) of th e p erm it apply w h en w a te r in th e a s h settling basin is lowered below the three feet trigger m ark.
Clarifying lan g u ag e w as ad d e d to th e p erm it in S ection A. (2.) to specify th a t th e zero d isch arg e lim its o n fly a s h a n d bottom a s h tra n s p o r t w a te r only apply to fly a s h a n d bottom a s h tra n s p o rt w a te r g en erated after N ovem ber 1, 2 0 1 8 a n d J a n u a r y 31, 2021 accordingly.
Section A. (7.) w as co rrec te d to in clu d e a n ad d itio n of a Note 4 s u p e rsc rip t to th e to tal m ercury lim it to clarify th a t lim its are effective on Ja n u a ry 31, 2021.
Section A. (17.) w as am e n d e d to in clu d e a se p a ra te IWC for dew atering p h ase toxicity testing.
The G roundw ater M onitoring Plan attac h m e n t w as am ended to include th e following clarifying language: "3(h). The p ro v isio n s of sec tio n s 3(f) a n d 3(g) apply only to the sam p lin g ev en ts d esc rib ed in 3(b) above. T he re p o rtin g re q u ire m e n ts for any sam pling events o th er th a n those described in 3(b) above shall be in accordance with th e general provisions of 15A NCAC 02L."
A S pecial C ondition en title d "D om estic W astew ater T re a tm e n t P lan " w as added to the p erm it to a d d re s s th e EPA co m m en t (Please see S pecial C ondition A. (32.)).
The Daily M axim um lim it for TSS w as reduced to 50.0 m g / L for Outfall 002 to m eet the requirem ents of 40 CFR 423.
State of North Carolina j Environmental Quality Water Resources 1617 Mail service Center | Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611 919 707 9000
The lim its for TSS an d Oil a n d G rease were ad d ed to Outfall 002A and 002B to m eet the requirem ents of 40 CFR 423.
A Special C ondition A. (30.) w as m odified to a d d re ss th e EPA co n cern regarding th e perm itting of the newly identified seeps and locations of the instream sam pling for compliance with the w ater quality standards.
The lim its for BOD a n d F ecal Coliform s w ere ad d e d to O utfall 002 to a d d re ss th e EPA com m ent.
The footnote describing the effluent lim itations for Turbidity was modified to better address the state turbidity stan d ard (Outfall 002).
The m onitoring frequency for Oil a n d G rease w as in creased to M onthly (Outfall 002) to address the EPA com m ent.
The Plan for Identification of New D ischarges w as added to the perm it to address the EPA com m ent.
The S eep P o llu tan t A nalysis S pecial C ondition (Please see A. (30.)) w as m odified based on the discussion with the US Army Corps of Engineers.
The additional decanting conditions for closing ash ponds were added to the perm it to a d d re ss th e EPA com m ent.
If any p arts, m easurem ent frequencies, or sam pling req u irem en ts contained in this perm it are unacceptable to you, you have the right to a n adjudicatory h earing u p o n w ritten request w ithin th irty (30) d a y s following receipt of th is letter. T his re q u e st m u s t b e in th e form of a w ritten petition, conform ing to C h ap ter 15 0B of th e N orth C arolina G eneral S ta tu te s , a n d filed w ith the office of A dm inistrative H earings, 6714 Mail Service C enter, Raleigh, North C arolina 27699-6714. Unless such a dem and is m ade, this perm it shall be final and binding.
Please take notice th a t this perm it is not transferable except after notice to the Division of W ater Resources. The Division may require m odification or revocation and reissuance of the perm it. This perm it does not affect the legal requirem ents to obtain other perm its w hich m ay be required by the Division of W ater R esources, th e Division of Land R esources, the C oastal Area M anagem ent Act, or any other federal or local governm ental permit. If you have any questions on this perm it, please contact Sergei C hem ikov at 919-807-6386.
Sincerely,
H ardcopy: C entral Files, NPDES Files Mooresville Regional Office, W ater Q uality
E-copy: US EPA, Region IV A quatic Toxicology Unit
P e r m it No. NC0004987
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
.
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina E nvironm ental M anagement Commission, an d the Federal W ater Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Marshall Steam Station At the intersection of NC Highway 150 an d NCSR 1841
Terrell Catawba County
to receiving w aters designated as the C ataw ba River (Lake Norman) in the Catawba River B asin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirem ents, and other applicable conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III hereof.
This perm it shall become effective October 1, 2016.
This perm it and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on September 30,
2021.
Signed this day September 9, 2016.
S. JayiZiihiqfiian P.G., Director Division of \^ a te r R esources By Authority of the Environm ental M anagem ent Commission
Page 1 o f 27
P e r m it No. NC0004987
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, w hether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked, and as of this issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this num ber is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the perm it conditions, requirem ents, terms, and provisions included herein.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC is hereby authorized to: 1. Continue to discharge:
Outfall 001: once-through cooling w ater and intake screen backwash Outfall 002: treated wastewater (consisting of metal cleaning wastes, coal
pile runoff, a sh tra n sp o rt water, dom estic w astew ater, storm water, low volume wastes, and FGD wet scrubber wastewater) from the ash settling basin Outfalls 002A and 002B: yard sum p overflows Internal Outfall 003: non-contact cooling w ater from the induced draft fan control house to intake for cooling w ater pum ps Internal Outfall 004: treated FGD wet scrubber wastewater to the ash settling basin Seep Outfalls 101 and 102: 2 potentially contam inated groundw ater seeps From a facility located at Duke Energy's M arshall Steam Station at the intersection of NC Highway 150 and NCSR 1841 in Terrell, Catawba County;2
2. Discharge from said treatm ent works at the locations specified on the attach ed map into the C ataw ba River (Lake Norman) w hich is classified WS IV and B CA w aters in the Cataw ba River Basin.
Page 2 of 27
P e r m it No. NC0004987
Part I
A. (1.) Effluent L im itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 001) [15A NCAC 02B ,0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 001 (once-through cooling water). Such discharges shall be limited and monitored2 by the Permittee as specified below:
E ffluent C h a r a c t e r is t ic s
Flow, MGD
Temperature (November 1 - June 30) Temperature (July 1 - October 31) Free Available Chlorine1
D is c h a r g e L im it a t io n s
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
M onitor & Report
33.3 C 34.4 "C 0.2 m g/L
0.5 m g/L
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency
Type
Location
Daily
Pump logs or sim ila r
Effluent
readings
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Daily
Grab
Effluent
D a ily
Grab
Effluent
Notes: 1 O nce-through cooling w ater shall not be chlorinated. Should the facility w ish to chlorinate once-through cooling w ater, Division perm ission shall be obtained prior to . com m encem ent of chlorination. The m onitoring requirem ent and effluent lim itations only apply if chlorination is commenced. 2 S tarting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge M onitoring Reports electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR application system . Please See Special Condition A. (31.). "
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
B ased u p o n studies conducted by the perm ittee and subm itted to the Division, it has been determ ined p u rsu a n t to Section 316(a) of th e Clean W ater Act th a t th e therm al com ponent of the discharge assu res the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish and wildlife in the receiving water.
Page 3 o f 27
Pe r m t No. NC0004987
A. (2.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 0 0 2 - normal operation/decanting) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 0 0 2 (ash settling basin discharge - decanting the free water above the settled ash layer that does not involve m echanical disturbance o f the ash). Such discharges shall be limited and m onitored1234 by the Permittee as specified below: _____________________________
E f f lu e n t C h a r a c t e r is t ic s
D is c h a r g e L im it a t io n s
Monthly I
Daily
Average | Maximum
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency
Type
Location1
Flow, MGD Oil and Grease
Monitor & Report
9.0 m g/L j 12.0 m g/L
Weekly' M o n th ly
Pump logs or similar readings
Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Suspended Solids2 BOD, 5-day, 20 C 2 Fecal Coliform (geo. mean)
Total Arsenic, pg/L
20.0 m g/L j 50.0 m g/L 30.0 m g/L I 45.0 m g/L
200/100 mL
4 0 0 /1 0 0 mL
M o n th ly M o n th ly M on thly Weekly
Grab Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
Total Copper
1.0 m g/L3 I 1.0 m g/L 3
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Iron Total Mercury6
1.0 m g/L 3
'
1.0 m g /L 3
Weekly Weekly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Selenium, pg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
T u rb id ity5, NTU N itra te /n itrite as N, m g /L
M on thly Quarterly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Bromide, m g/L
Total Hardness, m g/L Total Nitrogen (NO2 +NO3 +TKN), m g /L Total Phosphorus, m g/L
J
M onitor & Report Monitor & Report
M o n th ly M on thly Q u a rte rly Quarterly
Grab Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
Chronic Toxicity
See Part I, Section A. (17.)
M o n th ly
Grab
Effluent
pH7
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard Units
M on thly
Grab
Effluent
Notes: 1 Effluent sam pling shall be conducted a t the discharge from th e ash settling basin prior to
m ixing with any other waste stream (s). 2 The facility shall continuously m onitor TSS concentration when the decanting process
com m ences and the decanting pum p shall be shutoff autom atically when the one half of
th e Daily M axim um limit (15 m in u tes average) is exceeded. Pum ping will be allowed to
continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or dam age. The continuous TSS
m onitoring only required when the pum ps are employed for decanting.
3 The lim its for total copper and total iron only apply when chem ical m etal cleaning
w astew aters are being discharged.
4 S tarting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge M onitoring Reports electro n ically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR application system . P lease See S pecial Condition A.
(31.).. 5 T h e n e t tu rb id ity shall not exceed 50 NTU u sin g a grab sam ple a n d m e a su re d by the
difference betw een the effluent turbidity and the background turbidity. The sam ple for the
Page 4 of 27
Pe r m it No. NC0004987
background turbidity shall be ta k e n at point in the receiving w aterbody u p stream of the discharge location, and the background turbidity and the effluent turbidity sam ples shall be taken within the sam e 24 h o u r period. NTU - N ephelom etric T urbidity U nit. 6 The facility shall u se EPA m ethod 163IE. 7 The facility shall continuously m onitor pH w hen the decanting process com m ences and the decanting pum p shall be shutoff autom atically w hen 15 m in u tes ru n n in g average pH falls below 6.1 stan d ard u n its or rises above 8.9 stan d ard u n its. P um ping will be allowed to continue if interruption m ight resu lt in a dam failure or dam age.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. The facility is allowed to drawdown the wastewater in the ash pond to no less than three feet above the ash. The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program. The facility shall use a floating pump station with free water skimmed from the basin surface using an adjustable weir. By November 1, 2018 there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water. This requirement only applies to fly ash transport water generated after November 1, 2018. By January 31, 2021 there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. This requirement only applies to bottom ash transport water generated after January 31, 2021. The limits and conditions in Section A. (3.) of the permit apply when water in the ash settling basin is lowered below the three feet trigger mark. The facility shall notify DWRComplex NPDES Permitting Unit and DWRMooresville Regional Office seven calendar days prior to the commencement of the decanting. When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ponds by the physical-chemical treatment facilities.
Page 5 of 27
P e r m it No. NC0004987
A. (3.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring Requirem ents (Outfall 0 02 dewatering phase) [15A IMCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting until
expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 002 Ash Settling
Basin Discharge (Dewatering - rem oving the interstitial water). Such discharges
shall be limited an d m onitored4 by th e Perm ittee a s specified beloW:__________________
E f f l u e n t C h a r a c t e r is t ic s
D is c h a r g e L im it a t io n s
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
1
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
Measurement Sample
Sample
| Frequency
Type
Location1
Pump logs
Flow
1.0 MGD
Weekly
or similar
Effluent
readings
Oil and Grease
9.0 m g /L 1 12.0 m g /L
Monthly '
Grab : Effluent
Total Suspended Solids2 Total Arsenic
20.0 m g/L 397.1 ug/L
50.0 m g/L 11,121 p g/L |
M o n th ly Weekly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Copper
1.0 m g /L 3 j 1.0 m g /L 3 ,
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Iron BOD, 5-day, 20 C 2 Fecal Coliform (geo. mean)
Total Mercury6
1.0 m g /L 3 30.0 m g /L 200/100 mL
1.0 m g /L 3 45.0 m g/L 400/100 mL
i
Weekly M on thly M o n th ly Weekly
Grab Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
Total Selenium, gg/L
T u rb id ity5, NTU N itra te /n itrite as N, m g /L
Bromide, m g/L Total Hardness, m g/L Total Nitrogen (NO2 +NO3 +TKN), m g /L Total Phosphorus, m g/L
Monitor &Report Monitor &Report
1 Weekly
J Monthly 1 Quarterly 1 Monthly 1 Monthly
Quarterly
Quarterly
Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
Chronic Toxicity
See Part I, Section A. (17.)
M on thly
Grab
Effluent
pH7
Between 5.0 and 9.0 Standard Units
M on thly
Grab
Effluent
N otes:
1 E ffluent sam pling shall be co n d u c te d a t th e discharge from th e a sh settling basin prior to mixing with any other waste stream(s).
2 The facility shall continuously m onitor TSS concentration w hen the dew atering process
com m ences and the dew atering pum p shall be shutoff autom atically when the one half
of th e Daily M aximum limit (15 m in u te s average) is exceeded. Pum ping will be allowed to continue if interruption m ight result in a dam failure or damage.
3 The lim its for total copper and total iron only apply when chem ical m etal cleaning w astew aters are being discharged.
4 S tarting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR application system . Please See Special Condition A. (31.).
5 T he n e t tu rb id ity shall n o t exceed 50 NTU u sin g a grab sam ple a n d m e a su re d by the difference betw een the effluent tu rb id ity a n d th e b ackground turbidity. The sam ple for
the background turbidity shall be taken at point in the receiving waterbody upstream of
Page 6 o f27
Permit No. NC0004987 the discharge location, and the background turbidity and the effluent turbidity sam ples shall be taken within the sam e 24 hour period. NTU - N ephelom etric T urbidity Unit. 6 The facility shall use EPA m ethod 163 IE. 7 The facility shall continuously m onitor pH w hen the dew atering process com m ences and the dewatering pum p shall be shutoff autom atically w hen 15 m inutes running average pH falls below 6.1 stan d ard u n its or rises above 8.9 stan d ard units. Pumping will be allowed to continue if in terru p tio n m ight re su lt in a dam failure or dam age.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program. By November 1, 2018 there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water. This requirement only applies to fly ash transport water generated after November 1, 2018. By January 31, 2021 there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. This requirement only applies to bottom ash transport water generated after January 31, 2021When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ ponds by the physical-chemical treatment facilities.
Page 7 o f 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (4.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 002A) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting until
expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 002A (yard sump #1
overflows). Such discharges shall be limited and monitored2 by the Permittee as
specified below:_____ ________________________ _________________
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitations
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency
Type
Location1
Flow, MGD pH
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard Units
Per discharge event
Per discharge event
Estimate Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 m g/L
100.0 m g/L
Per discharge event
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Grease
15.0 m g /L
20.0 m g/L
Per discharge . event
Grab
Effluent
Total Iron, m g/L
Per discharge event .
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1 Effluent sam ples shall be collected a t a point upstream of the discharge to the Cataw ba River.
2 S tarting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge Monitoring Reports
electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR app licatio n system . P lease See Special C ondition A.
(31.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
All flows shall be reported on m onthly DMRs. Should no flow occur during a given m onth, tire words "No Flow" shall be clearly w ritten on the front of the DMR. All sam ples shall be of a representative discharge.
Page 8 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (5.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 002B) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
D uring the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 002B (yard sump #2 overflows). Such discharges shall be limited and monitored2 by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitations
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
Flow, MGD pH Total Suspended Solids
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard Units
30.0 m g/L
100.0 m g /L
Oil and Grease
15.0 m g /L
20.0 m g/L
Total Iron, m g/L
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency
Type
Location1
Per discharge event
Estimate
Effluent
Per discharge event
Grab
Effluent
Per discharge event
Grab
Effluent
Per discharge event
Grab
Effluent
Per discharge event
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1 E ffluent sam ples shall be collected a t a point u p strea m of the discharge to th e Cataw ba River.
2 Starting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge Monitoring Reports
electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR ap p licatio n system . P lease See S pecial C ondition A.
(31.).
'
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other th an trace am ounts.
All flows shall be reported on m onthly DMRs. Should no flow occur during a given m onth, th e words "No Flow" shall be clearly w ritten on the front of the DMR. All samples shall be of a representative discharge.
Page 9 of 27
Fermt No. NC0004987
A. (6.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Internal Outfall 003) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
D uring the period beginning on the effective date of th is permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 003 (non contact cooling water from the induced draft fan control house). Such discharges shall be limited and m onitored2 by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Flow, MGD
Temperature, C Total Residual C hlorine1, MR/L Free Available Chlorine1
pH
Discharge Limitations
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency .......TyPe
Location
S e m i-an n ua lly
Estimate
Effluent
S e m i-a n n u a lly
Grab
Effluent
S e m i-an n ua lly
Grab
Effluent
0.2 m g/L
0.5 m g/L
S e m i-an n ua lly
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard Units
S e m i-an n ua lly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Notes:
1 M onitoring requirem ents apply only if chlorine is added to the cooling water. Neither free
available chlorine nor total residual chlorine may be discharged from any unit for more than
two h o u rs in any one day and not m ore th an one u n it in any plant m ay discharge free
available chlorine or total residual chlorine at any one time.
2 S tarting on Decem ber 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge M onitoring Reports
electronically u s in g NC DWR's eDMR application system . P lease See Special C ondition A.
(31.).
'
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Limitations shall be met at the discharge point.
Page 10 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (7.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Internal Outfall 004) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
D uring the period beginning on the effective date of this perm it an d lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 0 0 4 (treated FGD w et scrubber w astewater to ash settlin g basin). Such discharges shall be limited and m onitored2 by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Flow, MGD
Total Arsenic Total M ercury3, n g /L Total Selenium N itra te /n itrite as N pH
Discharge Limitations
Monthly-
Dally
Average
Maximum
M onitor 8s Report
8.0 ng/ffl
11-0 Mg/L4
|
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Sample
Frequency
Type
Location1
I Monthly
Pump logs or sim ila r readings
Effluent
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
356.0 ng/L4 788.0 ng/L4 | Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
12.0 p g /L 4 23.0 p g /L 4 1 Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
4.4 m g/L 4
17.0 m g /L 4 I
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard 1
Units
|
Quarterly
_ ., Q u a rte rly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Notes: 1 Sam ple Location: E - Effluent sam ples shall be collected from the constructed wetland prior to discharge to the ash settling basin. 2 S tarting on December 21, 2016, begin subm itting Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR application system . P lease See Special C ondition A. (31.). 3 The facility shall use EPA m ethod 163IE. 4 The TBEL lim its shall become effective on Ja n u a ry 31, 2021. This time period is provided in order for the facility to budget, design, an d co n stru ct the treatm ent system . The facility shall m onitor these p aram eters even before th e lim its becom e effective.
All flows shall be reported on m onthly DMRs. Should no flow occur during a given m onth, the words "No Flow" shall be clearly w ritten on the front of the DMR. All samples shall be of a representative discharge.
Page 11 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (8.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 101) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of th is perm it and lasting until expiration, the
Perm ittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 101 - Seep D ischarge. Such discharges shall
be lim ited a n d m o nitored1 by th e P erm ittee as specified below:________________________________
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitations
Monthly
Daily
Average Maximum
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
Sample
Sample
Frequency2
Type
Location
Flow, MGD
M onthly/Q uarterly
Estimate
Effluent
pH3
M onthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
TSS
30.0 m g/L 100.0 m g/L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Grease
15.0 m g /L 20.0 m g /L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Fluoride, Mg/b Total M ercury4, n g /L
M onthly/Quarterly M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Barium, m g/L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Iron, pg/L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Manganese, pg/L
M on thly/Q ua rterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Zinc, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Arsenic, pg/L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Cadmium, pg/L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Chromium, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Lead, pg/L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nickel, pg/L
Monthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Selenium, pg/L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
N itra te /n itrite as N, m g /L
M on thly/Q ua rterly
Grab
Effluent
Sulfates, m g/L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Chlorides, m g/L
M onthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
TDS, m g /L
M onthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Hardness, m g/L
Monthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature, C
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity, pm ho/cin
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1. S ta rtin g on D ecem ber 21, 2016, begin su b m ittin g D ischarge M onitoring R eports
electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR application system . Please See Special Condition A.
(31.).
2. The facility shall conduct m onthly sam pling from th e effective date of the perm it. After one
year from the effective date of th e perm it th e m onitoring will be reduced to quarterly
3. The pH shall n ot be less th an 6.0 standard units nor greater th an 9.0 standard units.
4. T he facility shall u s e EPA m ethod 1 6 3 IE .
If the facility is unable to obtain a seep sample due to the dry or low flow conditions preventing the facility from obtaining a representative sample, then "no flow" should be reported on the DMR. This requirement is established in the Section D of the Standard Conditions and 40 CFR 122.41 (j).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other th an trace amounts.
Page 12 of 27
P ermit No. NC0004987
A. (9.) Effluent Lim itations and M onitoring R equirem ents (Outfall 102) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of th is perm it and lasting until expiration, the
Perm ittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 102 - Seep D ischarge. Such discharges shall
be lim ited a n d m o n ito red 1 by th e P erm ittee a s specified below:________________________________
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitations
Monthly
Daily
Average
Maximum
Monitoring Requirements
Monthly
Daily
Average Maximum
Flow, MGD
M onthly/Q uarterly
Estimate
Effluent
pH3
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
TSS
.
Oil and Grease
Fluoride, m g/L
Total M ercury4, n g /L
30.0 m g/L 15.0 m g/L
100,0 m g/L 20.0 m g/L
Monthly / Quarterly M onthly/Q uarterly M onthly/Q uarterly M onthly/Quarterly
Grab Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent Effluent
Total Barium, m g/L
M onthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Iron, m g/L Total Manganese, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Zinc, pg/L
Monthly/ Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Arsenic, pg/L
M onthly/Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Cadmium, pg/L Total Chromium, pg/L
M onthly/Q uarterly M onthly/ Quarterly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Copper, pg/L
M onthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Lead, pg/L Total Nickel, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly Monthly / Quarterly
Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent
Total Selenium, pg/L
Monthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
N itra te /n itrite as N, m g /L
Monthly / Qu arterly
Grab
Effluent
Sulfates, m g /L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
Chlorides, m g /L
M onthly/Q uarterly
Grab
Effluent
TDS, m g/L Total Hardness, m g/L Temperature, C
M onthly/Q uarterly M onthly/Quarterly Monthly / Quarterly
Grab Grab Grab
Effluent Effluent Effluent
Conductivity, pm ho/cm
Monthly / Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1. S ta rtin g on D ecem ber 21, 2016, begin su b m ittin g D ischarge M onitoring R eports
electronically u sin g NC DWR's eDMR ap plication system . P lease See S pecial C ondition A.
(31.). 2. The facility shall conduct m onthly sam pling from the effective date of the perm it. After one
year from the effective date of th e perm it the m onitoring will be reduced to quarterly
3. The pH shall n o t be less th a n 6.0 sta n d a rd u n its n o r greater th a n 9.0 stan d ard units.
4. The facility sh all u s e EPA m ethod 163 IE.
If the facility is unable to obtain a seep sample due to the dry or low flow conditions preventing the facility from obtaining a representative sample, then "no flow" should be reported on the DMR. This requirement is established in the Section D of the Standard Conditions and 40 CFR 122.41 (j).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 13 of 27
Permit No . NC0004987
A. (10.) Additional Conditions and Definitions 1. EPA m ethods 200.7 or 200.8 (or the m ost cu rren t versions) shall be used for analyses of all m etals except for total m ercury (EPA Method 163 IE). 2. All effluent sam ples for all external outfalls shall be taken at the m ost accessible location after the final treatm ent but prior to discharge to waters of the U.S. (40 CFR 122.4l(j)). 3. The term lo w v o lu m e w a s t e s o u r c e s m eans w astew ater from all sources except those for which specific lim itations are otherwise established in this p art (40 C F R 4 2 3 .il (b)). 4. The term c h e m ic a l m e ta l c le a n in g w a s t e m eans any w astew ater resulting from cleaning any metal process equipment with chemical compounds, including, b u t not limited to, boiler tube cleaning (40 CFR 423.11 (c)). 5. The term m e t a l c le a n in g w a s t e m eans any w astew ater resulting from cleaning [with or w ithout chemical cleaning compounds] any m etal process equipm ent including, b u t not limited to, boiler tube cleaning, boiler fireside cleaning, and air preheater cleaning (40 CFR 423.11 (d)). 6. For all outfalls where the flow m easurem ent is to be "estim ated" the estim ate can be done by using calibrated V-notch weir, stop-watch and graduated cylinder, or other m ethod approved by the Division. 7. The term "FGD wet scrubber wastewater" m eans w astew ater resulting from the use of the flue-gas desulfurization wet scrubber.
A. (11.) Toxicity Re -opener Condition This perm it shall be modified, or revoked and reissued to incorporate toxicity lim itations and monitoring requirem ents in the event toxicity testing or other studies conducted on the effluent or receiving stream indicate th at detrim ental effects may be expected in the receiving stream as a result of this discharge.
A. (12.) Applicable State Law (State Enforceable Only) The facility shall m eet the requirem ents of Senate Bill 729 (Coal Ash M anagement Act). This perm it may be reopened to include new requirem ents imposed by Senate Bill 729.
A. (13.) P olychlorinated Biphenyl Compounds There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl compounds such as those commonly used for transform er fluid.
A. (14.) Biocide Condition The perm ittee shall not use any biocides except those approved in conjunction with the perm it application. The permittee shall notify the Director in writing not later than ninety (90) days prior to instituting use of any additional biocide used in cooling systems w hich m ay be toxic to aquatic life other th a n those previously reported to the Division of W ater Resources. Such notification shall include completion of Biocide Worksheet Form 101 and a m ap locating the discharge point and receiving stream . Completion of Biocide W orksheet Form 101 is not necessary for those outfalls containing toxicity testing. Division approval is not necessary for the introduction of new biocides into outfalls currently tested for whole effluent toxicity.
Page 14 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (15.) Intake Screen Backwash Continued intake screen backw ash discharge and overflow from the settling basin are permitted without limitations or monitoring requirements.
A. (16.) Best Management Practices It h as been determined from information subm itted th at the plans and procedures in place at Marshall Steam Station are equivalent to th a t of a Best Management Practice (BMP).
A. (17.) Chronic Toxicity Pa ss/ F ail Permit Limit - Outfall 0 0 2 [15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.]
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to C e r i o d a p h t i i a d u b i a at an effluent concentration of 23.0% for decanting and 2.6% for dewatering.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, m o n th ly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina C e r io d a p h n ia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised December 2010, or su b seq u en t versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised- December 2010) or subsequent versions. Effluent sampling for this testing m u st be obtained during representative effluent discharge and shall be perform ed a t the NPDES perm itted final effluent discharge below all treatm ent processes.
If th e m onthly te st procedure results in a failure or ChV below th e permit lim it, then m ultiple-concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum , in each of th e two following m onths as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised-December 2010) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as p a rt of th is perm it condition will be entered on the Effluent D ischarge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the m onths in which tests were perform ed, using the param eter code TGP3B for the p ass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWR Form AT-3 (original) is to be se n t to the following address:
Attention:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources W ater Sciences Section/A quatic Toxicology Branch 1623 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later th a n 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chem ical/physical m easurem ents and all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sam ple m u st be m easured an d reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Page 15 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
Should there be no discharge of flow from th e facility during a m onth in which toxicity monitoring is required, the perm ittee will complete the inform ation located a t the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility nam e, perm it num ber, pipe num ber, county, and the m o n th /y ear of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be subm itted to the Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the perm ittee fail to m onitor during a m onth in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required during the following m onth. A ssessm ent of toxicity compliance is based on the toxicity testing month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirem ent or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources indicate potential im pacts to the receiving stream , this permit may be re-opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirem ents or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited docum ent, such as minimum control organism survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environm ental controls, shall constitute an invalid te s t and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the m onth of the initial monitoring.
A. (18.) Ash Settling Basin Beginning on the effective date of this perm it and lasting u n til expiration, there shall be no discharge of plant wastes to the ash pond unless the permittee provides and m aintains a t all times a minimum free water volume equivalent to the sum of the m axim um 24-hour plant discharges plus all direct rainfall and all runoff flows to the pond resulting from a 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event, when using a runoff coefficient of 1.0 .
During the term of the permit, the permittee shall remove settled material from the ponds or otherwise enlarge the available storage capacities in order to maintain the required minimum volumes at all times. Annually the permittee shall determine and rep o rt to the perm it issuing authority: (1) the actual free w ater volume of the ash pond, (2) physical m easurem ents of the dim ensions of the free w ater volume in sufficient detail to allow validation of the calculated volume, and (3) a certification th a t the required volum e is available with adequate safety factor to include all solids expected to be deposited in the ponds for the following year. Any changes to plant operations affecting su ch certification shall be reported to the Director within five days.
NOTE: In the event th at adequate volume h as been certified to exist for the term of the perm it, periodic certification is not needed.
A. (19.) Chemical Metal Cleaning Wastes It h as been dem onstrated that under certain conditions it is possible to reduce the concentration of m etals in boiler cleaning w astes in the range of 92 to 99+ percent by treatm ent in ash ponds. Because of dilution problems, and the existence of boundary interface layers at the extremities of the plume, it is difficult to prove beyond doubt that th e quantity of iron and copper discharged will always be less th an one milligram per liter tim es the flow of metal cleaning when treated in this m anner.
Page 16 of 27
Permit No . NC0004987
The application of physical/chem ical m ethods of treating wastes has also been dem onstrated to be effective in the treatm en t of m etal cleaning w astes. However, the effectiveness of ash pond treatm ent should be considered in relation to the small differences in effluent quality realized between the two methods.
It has been dem onstrated th a t the presence of ions of copper, iron, nickel, and zinc in the ash pond waters was not measurably increased during the ash pond equivalency dem onstration at th e Duke Energy's M arshall Steam Station. Therefore, w hen the following conditions are im plemented during m etal cleaning procedures, effective treatm ent for m etals can be obtained at this facility:
(1) Large a sh basin providing potential reaction volumes.
(2) Well-defined shallow a sh delta n ear the ash b asin influent.
(3) Ash pond pH of no less than 6.5 prior to m etal cleaning w aste addition.
(4) Four days retention time in a sh pond w ith effluent virtually stopped.
(5) Boiler volume less th an 86,000 gallons.
(6) Chem icals for cleaning to include only one or more of th e following:
(a) Copper removal step- sodium brom ate, NaBrCL; am m onium carbonate,
(NH4)2C 03; and am m onium hydroxide, NH4OH.
(b) Iron removal step-hydrochloric acid, HC1; and am m onium bifluoride, (NH4)BF2
and proprietary inhibitors.
'
(7) M axim um dilution of w astes before entering a sh pond 6 to 1.
(8) After treatm en t of metal cleaning w astes, if m onitoring of basin effluents as required
by the perm it reveals discharges outside th e limits of the perm it, the permittee will
re-close the basin discharge, conduct su ch in-basin sam pling as necessary to
determ ine the cause of nonconform ance, wall take appropriate corrective actions,
a n d will file a report with EPA including all p ertin en t data.
A. (20.) Floating Materials The Perm ittee shall report all visible discharges of floating m aterials, such as an oil sheen, to th e Director when subm itting DMRs.
A. (21.) Chemical discharges Discharge of any product registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act to any waste stream which may ultimately be released to lakes, rivers, stre am s or other w aters of the United States is prohibited un less specifically authorized elsewhere in this permit. Discharge of chlorine from the use of chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite, or other similar chlorination compounds for disinfection in plant potable and service w ater systems and in sewage treatm ent is authorized. Use of restricted use pesticides for lake m anagem ent purposes by applicators licensed by the N.C. Pesticide Board is allowed.
A. (22.) Priority P ollutant Analysis - Outfall 0 0 2 The Perm ittee shall conduct a priority p o llu tan t analysis (in accordance with 40 CFR P a rt 136) once per permit cycle a t outfall 002 an d su b m it the resu lts with the application for perm it renewal.
Page 17 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
A. (23.) Waivers Nothing contained in this perm it shall be construed as a waiver by permittee or any right to a hearing it may have p u rs u a n t to State or Federal laws or regulations.
A. (24.) GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION AND SAMPLING (STATE ENFORCEABLE Only) The permittee shall conduct groundwater monitoring to determine the compliance of this NPDES perm itted facility with the current groundw ater stan d ard s found u nder 15A NCAC 2L .0200. The monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with the Sampling Plan approved by the Division. See A ttachm ent 1.
A. (2 5 .) STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY INSPECTIONS OF ASH POND DAM The facility shall m eet the dam design and dam safety requirem ents per 15A NCAC 2K.
A. (2 6 .) Clean Water Act S ection 3 1 6 (a ) Thermal Variance The therm al variance granted u n d er Section 3 16(a) term inates on expiration of this NPDES perm it. Should the perm ittee wish a continuation of its 3 16(a) therm al variance beyond the term of this permit, reapplication for such continuation shall be subm itted in accordance with 40 CFR Part 125, S u b p art H and Section 122.21(1) (6) not later than 180 days prior to permit expiration. Reapplication shall include a basis for continuation su ch as a) plant operating conditions and load factors are unchanged and are expected to rem ain so for the term of the reissued perm it; b) there are no changes to plant discharges or other discharges in the plant site area which could in teract with the therm al discharges; and c) there are no changes to the biotic community of the receiving water body which would impact the previous variance determ ination.
The next 316(a) studies shall be performed in accordance with the Division of Water Resources approved plan. The temperature analysis and the balanced and indigenous study plan shall conform to the specifications outlined in 40 CFR 125 S ubpart H, the EPA's Draft 316(a) Guidance M anual, dated 1977, and the Region 4 letter to NCDENR, dated J u n e 3, 2010. EPA shall be provided an opportunity to review the plan prior to the commencement of the study.
Copies of all the study plans, study results, and any other applicable m aterials should be subm itted to:1
1) Electronic Version Only (pdf and CD) Division of W ater Resources WQ Perm itting Section - NPDES 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
2) Electronic Version (pdf and CD) and H ard Copy Division of Water Resources W ater Sciences Section 1621 Mail Sendee Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Page 18 of 27
Pkkmit No. NC0004987
A. (27.) Clean Water Act Section 316 (b ) The perm ittee shall comply with the Cooling W ater Intake Structure Rule per 40 CFR 125.95. The permittee shall submit all the m aterials required by the Rule with the next renewal application.
A . (28.) F ish T issue Monitoring N e a r Ash Pond Discharge - Outfall 002 The facility shall conduct fish tissu e monitoring annually and subm it the results with the NPDES perm it renewal application. The objective of the monitoring is to evaluate potential uptake of pollutants by fish tissue near the Ash Pond discharge. The param eters analyzed in fish tissue shall be arsenic, selenium, and mercury. The monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with the Sampling Plan approved by the Division.
A. (29.) Instkeam Monitoring The facility shall conduct sem iannual instream monitoring (approximately one mile upstream and approximately one mile downstream of the ash pond discharge) for arsenic, selenium, mercury (method 163IE), chromium, lead, cadmium, copper, zinc, bromide, total hardness, and total dissolved solids (TDS). Instream m onitoring should be conducted a t the stations th a t have already been established through the BIP monitoring program. The monitoring results shall be subm itted with the NPDES permit renewal application.
A. (30.) Discharge F rom Seepage Existing D isrharges from Seepage The facility ident lfied 2 non-enginccred discharges from seepage from the a sh settling basin. The locations of the seeps are identified below and are depicted on the map attached to the permit.
Tabic 1.___________ Discharge Coordinates and Assigned Outfall Numbers
D ischarge ID
Latitude
Longitude
Outfall number
75 i *--
353671"
8 0 0 5 7 '6 2 "
101
S-2
35n4 2 '56"
8021'56"
102
The outfall for these discharges is through an effluent channel meeting the requirem ents in 15A NCAC 2B .0228. Within 180 days of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall demonstrate, through in-stream sampling meeting the requirem ents of condition A. (29.), th a t the w ater quality stan d a rd s in the receiving stream arc not contravened.
D ischarges from Seepage tdentified After Permit Issuance The facility shall comply with the "Plan for Identification of New D ischarges" as contained in A ttachm ent 2. For any discharge identified p u rsu a n t to this Plan, the facility shall, within 90 days of the seep discovery, determine if the discharge seep m eets the state w ater quality stan d ard s established in 15A NCAC 2B .0200 and subm it the re su lts of this determ ination to the Division. If the stan d ard s arc not contravened, the facility shall conduct m onitoring for the param eters specified in A. (8.).
Page 19 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
If any of the water quality standards are exceeded, the facility shall be considered in violation until one of the options below is fully implemented:
1) Subm it a complete application for 404 Permit (within 30 days after determ ining that a w ater quality standards is exceeded) to pum p the seep discharge to one of the existing outfalls, install a pipe to discharge the seep to the Catawba River, or install an in -situ treatm ent system. After the 404 Permit is obtained, the facility shall complete the installation of the pum p, pipe, or treatm ent system w ithin 180 days from the date of the 404 perm it receipt and begin pumping/discharging or treatment.
2) D em onstrate through modeling th a t th e decanting and dewatering of the ash basin will resu lt in the elimination of th e seep. The modeling results shall be subm itted to the Division within 120 days from the date of the seep discovery. Within 180 days from the completion of the dewatering the facility shall confirm th a t the seep flow ceased. If the seep flow continues, th e facility shall choose one of the other options in this Special Condition.
3) D em onstrate th a t the seep is discharging through the designated "Effluent Channel''' and the w ater quality stan d ard s in the receiving stream are not contravened. This dem onstration should be subm itted to the Division no later th a n 180 days from the date of the seep discovery. The "Effluent C hannel" designation should be established by the DEQ Regional Office personnel prior to the issuance of the permit. This perm it shall be reopened for cause to include the "Effluent C hannel" in a revised permit.
All effluent limits, including w ater quality-based effluent limits, rem ain applicable notw ithstanding any action by the Permittee to address the violation through one of the identified options, so th at any discharge in exceedance of an applicable effluent limit is a violation of the Perm it as long as the seep rem ains flowing.
New Identified Seeps If new seeps are identified, the facility shall follow the procedures outlined above. The deadlines for new seeps shall be calculated from the date of the seep discovery. The new identified seep are not perm itted until the perm it is modified and the new seep included in the perm it and the new outfall established for the seep.
A. (31.) Electronic Reporting of Discharge Monitoring Reports [G.S. 143-215.1(b)] Federal regulations require electronic su bmittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) an d program reports and specify that, if a state does no t establish a system to receive such subm ittals, then permittees m ust subm it monitoring data and reports electronically to the Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA). The final NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was adopted and became effective on December 21, 2015.
NOTE: This special condition supplem ents or supersedes the following sections within P a rt II of th is p erm it ( S t a n d a r d C o n d itio n s f o r N P D E S P e r m its ):
Section B.
Signatory Requirements
( 11.)
Section D. (2.) Reporting
Page 20 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
Section D. (6.) Records Retention Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
1. Reporting Requirem ents fSupersedes Section D. (2.) and S ectio n E. (5.) (a)1
Effective December 2 1 , 2016, the perm ittee shall report discharge monitoring data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic D ischarge M onitoring Report (eDMR) internet application.
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each m onth and subm itted electronically using eDMR! The eDMR system allows perm itted facilities to enter monitoring data and subm it DMRs electronically using the internet. Until such time th a t the s ta te 's eDMR application is com pliant with EPA's Cross-M edia Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR), perm ittees will be required to subm it all discharge monitoring d ata to the state electronically using eDMR an d will be required to complete the eDMR subm ission by printing, signing, an d subm itting one signed original an d a copy of the com puter printed eDMR to the following address:
NC DEQ / Division of W ater Resources / W ater Quality Perm itting Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
'
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If a perm ittee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a dem onstrated hardship or due to the facility being physically located in an area where less th a n 10 percent of the households have broadband access, then a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirem ents may be granted and discharge m onitoring d a ta m ay be subm itted on paper DMR forms (MR 1, 1.1, 2, 3) or alternative forms approved by the Director. Duplicate signed copies shall be subm itted to the mailing address above. See "How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting" section below.
R egardless of th e subm ission m ethod, th e first DMR is due on the last day of the m onth following the issuance of the perm it or in the case of a new facility, on the last day of the m onth following the com m encem ent of discharge.
Starting on December 21, 2020, the permittee m ust electronically report the following compliance monitoring data and reports, when applicable:
Sewer Overflow/Bypass Event Reports; Pretreatm ent Program Annual Reports; and Clean W ater Act (CWA) Section 316(b) A nnual Reports.
The perm ittee m ay seek an electronic reporting waiver from the Division (see "How to R equest a Waiver from Electronic Reporting" section below).
2. Electronic Submissions
Page 21 of 27
Permit No. NC0004987
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.41(1)(9), th e perm ittee m u st identify the initial recipient at the time of each electronic submission. The permittee should use the EPA's website resources to identify the initial recipient for the electronic submission.
Initial recipient of electronic NPDES information from NPDES-regulated facilities
m eans the entity (EPA or the state authorized by EPA to im plem ent the NPDES
program) th at is the designated entity for receiving electronic NPDES data [see 40
CFR 127.2(b)], '
.
EPA plans to establish a website th at will also link to the appropriate electronic reporting tool for each type of electronic subm ission and for each state. Instructions on how to access and use the appropriate electronic reporting tool will be available as well. Information on EPA's NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule is found at: h ttp :/ / www2.epa.gov/ com pliance/ final-national-pollutant-dischargeelim ination-system -npdes-electronic-reporting-rule.
Electronic subm issions m u st start by the dates listed in the "Reporting Requirem ents" section above.
3. How to R equest a Waiver from Electronic Reporting
The perm ittee may seek a temporary electronic reporting waiver from the Division. To obtain a n electronic reporting waiver, a perm ittee m u st first subm it an electronic reporting waiver request to the Division. Requests for temporary electronic reporting waivers m ust be subm itted in writing to the Division for written approval at least sixty (60) days prior to the date the facility would be required under this perm it to begin submitting monitoring data and reports. The duration of a tem porary waiver shall not exceed 5 years and shall thereupon expire. At such time, monitoring data and reports shall be subm itted electronically to the Division unless the perm ittee re-applies for and is granted a new tem porary electronic reporting waiver by the Division. Approved electronic reporting waivers are not transferrable. Only permittees with an approved reporting waiver request may subm it m onitoring data and reports on paper to the Division for the period that the approved reporting waiver request is effective.
Information on eDMR and the application for a temporary electronic reporting waiver are found on the following web page:
http: / / deq ,nc, gov/ about/divisions / w ater-resources /cdm r
4. Signatory R equirem ents [Supplements Section B. (11.) (b) and Supersedes S e c tio n B. (11.) (d)l
All eDMRs subm itted to the perm it issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in P art II, Section B. (1 l.)(a) or by a duly authorized representative of th a t person as described in Part II, Section B. (ll.)(b). A person, and not a position, m ust be delegated signatory authority for eDMR reporting purposes.
Page 22 of 27
P ermit No . NC0004987
For eDMR subm issions, the person signing and subm itting the DMR m ust obtain an eDMR user account and login credentials to access the eDMR system. For more inform ation on North C arolina's eDMR system , registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR u ser account, please visit the following web page: http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edm r Certification. Any person subm itting an electronic DMR using the s ta te 's eDMR system shall m ake the following certification [40 CFR 122.22], NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL BE ACCEPTED:
"I c e r tif y , u n d e r p e n a l t y o f la w , t h a t t h i s d o c u m e n t a n d a ll a t t a c h m e n t s w e r e p r e p a r e d u n d e r m y d irectio n or s u p e r v is io n in a c c o rd a n c e w ith a s y s te m d e s ig n e d to a s s u re th a t q u a lified p erso n n el p ro p e rly g a th e r a n d ev a lu a te th e inform ation su b m itted . B a se d on m y inquiry o f th e p e rso n or p e rso n s w h o m a n a g e th e system , or th o se p e r s o n s d irectly resp o n sib le fo r g a th erin g th e inform ation, th e inform ation s u b m itte d is, to th e b e st o f m y k n o w le d g e a n d b e lie f true, a ccu ra te, a n d com plete. I a m a w a r e th a t th ere a re sig n ifica n t p e n a ltie s fo r su b m ittin g f a ls e inform ation, in clu d in g th e p o s s ib ility o ffin e s a n d im p riso n m en t fo r k n o w in g violations."
5. R ecords R eten tion [Supplem ents S ection D. (6.)1 The permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports, including eDMR subm issions. These records or copies shall be m aintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the report. This period may be extended by request of th e Director a t any time [40 CFR 122.41],
A. (32.) Domestic Wastewater Treatment P lant The dom estic w astew ater treatm ent p lan t shall be properly operated an d m aintained to ensure treatm ent of domestic w astew ater to secondary levels.
Page 23 o f 27
Permit No. NC0004987
Attachment 1
GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN The permittee shall conduct groundwater monitoring as may be required to determine the compliance of this NPDES perm itted facility with the current groundwater Standards found under 15A NCAC 2L .0200.
1. (
2.
WELL CONSTRUCTION a. Monitoring wells shall be constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC
02C .0108 (Standards of C onstruction for Wells Other th an Water Supply) and any other jurisdictional laws and regulations pertaining to well construction. b. Monitoring wells m u st be constructed by a North Carolina Certified Well Contractor, the property owner, or th e property lessee according to General Statutes 87-98.4. If the construction is not perform ed by a certified well contractor, the property owner or lessee, provided they are a natural person, m ust physically perform the actual well construction activities. c. Within 30 days of com pletion of well construction, a completed Well C onstruction Record (Form GW-1) m u st be subm itted for each compliance monitoring well to Division of W ater Resources, Water Quality Regional O perations Section (WQROS), 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636. d. The Mooresville Regional Office, telephone num ber (704) 663-1699, shall approve th e location of new compliance monitoring wells prior to installation. The regional office shall be notified at least 48 hours prior to the construction of any compliance monitoring well and such notification to the WQROS regional supervisor shall be made from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays. c. All monitoring wells shall be regularly m aintained. Such m aintenance shall include ensuring th a t th e well caps are rust-free and locked at all times, the outer casing is upright and undamaged, and the well does not serve as a conduit for contam ination. f. If the Permittee intends to abandon a compliance monitoring well either temporarily or permanently, the Permittee shall justify the abandonm ent and request approval from th e WQROS Regional Office within 30 bu sin ess days prior to initiating abandonm ent procedures. g. Monitoring wells shall be abandoned in accordance with 15A NCAC 02C .0113 (Abandonment of Wells). Within 30 days of completion of well abandonm ent, a completed Well A bandonm ent Record (Form GW-30) m u st be subm itted for each monitoring well to WQROS, 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636. MAPS a. Updated m aps shall be provided within 60 days when any of the following occur: i. Compliance monitoring wells are added or deleted from tire
plan.
Page 24 of 27
Permit No. N C 0004987
ii, The facility operation changes th a t would require a change in the waste boundary, compliance boundary, or property line.
b. If the map is updated, the Permittee shall subm it two original copies of a site map with an appropriate scale to easily identify all features overlaid on the m ost recent aerial photograph. At a minimum, the map shall include the following information: i. The location and identity of each m onitoring well. ii. The location of m ajor com ponents of the waste disposal system. iii. The location of property boundaries w ithin 500 feet of the disposal areas. iv. The elevation of the top of the well casing (i.e., m easuring point) relative to a common datum . vi. The depth of w ater below the m easuring point at the time the measuring point is established. vii. The location of compliance boundary. viii. The date th e m ap is prepared a n d /o r revised. ix. Topographic contours in no more th an ten (10) foot intervals. For areas of high relief, 20 foot intervals shall be acceptable.
c. The m ap and any supporting docum entation shall be sen t to the WQROS, 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636.
3. GROUNDWATER SAMPLING AND COMPLIANCE. a. The compliance boundary,for the disposal system shall be specified in accordance w ith 15A NCAC 02L .0107(a) or (b) dependent upon the date perm itted. An exceedance of groundw ater standards at or beyond the compliance boundaiy is subject to remediation action according to 15A NCAC 02L .0106(c) or (d) as well as enforcement actions in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 1432 15.6A through 143-215.6C. b. Monitoring wells shall be sam pled after construction and thereafter at the frequencies and for the param eters as specified in Part 4 of this plan. All m aps, well construction forms, well abandonm ent forms and monitoring data shall refer to the permit num ber and the well nom enclature. c. Per 15A NCAC 02H .0800, a Division certified laboratory shall conduct all laboratory analyses for the required effluent, groundwater or surface water parameters. d. The m easurem ent of w ater levels shall be made prior to purging the wells. The depth to water in each well shall be m easured from the surveyed point on the top of the casing. e. The m easuring points (top of well casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed to provide the relative elevation of the measuring point for each monitoring well. The m easuring points (top of casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed relative to a common datum . f. Two copies of the m onitoring well sam pling shall be subm itted on a Compliance Monitoring Form (GW-59CCR), and received no later than 60 days from the sampling date. Copies of the laboratory analyses shall be kept on site, and made available upon request.
Page 25 of 27
Permit No . NC0004987
The Compliance Monitoring Form (GW-59CCR) shall include this perm it num ber and the appropriate well identification num ber. The Compliance Monitoring Form s (GW-59CCR) shall be subm itted to the Division of Water Resources Information Processing Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 g. For groundw ater sam ples th a t exceed th e ground w ater quality standards in 15A NCAC 02L .0202, the Regional Office shall be contacted within 30 days after subm ission of the groundwater monitoring form; an evaluation may be required to determine the impact of the waste disposal activities. Failure to do so may subject the permittee to a Notice of Violation, fines, a n d /o r penalties. h. The provisions of sections 3(f) and 3(g) apply only to the sampling events described in 3(b) above. The reporting requirem ents for any sam pling events other th a n those described in 3(b) above shall be in accordance with th e general provisions of 15A NCAC 02L. 4. MONITORING WELLS, PARAMETERS, AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY. a. Laboratory m ethods shall be EPA approved and sufficient to detect constituent quantities at or below th eir individual 15A NCAC 02L groundwater standards. b. The following chart contains the compliance monitoring wells to be sampled, the param eters to be sampled, and the frequency in which the samples shall be collected.
M ONITORING WELLS
MW-4, MW-4D, MW-10S, MW10D, MW-11S, MW-11D, MW-
12S, MW-12D, MW-
13S, MW-13D, MW-
14S, MW-14D
PARAM ETERS
L aboratory P aram eters
A lum inum
A n tim on y
B eryllium C obalt L ead M ercury
B oron C hrom ium M agn esium N ickel
' Sodium .
S tro n tiu m
Zinc
C hloride
B icarbonate C arbon ate
F ield P a ra m eters
T urbidity
pH
D issolved O xygen
O xidation R eduction P oten tial
FREQUENCY
A rsen ic C adm iu m C opper M anganese P otassiu m T hallium S u lfa te T o ta l D issolved S olids
B arium C alcium Iron M olybden u m S e le n iu m V anadium A lkalin ity T o ta l S u sp en d ed S olids
S p e c ific T em peratu re
C onductance W ater level
February, June,
October
Page 26 of 27
P ermit No. NC0004987
Attachment 2
Plan for Identification of New D ischarges (State Enforceable Only)
http: / /deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-hot-topics/dwrcoal-ash-regulation/duke-energy-npdes-perm its-for-facilities-w ith-coal-ashponds/ duke-energy-npdes-modifications-renewals
Page 27 of 27
Outfall Information
Outfall #: Receivine Stream: Latitude: Loneitude:
001 Catavvba River 3535'43*' 80u57, 52"
Outfall ft Receivine Stream: Latitude: LoDEilude: I.oneitude for 002B:
Outfall : Recetvine Stream: LatitudeLoneifude:
002 Catawba River 3S3r>,2 r 8057'35"
Outfall it:
LatitudeLon eihide:
002A ad 02B Catawba 35035'51" 8057'36" 8057'34"
003
3535'52" 80 5 1 '4 T '
Facility Location
North
Duke Power Corporation NC0004987
Marshall Steam Station
STATE OF MISSOURI
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MISSOURI CLEAN WATER COMMISSION
MISSOURI STATE OPERATING PERMIT
In com pliance w ith the M issouri C lean W ater L aw , (C hapter 6 4 4 R .S. M o. as am ended, hereinafter, the L aw ), and the Federal Water P o llu tio n C on tro l A ct (P u b lic L a w 9 2 - 5 0 0 , 92.1,d C o n g re ss) a s a m en d ed ,
Perm it N o .
M O -0000353
Owner: Address:
Am eren M issouri 1901 Chouteau A ven u e, P.O . B o x 661 4 9 , M C -602, St. L ouis, M O 63166-6149
C ontinuing Authority: A d dress:
sam e as above sam e as above
Facility N am e Facility Address:
Am eren M issouri Sioux E nergy Center 8501 North State R oute 94, W est A lton, M O 6 3 3 86-1009
L egal Description: UTM Coordinates:
see pages tw o and three; St. Charles Co. see pages tw o and three
R eceivin g Stream: First C lassified Stream and ID: L S u S Basin & Snb-watersbed N o.:
see p ages tw o and three see pages tw o and three see pages tw o and tliree
is auth orized to discharge lVoin the fa cility d escrib ed herein, in accord an ce w ith the efflu en t lim itations and m onitoring requirem ents as set forth herein:
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
T his facility is a pow er generating facility prim arily involved in the production and sale o f electricity from coal. See pages tw o and three for outfall descriptions. T his facility d oes not require a certified w astew ater operator.
(continued below )
T his perm it authorizes only w astew ater and storm w ater discharges under the M issouri C lean W ater Law and the N ational Pollutant
D isc h a r g e E lim in a tio n S y stem ; it d o e s not a p p ly to o th er regu lated areas. T h is p erm it m a y b e a p p e a le d in a ccord an ce w ith S e c tio n s
640.013" 6 21.250. and 644.051.6 o fth e Law.
"
'
A pril 1 .2 0 1 7 Effective Date
M arch 31. 2022 Expiration Date
FACILITY DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 2 of 19
.O u t f a l l # 0 0 1 .- P o w e r P l a n t - S I C # 4 9 1 1 , N A IC S # 2 2 1 1 1 2
N on-contact coolin g water; U nit 1 and 2 condensers, condensate coolers, jacket water coolers
L egal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles County
U T M Coordinates:
X = 734877, Y = 4311058
R eceivin g Stream:
M ississippi River, M ile 209.5
First C lassified Stream and ID:
Upper M ississippi R iver (P) (3700)
U SG S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
C ity o f A lton-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0402
D esign Flow :
724.3 M G D
A verage Flow :
645 M GD
Outfall # 0 0 2 . - P o w e r P lan t - SIC # 4 9 1 1
A sh pond #1; bottom ash system , com b in ed drain sum p, bottom ash system overflow , sew age treatm ent plant (O utfall #0 2 A ), boiler
drain line, exciter & control room H V A C coolin g tow er, precipitation
L egal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles County
U T M Coordinates:
X = 734273, Y = 4310597
R eceivin g W aterbody:
Poeling Lake
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M ississippi R iver (P ) (3700)
U SG S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
M arais Tem ps C lair-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0401
D esign Flow :
15.8 M G D
A verage Flow :
3.8 M G D
OUTFALL # 0 2 A - P o w e r P lan t - SIC # 4 9 1 1
P ack age S ew a g e T reatm ent Plant (flo w equalization, exten ded aeration, activated slu d g e, slu d g e hold in g tank; slud ge rem oved b y
contract hauler)
Legal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles County
U T M Coordinates:
X = 735053, Y = 4310953
R eceivin g W aterbody:
Poeling Lake
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M ississippi R iver (P) (3700)
U SG S Basin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
M arais Tem ps C lair-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0401
D esign Flow :
0.039 M G D
A verage Flow :
0.013 M G D
.Outfall # 0 0 3 . - P o w e r P lan t - SIC # 4 9 1 1
C om bined drain su m p-em ergency overflow . D ischarges from this outfall is not authorized, and shall be subject to 40 CFR 122.41(m )
and reported according to 4 0 C FR 122.41(m )(3X i) & (h).
L egal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. C harles C ounty
U T M Coordinates:
X = 734884, Y = 4310982
R eceivin g Stream:
M ississippi R iver (P)
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M ississippi River (P) (3700)
U SG S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
C ity of A lton-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0402
D esign Flow :
3.48 M G D
A verage Flow :
0 MGD
Outfall #004. - Stormwater
Storm water, discharges in to the coolin g w ater intake structure canal
Legal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles County
U T M Coordinates:
X = 734711, Y =4310878
R eceivin g Stream:
M ississippi R iver (P)
First C lassified Stream and ID:
U SG S Basin & Sub-w atershed No.:
M ississippi R iver (P) (3700) M arais T em ps C lair-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0401
A ctual Flow :
dpendent upon prcipitation
Area oflm p erviou s Surface:
0.2 acres
Total Drainage Area:
0.6 acres
(continued below )
FAC ILITY DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 3 of 19
.Outfall #005. - Stormwater
Stormwater, roadw ay south o f facility betw een south ash pond and Poeling Lake
L egal D escription:
Landgrant 183 8 , St. C harles C ounty
U T M Coordinates:
X = 734408, Y = 4310020
R eceivin g W aterbody:
Poeling Lake
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M ississippi R iver (P) (3700)
U SG S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
M arais Tem ps C lair-M ississippi River - 07110009-0401
A ctual Flow':
dependent upon precipitation
A rea o f Im pervious Surface:
0.05 acres
Total Drainage Area .
0.2 acres
Outfall # 0 0 6 . - P o w e r P lant - SIC # 4 9 1 1
A sh pon d #2; flu e gas con d ition in g heat exch anger, coal handling sum ps, air heater w ash , econ om izer ash system , precipitator ash
rem oval system , precipitator pad sum ps, regeneration w astes, char hopper, precipitation, decanting, dewatering
Legal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles C ounty
UTM Coordinates:
X = 734716, Y = 4310212
R eceiving W aterbody:
Poeling Lake
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M ississippi R iver (P) (3700)
U S G S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
M arais T em ps C lair-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0401
D esign Flow :
10.8 M G D
A verage Flow :
4.6 M G D
Outfall # 0 0 7 . - P o w e r P lan t - SIC # 4911
E m ergency overflow structure for no-discharge recycle pond. D ischarges from this outfall is not authorized, and shall be subject to 40
CFR 122.41(m ) and reported according to 4 0 CFR 122.41(m )(3)(i) & (ii).
Legal D escription:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles County
U T M Coordinates:
X = 7 3 4 3 9 2 ,Y = 4309811
R eceiving W aterbody:
discharge w ou ld exit the w estern side o f the recycle pond and enter an agricultural field;
th en W'ould lik e ly travel sou th until m e etin g D w ig g in s R oad ; lik ely it w o u ld travel under
D w ig g in s R oad and the rail road tracks at the jurisdictional seep then would follow
genera] field drainage patterns south to the M issouri River.
First C lassified Stream and ID:
M issouri R iver (P) (1604)
U SG S B asin & Sub-w atershed N o.:
O utlet M issouri R iver - 10300200-0804
D esign Flow :
1378 M GD
A verage Flow :
0 MGD
P e r m it t e d Fe a t u r e # 0 0 8 - P o w e r P lant - SIC # 4 9 1 1
Intake structure (n ew feature this perm it)
Legal Description:
Landgrant 1838, St. Charles C ounty
U T M Coordinates:
X = 7 3 4 7 1 1 ,Y = 4310878
W ithdraw ing Stream:
Upper M ississippi River (P) (3700) at m ile 209.5
LSGS B asin & Sub-w'atershed N o.:
M arais T em ps C lair-M ississippi R iver - 07110009-0401
W ithdrawal:
2 0 2 ,2 0 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 gallons in 2014 (202,201 M G D )
A F.FFI .1JF.NT T.IM ITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 4 of 19
OUTFALL #001
Cooling Water
Table A-l Interim Effluent Limitations And Monitoring Requirements
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial n u m b ers) as specified in the application for this permit. The interim effluent
limitations shall becom e effective on ADril 1. 2017. and remain in effect through March 31.2019. Such discharaes shall be controlled, limited
and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Parameters
Pf IYM( \L
Units
Interim Effluent Limitations
D aily M axim um
W eekly
Average 1 4,
Monthly Average
Monitoring Requirements
M easurement Frequency
S a m ple T ype
F low
MOD
*
*
d a ily
24 hr. total
Thermal Discharge
Btu/hr
5 5 xlO 9
*
daily
calculation
Effluent F low (Q t )
cfs
*
*
d a ily
m easured
E ffluent Tem perature (T^) Stream Flow (Q s )
F
*
cfs
*
*
daily
m easured
*
daily
m easured
Stream Tem perature (T ,) AT (N ote 3)
op
*
F
*
*
daily
m easured
*
d a ily
calculation
L w (N ote 4)
F
*
daily
calculation
Tim e o f D eviation-M onth (N ote 4)
hours
*
m onthly
calculation
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted M onthly; The First Report Is Due M A Y 28.2017..
There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts
Total Tim e o f D eviation (N ote 4 )
hours/year
*
yearly sum
calculation
Monitoring Reports Shall B e Submitted Yearly.; The First Report Is Due J anuary 28.2018.. There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace amounts.
*
M onitoring requirem ent only.
A . F.FFT.1JF.NT T.IMITATIONS AN D MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED'!
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 5 o f 19
OUTFALL #001
.C ooling W ater
.T a b l e A - 2 P in a l E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s A n d M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number(s) as specified in the application for this permit. The final effluent limitations shall becom e effective on A p r i l 1 . 2019 and remain in effect until expiration o f the permit. Such discharges shall be controlled. limited and monitored by the pennittee as specified below:
E f f i .l t .n t P a r a m e t e r s
U n it s
F in a l E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s
D a il y M a x im u m
W eekly a verag e
M onthly A verage
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
M easurem ent Frequency
Sam ple ty pe
P h y sic a l
F lo w Effluent F low (Q*) Effluent Temperature (T*) S trea m F lo w (Q s.) S trea m T em p eratu re (T.*) AT (N ote 3)
MOD
4
cfs
*
F
*
cfs
*
F
*
F
5
4
daily
24 hr. total
daily
m easured
4
daily
m easured
4
daily
m easured
4
daily
m easured
4
daily
calculation
T-cap (N o te 4) January February M arch A p ril M ay June July August Septem ber O ctob er N ovem ber Decem ber
op
45
*
Of
45
4
op
57
*
op 68
4
op
78
'Q.;?f; N''tW~':
4
op
86
4
F
88
4
op
88
4
op 86
*
op
75
*
op
65 lllliillll *
op
52
*
daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily
calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation
T ** (N ote 4) January February M arch A p ril M ay
F
48
F
48
op 60
op
71
F
81
*
daily
*
daily
*
daily
4
daily
4
d a ily
June July August Septem ber
op
89
op
91
op
91
F
89
4
daily
4
daily
*
daily
4
daily
O ctob er
op
78
4
daily
N ovem ber Decem ber
op
68
op
55
4
daily
4
daily
Tim e o f D eviation-M onth (N ote 4)
hours
4
m onthly
M o n i t o r i n g R e p o r t s B . S h a l l f S u b m i t t e d M o n t h l y : T h e F i r s t R e p o r t I s D u e M A Y 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 .
calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation calculation
T h e r e S h a l l B e N o D i s c h a r g e O f F l o a t i n g S o l i d s O r V i s i b l e F o a m In O t h e r T h a n T r a c e A m o u n t s .
Total Tim e o f D eviation (N ote 4)
h o u rs/y e a r
438
yearly sum
calculation
M o n it o r in g R e p o r t s S h a l l B e S u b m it t e d Y e a r l y : T h e F ir s t R e p o r t Is D u e Ja n u a r y 2 8 ,2 0 2 0 . T h e r e S h a l l B e N o D i s c h a r g e O f F l o a t i n g S o l i d s O r V is ib l e F o a m In O t h e r T h a n T r a c e A m o u n t s .
4
M onitoring requirem ent only.
A. EFFLUENT I .IM ITATIONS AN D MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED)
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Siota Energy Center
Page 6 of 19
OUTFALL #001
-Table A-3
______ .Cooling Water_______________ JESAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND CONDITIONAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number(s) as specified in the application for this permit. The final effluent limitations shall become effective on April 1. 2017 and remain in effect until expiration of the permit. Testing for the following parameters will occur concurrently of each use of chlorine or biocides. Such discharges shall be controlled, limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Final Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Effluent Parameters
Units
Daily Maximum
Weekly Average
Monthly Average
Measurement Frequency
Sample Type
Condi i ion al Monijoring
Chlorine, Free A vailable +
Pg'T
500
200
conditional
grab
Chlorine, Total Residual 1
gg'L
200
conditional
grab
W hole Effluent T oxicity, A cute * See Special C ondition #C 19
TU.
*
conditional
grab
Monitoring Reports Shall B e Submitted No More Than 3 0 D a y s From Use O f Biocides or Chlorine Products
There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
Y early Chlorine & B iocide/. M olluskicide. Report f
See Special C ondition #C 22
report
report
Y early SOC Report
report
report
Reports Shall Be Submitted Yearly: The First Report Is Due January 28.2018.
i (a) T o com p ly w ith yearly reporting, each year, even if chlorine or biocides/.m olluskicides. are not used, the facility w ill subm it a short report to the St. L ouis R egional O ffice. The report m ust detail each chem ical used, the dosin g concentration, and the tim e applied to the system . T he facility m ust sam ple for free available chlorine and total residual chlorine upon every' occasion (daily, concurrently) o f chlorine use. T he facility is not required to sam ple for chlorine i f the biocide/.m olluskicide. used is not chlorine based. T he fa cility has no plan s to use chlorine-based agents in the once-through system but lim itations rem ain in the permit. (b) T he facility m ust co llect a sam ple for W E T testing i f any biocide,'.m olluskicide. is u sed . The facility believes they w ill add m olluskicide once per year. (c) See also special condition #3 lim iting chlorine discharges.
* M onitoring requirem ent only.
A. EFFLUENT T.IM ITATIONS AND MONITORING REOIJIRF.MENTS /CONTINUED!
Permit No. MO-OOQ0353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 7 of 19
.Outfalls #002 & #006
Ash Ponds
.Table A-4 Final Effluent Limitations And Monitoring Requirements
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial Humberts) as specified in the application for this permit. The final effluent limitations shall becom e effective on A pril 1, 2017 and remain in effect until expiration o f die permit. Such discharges shall be controlled, limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Param eters
U n it s
L in a l E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s
D aily M axim um
W eekly A verage
M onthly Average
M o n it o r in g Re q u ir e m e n t s
M easurement Frequency
Sam ple Type
PHYsR \!_ F low
MGD
*
*
once/w eek
2 A hr. total
CONVENTIONAL ;
O il & G rease
m g/L
15
10
once/m onth
grab
p H (N o te 1) Total Suspended Solids (Actual)
SU m g/L
6.5 to 9.0
6.5 to 9.0 *
once/w eek once/w eek
grab grab
N et Total Suspended Solids
m g/L
100
30
once/w eek
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted Monthly: The First Report Is Due M A Y 2 8 . 2 0 1 7 . I hfrf Shai i Bf No Dischargf Of hi oating So: ids ( )r Visibi f Foam In ( )thfr 1han 1rauf Amoi tsts.
Convention ax
grab
Cyanide A m enable to Chlorination
M etals
Alum inum , Total R ecoverable
p g /L
once/quarter 0
grab
Arsenic, Total R ecoverable Boron, Total R ecoverable
p g /L
pgL
once/quarter 0 once/quarter 0
grab grab
Chrom ium VI, D issolved
p g /L
once/quarter 0
grab
Iron, Total R ecoverable M olybdenum , Total R ecoverable
P/L
P g /L
once/quarter 0 once/quarter 0
grab grab
Selenium , Total R ecoverable
pg/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Titanium, T otal R ecoverable
Notuents
' -
p g /L
once/quarter 0
grab
A m m onia as N
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
K jeldahl N itrogen, Total (TK N )
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Nitrate plus N itrite as N itrogen (N )
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Nitrogen, Total (T N )
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Phosphorus, Total (TP)
.Other
'
tng/L
once/quarter 0
grab
C hloride
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
F lu o rid e
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Sulfate
m g/L
once/quarter 0
grab
Sulfate plus Chloride
m g/L
once/quarter 0
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted Ouarifkly. T he Firs r Rlpor i Is D i e J U L Y 2 8 , 2 0 1 7 . There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
W hole Effluent T oxicity, Chronic See Special C ondition #C 19
TU*
o n c e /y e a r
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted Yearly: The First Report Is Due January 28.2018. There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
grab grab
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N ote 1: The facility w ill report the m inim um and m axim um values; pH is not to be averaged.
A. EFFLUENT LIM ITATIO N S AN D MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED!
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 8 of 19
I nternal Monitoring Point #02A
D om estic W astewater
.Table A-5 I nterim Effluent L imitations And M onitorlng Requirements
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number(s) as specified in the application for this pennit. The interim effluent
limitations shall becom e effective on Anril 1, 2017 and remain in effect through March 31. 2019. Such discharges shall be controlled. limited
and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Parameters
Physical
F lo w
U nits
MGD
Interim Effluent Limitations
Daily Maximum
Weekly Average
Monthly Average
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Frequency
Sample Type
*
o n c e /q u a n e r
24 hr. total
( G W I N H O N At
B ioch em ical O xygen Dem and.,
m g/L
45
E. coli (N o te 2)
#/100 mL
*
30
once/quarter
+
once/quarter
grab grab
p H ( N o te 1)
SU
6.0 to 9.0
6.0 to 9 0
once/quarter
grab
Total Suspended Solids
m g/L
45
30
once/quarter
grab
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted Ouarterly: The first Report Is Due JU L Y 2 8 .2 0 1 7 . There Shall Be N o Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
I nternal M onitoring P oint #02A
D om estic W astewater
.Table A-6 Final Effluent L imitations And M onitoring Requirements
The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number; s) as specified in the application for this pennit. The final effluent
limitations shall becom e effective on ADril 1. 2019 and remain in effect until exDiration o f the nermit. Such discharges shall he controlled,
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent P arameters Physical
Units
Final E ffluent Limitations
Daily Maximum
Weekly
AVERAGE
Monthly Average
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Frequency
Sample Tate
F lo w C O M FM IO N .A L
MGD
*
once/quarter
24 hr. total
SlIliffllIillSI
Biochem ical O xygen D em and,
m g/L
45
30
once/quarter
grab
E. coli (N o te 2)
#/100 mL
630
126
once/quarter
grab
p H (N o te 1)
SU
6.0 to 9.0
6.0 to 9.0
once/quarter
grab
Total Suspended Solids
m g/L
45
30
o n c e ;quarter
grab
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted Ouarterly; The First Report Is Due JU L Y 2 8 .2 0 1 9 . There Shall Be N o Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
*
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N o t e 1: T h e fa c ility w ill report th e m in im u m and m a x im u m v a lu e s; p H is n o t to b e a v era g ed .
N o t e 2: T h e qu arterly a v e ra g e for E. coli is e x p r e s se d as a g e o m e tr ic m ean; sa m p le o n ly du rin g the recreation al se a so n from A p ril 1
through O ctober 31; quarterly sam p les required; a sam p le in O ctob er w ill b e required.
A. EFFLUENT LIM ITATIO N S AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ('CONTINUED')
Permit No. MO-OOO353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 9 of 19
Outfalls #003
Emergency D ischargefro m Sump
Table A-7 Final Effluent Limitations And Monitoring Requirements
The perm ittee is not authorized to discharge from o u tfa ll(s) w ith serial num bers) as specified in the application fo r th is perm it. The fin a l effluent lim ita tio n s shall become effective on A p ril 1, 2017 and rem ain in effect u n til perm it expiration. A n y discharges shall be controlled, lim ite d and m onitored b y the perm ittee as specified below :
Monitoring Reports Shall Be Submitted No More than 30 Days from Date of Discharge: There Shall Be No Discharge Of Floating Solids Or Visible Foam In Other Than Trace Amounts.
*
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N ote 1: The facility w ill report the m inim um and m axim um values; pH is not to be averaged.
A. EFFLUENT I.IM ITATIO N S AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED')
Permit No. MO-OO0353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 10 o f 19
.Outfalls #007
Emergency' D ischarge
.Table A-8 Lnterim Effluent Limitations And Monitoring Requirements
The permittee is not authorized to discharge from this outfall. The final effluent limitations shall becom e effective on April 1, 2017 and remain in effect until October 31. 2018. Discharges shall be limited and monitored b v the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Param eters
U n it s
In t e r im E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
,, . ...
Physical
H ow
Convex iionai.
O il & Grease p H (N o te 1) T otal Suspended Solids
I-GD Wasilwatlr E I.G
Arsenic, Total M ercury, Total Selenium , Total Nitrate/Nitrite as N
M a x im u m
MGD
*
:
m g/L
*
SU
*
m g/L
*
uv I
*
ng/L
+
P g /L
ijc
m g/L
*
A verage
A v er a g e
lillllii
* * * *
M easurem ent F requency
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
T ype
llilllllliSlil
2 4 lir. total -
grab grab grab
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o u c e /d a y /d isc lia r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab grab grab grab
NT IRfiNIS-
Nitrogen, Total (T N )
m g/L
Phosphorus, Total (TP)
m g/L
*
one c/day/disc harge o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab grab
OUTER
C h lorid e
m g/L
*
H ardness
m g/L
*
Sulfate
m g/L
*
Sulfate plus C hloride
m g/L
*
't
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e onee/day/di scharge
l3 lli i;!P^
grab grab grab grab
N o 3 0 M o n i t o r i n g R e p o r t s S h a l l B e S u b m i t t e d
M ore th an
D a y s f r o m D a t e o f D is c h a r g e :
T h e r e S h a l l B e N o D l s c h a r g e O f F l o a t i n g S o l i d s O r V is ib l e F o a m In O t h e r T h a n T r a c e A m o u n t s .
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N o te 1: T he facility w ill report the m inim um and m axim um values; pH is not to b e averaged.
A F.FFT.TJF.NT LIM ITATIO N S AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED!
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page II o f 19
Outfalls #007
Emergency- D ischarge
Table A-9 Final Effluent Limitations And Monitoring Requirements
The permittee is not authorized to discharge from this outfall. The final effluent limitations shall become effective on November 1. 2018 and remain in effect until expiration of the permit. Discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below;
Efflu en t Pa r am eter s
U n it s
F in a l E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s
D a il y M a x im u m
W eekly' A verag e
M onthly A verage
M o n it o r in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
M easurem ent Frequency
Sam ple TYPE
Physk al F lo w
Convfniionai.
O il & G rease pH (N o te 1) I otal Suspended Solids
FOD W a s ixwaier ELG
Arsenic, Total
MGD
m g/L
SU
m g/L
p g /L
J J |lg
*
*
* *
11
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
2 4 hr. total
o n c e /d a y /d isc lia r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab grab grab
8
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab
M ercury, Total
ng/L
788
356
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab
Selenium , Total
Nitrate/N itnie as N
Nutrients
Nitrogen, Total (T N )
Phosphorus, Total (TP)
Other
'
C h lo rid e
Sulfate
Sulfate plus C hloride
g g 'L m g/L
m g/L m g/L
mg'"L m g/L m g/L
23 17.0
* *
*
*
*
12 4 .4
iia ia ii
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e once/d ay/d isc harge
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e o n c e /d a y /d isc h a r g e
grab grab
grab grab
grab grab grab
M o n it o r in g R e p o r t s S h a l l B e S u b m it t e d N o M o r e t h a n 3 0 D a y s f r o m D a t e o f D is c h a r g e :
T h e r e S h a l l B e N o D is c h a r g e O f F l o a t in g S o l id s O r V is ib l e F o a m In O t h e r T h a n T r a c e A m o u n t s
*
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N ote 1: The facility w ill report the m inim um and m axim um values; pH is not to be averaged
A F.FFT.1TF.NT T.IM ITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED-!
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 12 o f 19
*
M onitoring requirem ent only.
N o te 1: T h e fa c ility w ill rep ort th e m in im u m and m a x im u m v a lu e s; p H is n o t to b e averaged .
N o te 2: T he qu arterly av era g e for E. coli is e x p r e s se d a s a g e o m e tr ic m ean; sa m p le o n ly du rin g th e recreation al se a so n fro m A p ril 1
through O ctober 31; quarterly sam p les required; a sam p le in O ctober w ill be required.
N o te 3: A T = [ ((Q S/4)T .S + Q , T . ) / ( ( Q ,/ 4 ) + Q e )] - T ,
W here:
AT
the ch an ge in tem perature in F at the e d g e o f the therm al m ix in g zon e
Q/4 the receiv in g stream flow in cfs divided by 4
Q,,.
effluent flo w in cfs
T.s
m easured stream temperature
T.e
m easured temperature o f effluent
N o te 4: T o calculate the tem perature o f the stream at the ed ge o f the m ixin g zon e, the facility w ill use the follow in g equation: D e sig n a te d as T imr in th e e q u a tio n b e lo w , th e fa c ility c a n d e te rm in e c o m p lia n c e w ith T <k.w T ca)>, and p ercen t tim e d e v ia tio n allow ance.
T-anz = [((Q,/4)T, + Q*T,,) / ((QJ4) + Q*))]
W here:
T<mz. th e tem p eratu re o f th e r e c e iv in g stream at th e e d g e o f the th erm al m ix in g z o n e
Q^/4 the r ec eiv in g stream flow in c fs divided b y 4
Q<.
effluent flo w in cfs
T,
m easured stream temperature
T.e
m easured temperature o f effluent
T em p eratu re cap (d e sig n a te d a s T cap in T ab le A - 2 o f th e p erm it) is th e e fflu e n t tem p eratu re lim ita tio n ap p lica b le in the r e c e iv in g stream at th e e d g e o f the th e r m a l m ix in g z o n e . It m a y b e e x c e e d e d for n o m o re than 5% o f th e y ea r (4 3 8 hours).
T em p eratu re d e v ia tio n (d e sig n a te d a s T,iev in T a b le A -2 o f th e p erm it) is th e m a x im u m e fflu e n t tem p eratu re lim it at the e d g e o f the therm al m ixin g z o n e w h ich m ay not be ex ceed ed . M oC W IS is set up to receive one valu e for the thermal lim itations for each m onth. The fa cility w ill vio la te the thermal lim it if the value entered in M oC W IS is ab ove the T^w. value for the m onth.
P er ce n t T im e D e v ia tio n A llo w a n c e : M is s o u r i's W ater Q u a lity S tan d ard s a llo w s p e r m itte e s to e x c e e d th eir a p p lic a b le T tBp criteria (b u t n o t th e T dev criteria) for 5% o f the y e a r in Z o n e 1B a lo n g th e M is sissip p i R iv er. T h e tu n e o f d e v ia tio n a llo w a n c e sh a ll b e track ed in h ou rs p e r y e a r a n y tim e their c a lc u la te d tem p eratu re v a lu e s e x c e e d s the m o n th 's d a ily m axim u m Tiap effluent lim it. T he perm ittee is required to m onitor and report the total m onthly exceed an ce tim e (not an average). a ) I f T , ^ is le s s than T va)r th e n th e p erm ittee r ec o rd s "0 " h ou rs d e v ia tio n . b ) A n y tim e T em2 is a b o v e T ,a? th en th e fa c ility rep orts th e n u m b er o f h o u rs o f d e v ia tio n . e) T he perm ittee sh all report on January 2 8 * o f each year the total num ber o f hours the facility ex ceed ed their temperature
cap effluent lim its for the entire year.
A v io la tio n o ccu rs if: a. T he percent time deviation allow ance is above 5% (4 3 8 hours) for the calendar year; and/or b. T h e Tonz value reported is a b o v e the Taev m on th ly lim itation.
0
Q uarterly sam pling
M in im u m Q u a r t e r l y S a m p l in g R e q u ir e m e n t s
Q uarter
First Second Third Fourth
M onths
January, February, March April, May, June
July, August, September October. November, December
E ffluent P aram eters
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter; an E- c o li sample is not required this quarter
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter Sample at least once during any month of the quarter Sample at least once during any month of the quarter;
for . co li, a sample must be collected in October
R e po r t is D u e
April 28."1 July 28th October 28th January 28th
B. STANDARD CONDITIONS
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 13 of 19
In addition to sp ecified con d ition s stated herein, this perm it is su bject to the attached Part I standard conditions dated A ugust 1 .2 0 1 4 . and hereby incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
C, SPECIAL CO NDITIO NS
1. This perm it m ay b e reop en ed and m odified , or alternatively revok ed and reissued, to: (a) C om ply w ith any applicable effluent standard or lim itation issu ed or approved under Sections 301(b)(2)(C ) and (D ), 304(b)(2), and 307(a) (2 ) o f the C lean W ater A ct, if the effluent standard or lim itation so issued or approved: (1 ) contains different con d ition s or is otherw ise m ore stringent than any efflu en t lim itation in the perm it; or (2) controls any pollutant not lim ited in the perm it. (b) Incorporate new or m odified effluent lim itations or other conditions, if the result o f a w aste load allocation study, toxicity test or other inform ation in d icates changes are necessary to assure com plian ce w ith M issou ri's W ater Q uality Standards. (c) Incorporate new or m odified effluent lim itations or other conditions if, as the result o f a watershed analysis, a Total M a x im u m D a ily L oad (T M D L ) lim ita tio n is d e v e lo p e d for th e r e c e iv in g w a te rs w h ic h are cu rren tly in c lu d e d in M is so u r i's list o f w a ters o f th e sta te n o t f u lly a c h ie v in g th e s ta te 's w ater q u a lity stan d ard s, a lso c a lle d the 3 0 3 (d ) list. T he perm it as m odified or reissued under this paragraph sh all also contain an y other requirem ents o f the C lean W ater A ct then a p p lic a b le.
2. A ll outfalls and perm itted features m ust be clearly marked in the field. The perm ittee w ill have 180 days from date o f issuance to place sign s on n ew ly identified perm itted features, O utfall # 0 0 7 , and Perm itted Feature # 0 0 8 .
3. 4 0 C FR 4 2 3 .1 3(c)(2): "N either free availab le chlorine nor total residual ch lorin e m ay be discharged from any unit for m ore than tw o hours in any o n e day and n ot m ore than on e unit in any plant m ay discharge free availab le or total residual chlorine at any one tim e u n less the utility can dem onstrate to the [state] the units in a particular location cannot operate at or b elow this level o f chlorination."
4 . 4 0 C F R 1 2 5 .9 8 (b X l): "N o th in g in this perm it a u th o riz es take fo r the p u rp o se s o f a f a c ility 's c o m p lia n c e w ith th e E n d an g ered Species A ct."
5. 40 CFR 4 2 3 .1 3(a): There shall be no discharge o f polychlorinated biphenyl com pounds (P C B s) such as those com m only [historically] used for transform er fluid.6
6. W ater Q uality Standards (a) T o the extent required b y law , d ischarges to w aters o f the state shall not cau se a v iolation o f w ater quality standards rule under 10 C SR 20-7.03 i, including both sp ecific and general criteria. (b) G eneral Criteria. T he fo llo w in g general w ater qu ality criteria shall b e ap p licab le to all w aters o f the state at all tim es including m ixing zones N o w ater contam inant, by itse lf or in com bination w ith other substances, shall prevent the waters o f the state from m eeting the follow in g conditions: (1 ) W aters sh a ll b e free fro m su b sta n c es in s u ffic ie n t a m o u n ts to c a u se th e form a tio n o f p u trescen t, u n sig h tly or h arm fu l bottom deposits or prevent full m aintenance o f beneficial uses; (2) W aters shall be free from o il, scum and floating debris in sufficient am ounts to be unsightly or prevent full m aintenance o f beneficial uses; (3) W aters shall be free from substances in sufficient am ounts to cause unsightly color or turbidity, offen sive odor or prevent full m aintenance o f beneficial uses; (4 ) W aters shall be free from su bstances or con d ition s in su fficien t am ounts to result in to x icity to hum an, anim al or aquatic life, (5) There shall be no significant hum an health hazard from incidental contact w ith the water; (6) There shall b e no acute toxicity to livestock or w ildlife watering; (7) W aters shall be free from p h ysical, ch em ical or h yd rologic changes that w ou ld im pair the natural biological com m unity; (8) W aters shall be free from used tires, car b od ies, appliances, dem olition debris, used veh icles or equipm ent and solid w aste as defined in M issouri's Solid W aste L aw , section 260.200, R SM o, except as the use o f such m aterials is sp ecifically perm itted pursuant to section 2 6 0 .2 0 0 -2 6 0 .2 4 7 .
C SPECIAL. CONDITIONS (CONTINUED")
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 14 o f 19
7. C hanges in D ischarges o f T oxic Pollutant In addition to the reporting requirem ents under 1 2 2 .4 1 (1 ), all existin g m anufacturing, com m ercial, m ining, and silvicultural dischargers m ust notify the D irector as soon as they know or have reason to believe: (a) That an activity has occurred or w ill occur w h ich w ou ld result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, o f any toxic pollutant w hich is not lim ited in the perm it, i f that discharge w ill exceed the high est o f the follow in g notification levels: (1) O ne hundred m icrogram s per liter (1 0 0 pg/L); (2) T w o hundred m icrogram s per liter (2 0 0 pg/L ) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; (3) F ive hundred m icrogram s per liter (5 0 0 pg/L ) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-m eth yl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; (4) O ne m illigram p er liter (1 m g/L ) for antim ony; (5) F ive (5) tim es the m axim um concentration value reported for the pollutant in the perm it application in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or (6) T he notification lev el established b y the departm ent in accordance w ith 4 0 C F R 122.44(f). (b) That any activity has occurred or w ill occur w hich w ould result in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis, o f a toxic pollutant w h ich is not lim ited in the perm it, i f that discharge w ill e x ceed the h ig h est o f the fo llo w in g "n otification le v e ls" : (1) F ive hundred m icrogram s per liter (5 0 0 pg/1); (2) O ne m illigram per liter (1 m g/L ) for antim ony; (3) T en (1 0 ) tim es the m axim um concentration value reported for that pollutant in the perm it application in accordance with 1 2 2 .2 1(g)(7). (4 ) T h e le v e l e sta b lish e d b y th e D ir e c to r in a c co r d a n ce w ith 12 2 .4 4 (f).
8. Report as no-discharge w h en a discharge does not occur during the report period.
9. Reporting o f N on -D etects (a) A n analysis conducted b y the perm ittee or their contracted laboratory shall be conducted in such a w ay that the precision and accuracy o f the analyzed result can be enum erated. (b) The perm ittee shall not report a sam ple result as "N on -D etect" without also reporting the detection lim it o f the test. Reporting as "N o n -D e te c t" w ith o u t a lso in clu d in g th e d e te ctio n lim it w ill b e co n sid ered failu re to report, w h ic h is a v io la tio n o f th is p erm it. (c) The perm ittee shall report the "N on -D etect" result using the less than sign and the m inim um detection lim it (e.g. <10). (d) W here the perm it contains a M in im u m L ev el (M L ) and the perm ittee is granted authority in the perm it to report zero in lieu o f the < M L for a sp ecified param eter (con ven tion al, priority pollutants, m etals, etc ), then zero (0 ) is to be reported for that p aram eter. (e ) S e e Standard C on d ition s Part I, S e c tio n A , # 4 regarding proper d etectio n lim its u sed for sam p le analysis. (t) W hen calculating m onthly averages, on e-h alf o f the m inim um detection lim it (M D L ) should b e used instead o f a zero. W here all data are b e lo w the M D L . the "< M D L " shall be reported as indicated in item (C).
10. It is a violation o f the M issouri C lean W ater Law to fail to pay fees associated with this perm it (644.055 R SM o).
11. A ny pesticide discharge from any point source shall com ply with the requirem ents o f Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
R o d en tic id e A c t, a s a m e n d e d ( 7 U .S .C . 1 3 6 et. seq.) an d the u se o f su ch p e s tic id e s sh a ll b e in a m anner co n siste n t w ith its label.
12. The purpose o f the SW PPP and the B M P s listed herein is the prevention o f pollution o f waters o f the state. A d eficien cy o f a B M P m eans it w as not e ffectiv e in p reven tin g p o llu tio n [1 0 C SR 2 0 -2 .0 1 0 (5 6 )] o f w aters o f the state, and corrective actions m eans the facility took steps to elim inate the deficiency.
C. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)
Permit No. MO-OO035? Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 15 of !9
13. The fa cility 's SIC co d es found in 4 0 C FR 1 2 2 .2 6 (b )(1 4 ) and/or 10 C SR 2 0 -6 .2 0 0 (2 ) indicate they shall im plem ent a SW PPP w h ich m ust b e prepared and im plem ented up on perm it issu ance. T he SW P P P m ust be kept on-site and should not b e sent to the department unless specifically requested. The SW PPP m ust be review ed and updated every five (5) years or as site conditions change (see R ationale and D erivation: antidegradation analysis, and SW P P P in the fact sh eet). The perm ittee shall select, install, u se, operate, and m aintain the B est M anagem ent Practices prescribed in the SW P P P in accordance w ith the concepts and m ethods
describ ed in: Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, A Guidefo r Industrial Operators, (E P A 8 3 3 -B -0 9 -0 0 2 )
p u b lish e d b y th e E P A in F eb ru ary 2 0 0 9 f.w w w .e p a . g o v /n p d e s/p u b s/in d u stiia l sw p p p g u id e-p d f.). In a d d itio n to areas w ith industrial exposure, the facility m ust include the barge area, the road intended to transport dry-handled ash to the utility w aste landfill, the railroad, outfall # 0 0 4 , and outfall # 0 0 5 in the SW P P P. T he SW PPP m ust include: (a) A listin g o f sp ecific contam inants and their control m easures (or B M P s) and a narrative exp lain in g how B M P s are
im plem ented to control and m inim ize the am ount o f contam inants potentially entering storm water. The B M Ps should be d esign ed to treat the storm w ater up to the 10 year, 2 4 hour rain even t. (b) For new , altered, or expanded storm water discharges, the SW PPP shall identify reasonable and effective BM Ps w hile accounting for environm ental im pacts o f varying control m ethods. The antidegradation analysis m ust docum ent w h y no discharge or no exposure options are not feasible. The selection and docum entation o f appropriate control m easures shall serve as an alternative a n a ly sis o f te ch n o lo g y and fu lfill the requirem ents o f antidegradation [ 10 C SR 20 -7 .0 3 1 (3 )]. Failure to im plem ent and m aintain the chosen B M P is a perm it violation. For further guidance, consult the antidegradation im p lem e n ta tio n p roced u re at -h tm :.# d n r.m o .g o v ;e n v /w n p /d o c s /A lP 0 5 0 2 1 2 .p d f . (c) The SW PPP m ust include a schedule for once per m outh site inspections and b rief written repoits. The inspection report must include precipitation inform ation for the entire period since last inspection, as w ell as observations and evaluations o f BM P effectiveness. Throughout coverage under this perm it, the facility m ust perform on goin g SW PPP review and revision to incorporate any site condition changes. i. O perational d eficien cies m ust be corrected w ithin seven (7) calendar days. ii. M inor structural d eficien cies m ust b e corrected w ithin fourteen (1 4 ) calendar days. iii. M ajor structural d eficien cies m ust be reported to the regional o ffice w ithin seven (7) days o f discovery. The initial report
shall con sist o f the d eficien cy noted, the proposed rem edies, the interim or tem porary rem edies (including the general tim in g o f the placem ent o f the interim m easures), and an estim ate o f the tim efram e needed to w h olly com plete the repairs or construction. The perm ittee w ill w ork w ith the regional o ffice to determ ine the best course o f action, including but not lim ited to tem porary structures to control storm w ater runoff. T he facility shall correct the m ajor structural d eficien cy as soon as reasonably achievable. iv. A ll actions taken to correct the d eficien cies shall be included with the written report, including photographs. v. Inspection reports m ust be kept on site w ith the SW PPP and m aintained for a period o f five (5) years. These m ust be m ade available to department and E PA personnel upon request. (d) A provision for designating an individual to be responsible for environm ental matters. (e) A p rovision for providing training to all personnel involved in m aterial handling and storage, and housekeeping o f m aintenance and cleaning areas. P ro o f o f training shall b e subm itted on request o f the department.
C SPECIAL CONDITIONS (CO NTiNUKDl
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 16 of 19
14. Perm ittee shall adhere to the fo llo w in g m inim um B est M anagem ent Practices (B M Ps): (a) Prevent the spillage or loss o f fluids, oil, grease, fuel, etc. from veh icle m aintenance, equipm ent cleaning, or warehouse activities and thereby prevent the contam ination o f storm water from these substances. (b) P rovide collection facilities and arrange for proper disposal o f w aste products including but not lim ited to petroleum w aste products, and solvents. (c) Store all paint, solven ts, petroleum products and petroleum w aste products (except fu els), and storage containers (such as drums, cans, or cartons) so these m aterials are not exp osed to storm w ater or provide other prescribed B M P s such as plastic lids and/or portable spill pans to prevent the com m in glin g o f storm w ater w ith container contents. C om m ingled water m ay not be discharged under this perm it. P rovide spill prevention control, and/or m anagem ent sufficient to prevent any sp ills o f these pollutants from entering waters o f the state. A n y containm ent system used to im plem ent this requirem ent shall be constructed o f m aterials com patible w ith the substances contained and shall also prevent the contam ination o f groundwater. (d) Provide good housekeeping practices on the site to keep trash from entry into w aters o f the state. (e) P rovide sedim ent and erosion control su fficien t to prevent or control sedim ent lo ss o f f o f the property. T his could include the use o f straw bales, silt fences, or sedim ent basin s, if needed, to com p ly w ith effluent lim its or benchmarks. (f) Ensure adequate provisions are provided to prevent surface w ater intrusion into the storage basin, to divert stormwater runoff arou n d the sto ra g e b a sin , a n d to p rotect em b a n k m en ts fro m e ro sio n .
15. T o protect the general criteria found at 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (4 ), b efore releasin g w ater accum ulated in secondary containm ent areas w h ic h c o n ta in p etroleu m p rod u cts, it m u st b e e x a m in e d for h y d ro ca rb o n o d o r an d p r e se n c e o f sh een . I f th e p re se n c e o f o d o r or sheen is indicated, the water shall b e treated u sin g an appropriate m ethod or d isp osed o f in accordance with legally approved m ethods, such as being sent to a w astew ater treatment facility. F ollow in g treatm ent, the w ater shall be tested for oil and grease, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene using 4 0 C FR part 136 m ethods. A ll pollutant levels must be below the m ost protective, applicable standards for the receiv in g stream , found in 10 C SR 20-7 .0 3 1 T able A. R ecords o f all testing and treatment o f water accum ulated in secondary' containm ent shall b e stored in the SW P P P to b e availab le on dem and to D N R and EPA personnel.
16. R elease o f a hazardous substance m ust be reported to die department in accordance with 10 C SR 2 4-3.010. A record o f each reportable spill shall be retained with the SW PPP and m ade available to the departm ent upon request.
17. Im pingem ent and Entrainment: C W A 3 1 6(b) C oolin g W ater Intake Structure (a) The facility is required to continue operating in a m anner m in im izin g im pingem en t and entrainm ent until the perm ittee has subm itted the ren ew al application required in 4 0 C F R 122.21 and 40 CFR 125 Subpart J and best tech n ology available is established in accordance w ith C lean W ater A ct 3 16(b) regulations. C W A 3 16(b) regulations require m odifications to reduce im pingem ent and entrainm ent caused b y intake structures. (b) T he facility shall follow 40 CFR 122.21 and 40 CFR 125 Subpart J regulations regarding reduction in im pingem ent and entrainm ent and perform ing their associated studies. (c) The facility shall subm it annual status reports by February 28 each year, detailing the progress o f the previous year. (d) S ix m onths prior to perm it expiration, the facility shall subm it their application for 3 1 6(b) detailing the results o f the biom onitoring studies and the selected path forward for im plem enting im pingem ent and entrainm ent m odifications at the intake structure. (e) This perm it m ay be reopened and m odified, or alternatively, revoked and reissued to incorporate new or m odified requirem ents applicable to existin g coolin g w ater intake structures under Section 3 16(b) o f the C lean W ater Act. In the event it is n ecessa ry for this perm it to b e reop en ed and m o d ified , or altern atively r ev o k ed and reissu ed , perm ittee sliall co m p ly with any such n ew or m odified requirem ents or standards applicable to existing co o lin g water intake structures under 316(b) o f the C lean W ater Act.
C. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (CONTINUED"!
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 17 of 19
18. G roundwater M onitoring Program ; T he perm ittee shall im plem ent an e ffectiv e groundw ater m onitoring program designed to determ ine if the coal ash im poundm ents have/had an im pact on groundw ater quality. The m onitoring system m ust be capable o f com paring up-gradient to dow n-gradient w ater quality in the first continuous water-bearing zon e beneath the im poundm ent The m onitoring system m ust b e based up on a thorough hyd rogeological characterization o f the im poundm ent area that determ ines the appropriate hydrostratigraphic unit to m onitor, its groundwater gradient(s) and any seasonal variations in its grad ien ts). A ny hyd rogeological characterization conducted for the design o f the groundwater m onitoring program shall be approved by the departm ent's M issou ri G e o lo g ica l Su rvey and m ust be con d u cted under the guid ance o f a g e o lo g ist registered in the State o f M issouri. The num ber o f m onitoring w ells required for the groundwater m onitoring program shall b e based on site-specific hydrogeologic conditions and sufficient for effective m onitoring o f the site. T o com plete the follow in g work plans and reports, the W ater Protection Program recom m ends u sin g applicable portions o f the docum ent issued by the M issouri G eological Survey
(M G S ), dated D ecem b er 1 0 ,2 0 1 0 (or new er), (Draft) Guidancefo r Conducting a Detailed Hydrogeologic Site Characterization and Designing a Groundwater Monitoring Program a s g u id a n ce. T h e p la n s sh all b e subm itted as tw o hard c o p ies and o n e
electronic cop y to the M issouri Departm ent o f Natural R esou rces central office: T he W ater P rotection Program at P.O. B o x 176, Jefferson C ity M O 6 5 1 0 2 -9 9 2 0 . In order to accom plish this, the perm ittee shall: (a) B y 6 m onths from the date o f issuance o f this perm it (or sooner), subm it a Site C haracterization W orkplan to the Central
O ffice for approval. (b) B y 27 m onths from the date o f issu ance o f this perm it (or soon er) subm it a S ite C haracterization Report detailing the findings
from com pletion o f the Site Characterization W orkplan to the Central O ffice for verification o f conclusions. (c) B y 30 m onths from the date o f issuance o f this perm it (or sooner) subm it a draft G roundwater M onitoring. Sam pling, and
A n alysis Plan (G M S A P ) to the Central O ffice for approval. (d) B y 36 m onths from the date o f issu an ce o f this perm it (or soon er) subm it a final G roundw ater M onitoring. Sam pling, and
A n alysis Plan fG M S A P ) to the Central O ffice for approval. T h e design o f the groundwater m onitoring network should b e approved by the departm ent prior to installation. H ow ever, if installation occurs prior to approval, the W PP and M GS reserves the right to insist on additional w ells or ch an ges to the netw ork. (e) B y 48 m onths from the date o f issu an ce o f this perm it (or soon er) have all elem en ts o f the G M S A P fu lly im plem ented. The facility shall co llect groundw ater quality sam p les at a discrete interval (u su ally quarterly) w h ich must dem onstrate each sam ple is independent and representative o f the groundw ater b ein g m onitored. A m inim um o f 8 groundwater quality sam ples must be collected prior to the expiration o f the perm it.
19. W hole Effluent T oxicity (W E T ) T ests shall b e conducted as follow s: For outfall #001 (acute test), the AEC is 66% ; die dilution series is 83% , 66% , 53% , 42% , and 34%. W ET tests on outfall #001 m ust be conducted concurrently o f biocide use. For outfalls # 0 0 2 , and # 0 0 6 (chronic tests), the A E C is 100% ; the dilution series is: 100% , 50% , 25% , 12.5% , and 6.25% .
A cute W hole Effluent T oxicity (W E T ) tests shall be conducted as follow s. (O utfall #001) (a) Freshwater Species and Test M ethods: Species and short-term test m ethods for estim ating the acute toxicity o f N PD ES
efflu en ts are fou n d in th e m ost recen t ed ition o f Methodsfor Measuring the Acute Toxicity o f Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms (E P A /8 2 l/R -0 2 /0 1 2 ; T a b le IA , 4 0 C F R Part 1 36). T h e perm ittee sh a ll concurrently
conduct 48-hour, static, non-renew al toxicity tests w ith the follow in g species:
o Tire fath ead m in n o w , Pimephales promelas (A c u te T o x ic ity E P A T e st M eth o d 2 0 0 0 .0 ). o T h e daphnid, Ceriodaphnia dubia (A cu te T o x ic ity E P A T e st M eth o d 2 0 0 2 .0 ).
(b) C hem ical and physical analysis o f the upstream control sam ple and effluent sam ple shall occur im m ediately upon being received by the laboratory, prior to any m anipulation o f the effluent sam ple beyond preservation m ethods consistent w ith federal gu id elin es for W E T testing that are required to stab ilize the sam p le during shipping. W here upstream receiving water is not available or know n to b e toxic, other approved control w ater m ay be used.
(c) T est conditions m ust m eet all test accep tab ility criteria required by the E P A M ethod used in the analysis. (d) A ll ch em ical and p h ysical a n a ly sis o f the efflu en t sam ple perform ed in con ju n ction w ith the W E T test shall be perform ed at the
100% effluent concentration. (e) A ll chem ical analyses shall be perform ed and results shall b e recorded in the appropriate field o f the report form. The
parameters for chem ical analysis include Tem perature (F ), pH (S U ), C onductivity (p m oh s/cm ), D issolved O xygen (m g/L ), Total Residual C hlorine (g g /L ), free available chlorine (g g /L ), total alkalinity (m g'L ), and total hardness (m g/L ). (f) The facility m ust subm it a full laboratory report for all toxicity testing. The report must include a quantification o f acute toxic units (T U * = 100/L C jo) reported according to the test m eth ods m anual chapter on report preparation and test review . The L eth a l C o n cen tra tio n 5 0 P ercen t ( L C 5<>) is th e e fflu e n t c o n c en tra tio n that w o u ld c a u se d eath in 5 0 p ercen t o f th e test o rg a n ism s at a sp ecific tim e.
C SPECIAL CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 18 o f 19
Chronic W hole Effluent T o x icity (W E T ) tests shall b e conducted as follow s: (O utfalls # 0 0 2 and #0 0 6 ) (a) Freshwater S p ecies and Test M ethods: Species and short-term test m ethods for estim ating the acute toxicity o f N P D E S
efflu en ts are fou n d in the m o st recen t e d itio n o f Short-term Methodsfor Estimating the Chronic Toxicity o fEffluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms (EPA/82l/R-02/013; Table Li, 40 CFR Part 136). T he perm ittee shall
concurrently conduct 7-day, static, renewal toxicity tests w ith the follow in g species:
o T h e fathead m in n o w , Pimephalespromelas (S u r v iv a l and G ro w th T est M eth o d 1 0 0 0 .0 ). o T h e dap hn id , Ceriodaphnia dubia (S u rv iv a l and R ep ro d u ctio n T est M eth o d 1 0 0 2 .0 ).
(b) Chem ical and physical analysis o f the upstream control sam ple and effluent sam ple shall occur im m ediately upon being received by the laboratory, prior to any m anipulation o f th e effluent sam ple b eyon d preservation m ethods consistent with federal gu id elin es for W E T testing that are required to stabilize the sam ple during shipping. W here upstream receiving w ater is not available or know n to be toxic, other approved control water m ay be used.
(c) T est con d ition s m ust m eet all test accep tab ility criteria required by the E P A M ethod u sed in the analysis. (d ) A ll c h e m ic a l and p h y sic a l a n a ly sis o f th e e fflu e n t sa m p le p erfo rm ed in co n ju n ctio n w ith th e W E T test sh all b e p erform ed at
the 100% effluent concentration. (e) A ll ch em ical analyses shall be perform ed and results shall b e recorded in the appropriate field o f the report form. The
param eters for ch em ical analysis are: Tem perature (F ), p H (S U ), C on du ctivity (p m o h s/cm ), D isso lv e d O xygen (m g/L ), Total R esidual Chlorine (m g/L ), Sulfates P lus C hlorides (m g/L ), and Total H ardness (m g/L ). (f) The facility m ust subm it a full laboratory report for all toxicity testing. The report m ust include a quantification o f chronic
to x ic units (T U c = 1 0 0 /IC 2 5 ) reported a ccord in g to the Methodsfor Measuring the Chronic Toxicit}' o fEffluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organistas chapter o n report preparation and test review . T he 2 5 percent
Inhibition E ffect C oncentration (IC 25) is the toxic or effluent concentration that w ou ld cause 25 percent reduction in mean young per fem ale or in grow th for the test populations.
20. Substances regulated by federal law under the R esource C onservation and R ecovery A ct (R C R A ) and C om prehensive E nvironm ental R esponse, C om pensation, and L iability A ct (C E R C L A ), that are transported, stored, or used for m aintenance, cleaning or repair, shall b e m anaged according to R C R A and C E R C L A . A m eren is exem p t from C lean W ater A ct, S ection 311, reporting for sodium hydroxide, sodium hypochlorite, sulfuric acid and hydrazine as per 40 CFR 117.12.
21. The facility shall not discharge chem ical m etal clean in g w astes [40 CFR 4 2 3 .1 3(e)] to w aters o f the state.
22. The facility shall subm it a report characterizing the use o f c hlorine and b iocid es in the coolin g system o f the plant. T he report w ill be subm itted to the St. L ouis R egional O ffice. See address below . A report w ill be required yearly even in the absence o f chlorine/biocide use. The report w ill describe the quantity, duration, W ET test results, and final concentration values o f any sam pling as required by T able A -3 and accom panying notes.
23. 4 0 C F R 4 2 3 .1 3 (h )(l)(i) and (k )(l)(i): T h e fa c ility sh all n o t d isch arge ash transport -water [4 0 C F R 4 2 3.1 l(p )] w h ich is not legacy w astew ater as soon as p ossible; and shall not discharge ash transport water on or after M ay 1, 2021. L egacy w astew ater [FR Vol. 80 N o. 2 1 2 :1 1 /3 /2 0 1 5 ; pream ble p. 678 5 4 , sec. VIII. C. 8.] is any bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, and FG D w astew ater generated b efore M a y 1, 2021.
C. SP E C IA I,C O N D IT IO N S fCO NTINUED ')
Permit No. MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Page 19 o f 19
24. Electronic D ischarge M onitoring Report (eD M R ) Subm ission System (a) D ischarge M onitoring R eporting R equirem ents. The perm ittee m ust electronically subm it com pliance m onitoring data via the e D M R sy s te m . In regard s to Standard C o n d itio n s Part I, S e c tio n B , # 7 , tire e D M R s y s te m is cu rrently th e o n ly D ep artm en t approved reporting m ethod for this perm it. (b) Program m atic R eporting Requirem ents. T he follow in g reports (if required b y this perm it) m ust be electronically subm itted as an attachm ent to the eD M R sy stem until such a tim e w h en the current or a n ew sy stem is available to allow direct input o f the data: (1 ) Schedule o f C om pliance Progress Reports; (2) CW A Section 3 16(b) Annual Reports; and (3 ) A n y add ition al report required b y tire perm it e x clu d in g b yp ass rqrorting. A fter such a system lias b een m ade available b y the depar tm ent, required data shall be directly input into the system by the next report due date. (c) Other actions. T he fo llo w in g shall be subm itted electronically after such a system has been m ade available b y the department: (1) G eneral Perm it A p plications/N otices o f Intent to discharge (N O Is); (2) N otices o f Term ination (N O T s); (3) N o Exposure Certifications (NO Es); (d ) E lectron ic S u b m issio n s. T o a c ce ss the e D M R sy stem , u se the fo llo w in g lin k in y o u r w'eb browser: Jittns://edm r.dnr.m o.gov7edm r/E2/Shared/Pages/M ainy'Loain.asnx..
D. SCHEDULE OF COM PLIANCE
Schedules o f com plian ce are allow ed im der 4 0 C FR 122.47. The facility shall attain com plian ce w ith final effluent lim itations established in this perm it as so o n as reasonably achievable:
1. T h e fa c ility sh a ll attain c o m p lia n c e w ith fin a l e fflu e n t lim ita tio n s for tem p eratu re at o u tfa ll # 0 0 1 as s o o n as rea so n a b ly a c h iev a b le or n o later than tw o years from the effe c tiv e date.
2 . T he fa c ility sh a ll attain c o m p lia n c e w ith fin al e fflu e n t lim ita tio n s for E. coli at o u tfa ll # 0 2 A as so o n a s rea so n a b ly a c h iev a b le or
no later than tw o years from the e ffectiv e date.
3. The perm ittee shall subm it interim progress reports detailing progress m ade in attaining com pliance w ith the final effluent lim its every calendar year. The first report is due January 28, 2018.
P le a se su bm it p rogress reports v ia tire E lectron ic D isch arge M on itorin g R eport (e D M R ) S u b m issio n S ystem .
Missouri Department of Natural Resources Fact Sheet
For the Purpose of Renewal
of
MO-0000353 Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
The Federal W ater P ollution Control A ct ("C lean W ater Act" S ection 4 02 Public L aw 92-500 as am ended) established the N ational P ollution D isch arge E lim ination S ystem (N P D E S ) perm it program . T his program regulates the discharge o f pollutants from point sources into the waters o f the U nited States, and the release o f storm water from certain point sources. A ll such discharges are unlawful w ithout a perm it (S ectio n 301 o f the "Clean W ater Act"). A fter a perm it is obtained, a discharge not in com plian ce with all perm it term s and conditions is unlaw ful. M issouri State O perating Perm its (M SO P s) are issued by the D irector o f the M issouri Departm ent o f Natural R eso u rces (D epartm ent) under an approved program , operating in accordan ce w ith federal and state la w s (Federal "Clean W ater Act" and "M issouri Clean W ater L aw " Section 644 as am ended). M SO Ps are issued for a period o f five (5 ) years unless otherw ise sp ecified for less.
A s per [4 0 C F R P art 124.8(a)] and [10 C SR 2 0 -6 .0 2 0 (1 )2 .] a factsheet shall be prepared to give pertinent inform ation regarding the applicable regulations, rationale for the developm ent o f effluent lim itations and conditions, and the public participation process for the M issouri State O perating P en nit (M SO P or operating perm it) listed b elow . A factsheet is not an enforceable part o f an operating perm it.
Part I. Facility Information
Facility T yp e Facility SIC Code(s): Facility N A IC S Code: A pplication Date: Expiration D ate. Last Inspection.
M ajor C ategorical Industry 4911 221112 1 0 /2 0 /2 0 0 8 0 5 /1 5 /2 0 0 9 0 1 /2 8 /2 0 1 5 - in com pliance
Facility Description:
T he Siou x Energy Center is a pow er generating facility prim arily involved in the generation and sale o f electricity. A s one o f four A m eren ow n ed coal-fired pow er plants in M issouri, it is currently the on ly one w ith air scrubbers installed. L ocated oil the south shore (d escen d in g bank) o f the M ississip p i R iver b etw een m ile 2 0 9 and 2 1 0 , the facility p ow ers tw o coal fired electrical generating units. N am eplate generating capacity is 1099 m egaw atts (M W ). Sioux is a tw o-unit, 986-m egaw att coal-fired pow er plant, w hich w as com p leted in 1968. E ach b oiler is equip ped w ith 10 cy clo n e bu rn ers-essen tially a 10-foot diam eter barrel into w'liich crushed coal and air are introduced. T his process requires less equipm ent and less horsepow er to crush the coal, versus grinding the coal into the con sisten cy o f talcum pow der as is done w ith other types o f boilers. C om bustion occurs in a sw irling m otion w ithin the cyclone burners; in m ore conventional boilers, pulverized coal is blow n into the m ain furnace alon g w ith air and burned in suspension in the fiim ace. T h e plant's boilers are m ore efficien cy than conventional boilers because they operated at a higher pressure (supercritical). S io u x 's air p erm it a llo w s th em to b u m in e x c e s s o f 2 0 ,0 0 0 to n s o f tire c h ip s an n u a lly , th e e q u iv a len t o f 2 5 ,0 0 0 to n s o f c o a l p er year, providing electricity for m ore than 4 ,0 0 0 residential custom ers. This w ould consu m e m ore than 2.5 m illion discarded used tires a year if they ch oose to use this fuel source. Sioux's m axim um bu m is 12,000 tons o f coal over 24 horns, about 3.0 m illion toas o f coal annually. C onstruction o f the scrubbers for each generating unit b egan in 2 0 0 6 . A s hot flu gas p a sses through each scrubber, a slurry o f crushed lim eston e and water is sprayed into it. The lim eston e in the slurry reacts w ith sulfur in the flue gas, creating synthetic gypsum - an inert m aterial captured and stored in the new landfill on plant property. G ypsum is the m ain com ponent o f wallboard.
T h e facility operates a c o a l term inal port fa c ility (barge u n lo a d in g station ) located at m ile 2 0 9 .6 o n tire right d escen d in g bank o f the Upper M ississippi R iver approxim ately 3 m iles b elo w Portage D e Sioux and 9 m iles above Lock and D am N o. 26. A series o f 60-inch co n v ey o rs exten d to a storage area in rear: o n e 1 ,2 4 2 -fo o t and on e 6 9 3 -fo o t, each w ith capacity for 3 ,0 0 0 tons per hour or total capacity for 4 30,000 tons. Coal delivered by barge is deposited via dry conveyor 1,255 feet to the coal pile on the northeastern side o f the facility.
Permitted Features Table:
Average Flow
Feature
(MGD)
#001 #002
78.0 5 4 0 .0 27.0
645.0
1.24 2.47
0 0.013 0 .0 0 3
0 0 .0 7 8
3.8
#02A
0 .0 1 3
#003 #006 #007
0
0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 3
0 0 3.35 0 0 .0 6 7 0 .8 6 4 0 .3 1 7
4.6
0
#008
6 7 5 .6
Design Flow (MGD)
8 5 .6 6 0 7 .9 30.8
724.3
4.38 5 .1 8 3 2.59 0 .0 3 9 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 3 2 3.38
15.8
0 .0 3 9
3.48
0 .0 2 5 0 .0 2 5
2.3 1.10 2.81 0 .0 7 2 0.2 0 .8 6 4 5.42
10.8
1378
7 5 5 .5
Treatment Level
none
(Ash Pond #1) sedim entation and
neutralization
activated sludge none
(Ash Pond #2) sedim entation and
neutralization
none intake
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 2 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Effluent type
condensate coolers unit 1 and 2 condensers
jacket water coolers TOTAL
com b in ed drain sum p bottom ash removal system bottom ash system overflow
dom estic sew age exciter & control room H VAC
unit 2 boiler drain line storm w ater TOTAL
dom estic wastew'ater
em ergen cy discharge o f com bined drain sum p
flue gas conditioning heat exchanger coal handling sum ps an' heater w ash
econom izer ash system precipitator ash rem oval system
precipitator pad sum ps regeneration wastes char hopper precipitation TOTAL U W L recycle pond
intake
Perm itted Features, Descriptions, and Supplementary Inform ation:
T he fa cility 's N P D E S perm it contains sev en designated and perm itted features; each describ ed below .
Outfall # 0 0 1 - Non-contact Once-Through Cooling Water
O utfall #001 is the discharge from the once-through coolin g water system . W ater is withdraw n from the M ississippi River, passed through condensers and other heat ex ch an ges, and returned to the river. P ortions o f the c o o lin g w ater system are interm ittently treated w ith b io c id e s. T h e treated w ater is u sed to lubricate the cir cu latin g w ater pu m p b earin gs w ith in th e intake structure. T his lube water m ix e s w ith the norm al pu m p flo w and is a co m p o n en t o f the discharge. T h e total flo w o f this treated w'ater is about 8 0 gpm . W astew ater sources o f outfall #001 are once-through coolin g water, circulating water pum ps for unit 1 condenser, unit 2 condenser,
con d en sate co o lers, and ja ck et w ater coolers. S e e Part 111Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits and Conditions; Impingement and Entrainment at CWIS; CWA 316(b).
Macroinvertebrate Control:
S iou x pow er plant has a m onitoring program to detect the presence and grow th o f zebra m ussels w itliin system s vulnerable to fouling. Currently, b iocid e treatm ents are not scheduled but occur before fouling occurs. W hile various approaches have been considered and evaluated, the facility's currents strategy con sists o f m olluskicide treatm ent o f intake structure c ells, auxiliary coolers (condensate, condenser, and jacket water coolers), and high and lo w pressure untreated (raw) water system s, using one o f the follow in g com m ercial chem ical products or their equivalents:
G E -B etz Spectrus CT 1300, d osed at 5-10 ppm ; or C a lg o n H -1 3 0 , dosed at approx. 5 ppm; or B uckm an Laboratories B ulab 6 0 8 6 , d o sed at 5 -10 ppm
T o com p ly w ith yearly reporting, each year, even i f chlorine or b iocid es/m ollu sk icid es are not used, the facility w ill subm it a short report to the St. L ouis R egional O ffice. T he report m ust detail each chem ical used, the dosin g concentration, and the time applied to the system . The facility m ust sam ple for free available chlorine, total residual chlorine, and w hole effluent toxicity, on a conditional schedule. The facility is not required to sam ple for chlorine if the b iocid e/m ollu sk icid e used is not chlorine based; how ever, the facility m ust still collect a sam ple for W ET testing if any biocide/m olluskicide is used.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 3 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Ou t fa l l # 0 0 2 - a s h P o n d #1 (O l d A sh P o n d ) Outfall # 002 is the discharge from one o f the plant's tw o w astew ater treatment ponds containing bottom ash and fly ash. The pond w as com m issioned in 1967 T his unit is 47 acres w ith a m axim um height above grade o f 27 feet. T he total storage capacity is 2,1 0 0 acre-feet. The volum e o f ash stored is approxim ately 1,859 acre-feet.
A sh pond #1 provides treatment for bottom ash (boiler slag), lo w volum e w astes, sew age treatment plant effluent, control room and exciter H V A C c o o lin g tow er, and storm w ater runoff. C om bined drain sum]) sources are: U n it 1 and 2 conditioner vacuum coolin g, vacuum prim ing pum ps seal water, floor drains, turbine room sum p, flue gas con d ition in g heat exchanger, soot blow in g traps, units 1 boiler drain line, dom estic sew a g e, yard dram s, control room cooler, E xciter H V A C co o ler, H V A C coolin g tow er, unit 1 bottom ash rem oval system overflow , and finally, reject and backw ash from the ultrafiltration system and the reverse osm osis system . The H V A C system is o n ly u sed w hen building coolin g is needed from late spring through early fall. T he discharges are to P oeling Lake, a non classified waterbody therefore no toxics m ixing is afforded.
Internal Monitoring Point (IM P ! #02A - Sewage Treatment Plant
T his is the discharge from the extended aeration package sew age treatment plant. D om estic w astew ater throughout the facility is p ro cessed in the ST P , prior to d isch arge into ash pon d # 1, then discharged to w aters o f the state through outfall # 0 0 2 . S lu dge is rem oved by a contract hauler.
Outfall #003 - Emergency Overflow from the Combined Drain Sim p
T h is o u tfa ll Ls an e m e r g e n c y d isc h a r g e p o in t for the c o m b in e d d rain su m p (C D S ). D u rin g n orm al o p era tio n s, th e C D S c o lle c ts v a rio u s lo w volum e w aste stream s from the plant for transfer to ash pond #1 (outfall #0 0 2 ). D uring em ergency conditions, a m anually operated valve m ay b e opened to a llo w discharge from the C D S to outfall # 0 0 3 . S ee outfall # 0 0 2 under com bined drain sum p for sources o f the wastew ater. This outfall did not discharge in the last five years D aily m axim um s and m onthly averages are required under 40 CFR 122.45(d)(1) for continuous discharges not from a PO TW . H ow ever, the facility has stated this is an em ergency discharge outfall therefore w ill o n ly receive daily m onitoring requirem ents. M onitoring w ill occur each day the facility discharges. M onitoring is unscheduled therefore the facility need on ly report those days w hen the outfall discharges. M onitoring for precipitation is inappropriate for these outfalls. T o discharge v ia outfall # 0 0 3 , a valve (w h ich is norm ally clo sed ) m ust b e opened, w hich w ou ld on ly occur in response to critical (and un exp ected) sy stem failure(s).
Outfall #006 - Ash Pond #2 (New Ash PondI
O u tfa ll # 0 0 6 is the d isch a rg e fr o m th e p la n t's se c o n d w a stew a ter treatm ent p on d . T h is p o n d w a s c o m m is s io n e d in 1 9 9 4 . T h is u n it is 6 0 acres w ith a m axim um height o f 22 feet. The total storage capacity is 9 6 0 acre-feet. The volum e o f ash stored is approxim ately 376 acre-feet. L ow volum e w aste sources and subsystem s include: track hopper spray system , coal handling sum ps, flue gas conditioning heat exchanger, precipitator pad sum p pum ps, precipitator ash rem oval system , precipitator pad sum ps, air heater w ash sum]), econ om izer ash rem oval system , ch em ica l lab drains, lo w pressure raw w ater pum ps, unit 2 boiler drain lin e, condensate polisher, dem ineralizer regeneration w astes, char hopper, and storm water. A sh pond #2 provides treatm ent for fly ash, econom izer a sk low volum e w astes, and storm water runoff. T he ash pond efflu en t pH is continuously m onitored during discharge. A s necessary, carbon d ioxide is injected into the discharge line to low er effluent pH . T he system is equipped w ith an alarm system w hich alerts personnel o f lo w pond elevation, pH out o f range, and pH m onitor failure. T he discharges are to P oeling Lake, a non -classified waterbody therefore no toxics m ixing is afforded. T he ash pond also receives runoff from the northeast transform er pad.
Outfall #007 - Decant Recycle Pond Emergency Overflow
T his outfall is id entified per D N R N P D E S C onstruction Perm it 2 2 -7 6 6 7 and represents the em ergen cy overflow ' from the no-discharge recycle pond. The recycle pond receives storm water and decants w ater from the on-site gypsum stack and utility w aste landfill. The em erg en cy o v e rflo w fun ctions to protect the integrity o f the recy cle pon d berm s per D a m S a fety regu lations. T h e facility' has asked tins outfall be rem oved from the perm it. T he perm it writer has u sed best professional jud gm en t to leave th e outfall in the permit Should w astew ater discharge from this outfall, the perm ittee w ill be required to sam ple several param eters. D ischarge is not rainfall dependent. The elevation is m aintained through pum ps and controls (autom atic and/or m anual). T he pond elevation is continuously m onitored, so rainfall m onitoring provides no real indication o f potential or actual discharge via this outfall.
T he utility w aste land fill (U W L ) w as constructed on 212 acres just south o f the p ow er plant. T he U W L d oes not occu p y the entire acreage. From 1959 through 1973 the area w as designated as agricultural lands. F rom 1973 to 1999, the area w as designated flood p la in In 1999, the area w as rezoned to describe the lands better as agricultural w ith flood w ay fringe and density flood w ay overlay districts. B ecau se o f this flo o d w a y d esignation , a 100 foot buffer strip is required on all four sides o f the U W L and the m axim um height is 525 feet above sea level. G round lev els at the site are about 4 2 0 feet above sea level. T he area w as re-zoned on M ay 30, 2006 to solid waste disposal district with flood w ay fringe and density flood w ay overlay b y the St. Charles C ounty Planning and Zoning C om m ission prior to construction com m encing.
T he pon d w as designed w ith a tw o foot thick com pacted clay liner w ith a m axim um perm eab ility o f IxlO '7 cm-'see hydraulic conductivity. T he d a y lin er w as overlain w ith an 8 0 m illim eter thick high -d en sity p olyeth ylen e (H D P E ) liner. T he recycle pond
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 4 of 65
Parti. Facility Information operates in a closed loop m anner. T he slurry line from the w et flue gas desulphurization (W F G D ) deposits the slurry to the recycle gypsum stack. T he stack o f gypsum presses out the w ater w hich decants to the recycle pond. W hen the gypsum stack has m et the m axim um height or filled the stack basin, the solids are transferred to the utility w aste landfill. From the U W L , the recycle pond receives decant w ater, consolidation water and storm w ater runoff. The water contained in the recycle pond sum p is returned to the W F G D scrubber to b e u sed again. T hree adjacent 6 -fo o t w id e b y 3-foot tall b o x culverts are d esign ed to con vey w ater from the perim eter ditch o f the U W L into the recycle pond. T he pond has been designed to the 100 year-1 hour storm even t w hich is 3.3 inches o f rain for tliis site. W ith both W F G D scrubber units running, approxim ately 9 7 0 gallon s per m inute (gpm ) [1 .3 9 M G D or 2.16 cfs] o f slurry is pum ped to the U W L . A portion o f the process water is lost w ith the deposition o f the w aste. The m axim um process water flow o f 970 gpm is a sm all flo w in the perim eter ditch w h ich is sized for a m axim um flo w o f about 100 cfs at the culverts. In the recycle pond, the storage requirem ent o f 9 7 0 gpm is about h a lf o f the design volum e (123 acre-feet) and is set aside for process m anagem ent. W ater in the recycle pond is pum ped back to the plan t's W F G D scrubber system to be reused. The leachate co llection system wastew ater is also reused in the w et scrubber system . W ater can be pum ped b etw een the recycle pond and the gypsum stack area to equalize flow's if needed to regulate storm water. F G D w a stes accu m u late at rates according to th e p ow er generated at the fa cility and the typ e o f co a l u sed to p ow er th e facility. W hen using low sulfur coal (as com pared to Eastern Illinois coal w hich has a m uch higher sulfur content) less gypsum is produced, about one-tenth o f higher sulfur coal. The m ore pow er generated at the facility, the m ore exhaust is produced, consequently the wet scrubbers m ust clea n m ore air, and hen ce m ore gypsum is produced. A n y discharges from this outfall w ill, according to the G eohydrologic Evaluation o f L iquid W aste Treatm ent Site (project #21407; 0 5 /0 3 /2 0 0 7 ), eventually discharge to the M issouri R iver, a classified "P" stream. T he report also indicated there were likely not any sin k h oles in this area. Prior to reaching the M issouri R iver, the w astew ater m ay encounter a jurisdictional scour hole, as identified by the U n ited States A rm y Corps o f E ngin eers (U S A C E ). T he w etlan d is located at the sou th w est co m er o f the utility w aste landfill at 7 3 4 1 7 6 m eters north, and 4 3 0 9 2 3 9 m eters east in U T M Z one 15. T he scour h ole w as created during the flood o f 1993.
Diasraj o fO ecn t & Recycle Pond:
The bi-directional arrow sh ow s the transfer o f water b etw een the recycle pond and the facility u sin g the reclaim ed water.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 5 of 65
P a rt! Facility Information
D aily m axim um s and m onthly averages are required under 40 CFR 122.45(d )(1) for continuous discharges not from a POTW . H ow ever, the facility has stated this is an em ergen cy discharge outfall therefore w ill receive daily m onitoring requirem ents occurring each day the facility discharges. M onitoring is unscheduled hence the facility need only report those days when the outfall discharges. The facility did not undergo an antidegradation an alysis, partly because the perm it renew al w as subm itted prior to M issouri requiring an official antidegradation review on n ew discharges. S econ d ly, the outfall is em ergen cy d ischarge on ly, therefore, it is in itse lf a violation to discharge.
Permitted Feature fPF) #008 - Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS)
D u e to n e w ly p rom u lgated regu lation s regard in g im p in g em en t and entrain m en t at c o o lin g w ater intake structures, the departm ent has determ ined identifying each structure is germ ane. The water is withdraw n from the river through a 0.32 m ile (1,623 foot) long canal. W ater first p asses through a trash gate, into the cem en t-lin ed intake w ell, through the intake screens and is extracted by the circulating w ater pum ps. W ater is divided and then transferred to the Unit 1 condenser, U nit 2 condenser, condensate coolers, jacket water coolers. U nit 1 and 2 conditioner vacuum cooling, high pressure raw w ater pum ps, and low pressure raw water pum ps. Outfall #004 discharges to the CWTS.
T his facility is required by the C lean W ater A ct 316(b ) to provide inform ation, data, and sum m aries to the department regarding fish
and sh e llfis h im p in g em en t and entrainm ent at the n ext perm it ren ew al. S e e Pari III Rationale and Derivation ofEffluent Limits and Permit Conditions; Impingement and Entrainment. A lso se e sp ec ia l c o n d itio n # 1 7 for the perm it requirem ents. E sta b lislu n en t o f this
perm itted feature is required to track subm issions required by the rule.
Return o fRiver Water:
The Sioux P ow er Plant has four points at w hich M ississip pi R iver w ater is returned to the M ississippi R iver and are not designated as outfalls. T h ese ou tfalls are all subject to the general criteria found at 10 C S R 20 -7 .0 3 1 (4) and m ay not violate narrative w ater quality criteria such as causing a color change or increase m turbidity. A ll are associated w ith the plant intake structure; none o f the follow in g sources h ave been determ ined to add pollutants to the M ississip pi River: D eicin g lin e: this lin e is an alternative routing for a portion o f the flow through O utfall #001 (non-contact coolin g water). During
w inter m onths (as am bient tem perature m ay dictate), a portion o f this outfall is diverted through the deicing line and is discharged at the face o f the intake structure to prevent ice form ation o n the intake screens and trash racks. This system m ay also he used infrequently, throughout the year for other operational needs. Fish Dumn: this system w as designed to reduce fish im pingem ent on the intake screens. W hen operating, water and fish from in front o f the screens is pum ped from the intake structure and returned to the river just dow nstream o f the intake canal. F ish basket and fish counting tank: a return o f river w ater u sed to w ash traveling screens at the intake. W ater from the intake screen and fish counting tank is released into the coolin g w ater discharge canal.
Intake Water Use Diagram: T h e fo llo w in g diagram sh o w s h o w w a ter at the in ta k e is u se d . In the d ia g r a m " * * " is a return o f river w ater. S e e Part III: Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits and Conditions; Impingement and Entrainment at CWIS: CWA 316(b).
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 6 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Major Water User:
T he fa cility is registered as a m ajor w ater user, N o . 4 2 2 4 4 9 4 6 . I'he fa cility w ith d rew 2 0 2 ,2 0 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 g a llo n s (2 0 2 .2 b illion gallon s) from the M ississip p i R iver in 2 0 14. M uch o f the water is returned to the river through outfall #001. T he facility u sed no groundwater.
Stormwater Discharges
The facility also has tw o designated storm water outfalls and three location s w here designated outfalls are not required. The m ajority o f the storm w ater on site is discharged through outfalls # 0 0 2 and # 0 0 6 , the ash pond outfalls O utfalls #002 and # 0 0 6 are considered p rocess w ater and are regulated as such. O ther storm w ater d isch arges (su ch as from roadw ays and the rail lo o p ) are vegetated areas or are sh eet flow . T h is perm it w ill not require any additional sam pling h ow ever, in clu sion in the SW P P P and B M P m onitoring is required. Should the discharges change in any m anner im pacting waters o f the state from industrial activity, the facility m ust report changes to the departm ent and, if required, subm it an application for perm it m odification per 10 C S R 2 0 -6 .0 1 0 (8 )(A )9 . The perm ittee has asked outfalls # 0 0 4 and #005 be rem oved from the perm it. In the past, the facility has not had to perform any m onitoring at these outfalls. T he previou s perm it on ly identified these outfalls b y num ber and stated "these outfalls still exist but are not currently b ein g m onitored due to im p lem entation o f b est m an agem en t p ra ctices and m inim al risk to w aters o f the state." S ee below .
Outfall # 0 0 4 - Stormwater Runoff within Intake Canal
T his outfall is representative o f various sim ilar channel erosion conduits alon g the plan t's intake canal. The facility has not been required to perform analytical m onitoring at this outfall in the last perm it. R o o f drains from the intake structure and a sm all storage b u ild in g are also w ithin this drainage area. L arge rock and gravel have b een p laced in the d itch es to control ex cess erosion. Storm water runoff from this area is discharged directly into the intake canal, through the co o lin g w ater system , and back to the M ississip pi River. T he drainage area ground cover is a com bination o f h eavily vegetated and graveled zon es. Drainage to this outfall is separate from prim ary portions o f the plant. B M P s are im plem ented to prevent contam ination o f storm water runoff and ensure appropriate and tim ely responses to spills and other unanticipated events.
Outfall #004 determination: T h e perm it w riter h a s d eterm in ed th e p erm ittees req u est to c o n tin u e n ot sa m p lin g th is outfall is
appropriate and this perm it w ill not require analytical m onitoring o f the outfall. T he ab ove p h oto sh ow s an overlay o f the elevation contour lines for the site. T he light blue lin e sh ow s elevation 4 2 0 . A n 11 acre area o f im pervious surface w as m easured (areas in white and w ith in th e 4 2 0 fo o t bou n d ary). In d u strial W'ater r u n o f f w ill f lo w to w a rd s th e so u th w e st an d in to Hie ash p on d b e c a u se o f established berm s around the northern portion o f the facility. T he canal is berrned and any storm water ru n off within the canal area w ill b e utilized b y die intake for the co o lin g w ater, u sed throughout the coolin g system , then discharged to the M ississippi River. E P A 's
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 7 of 65
Parti. Facility Information
Interim Permitting Approachfor Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations in Storm Water Permits, (E P A 8 3 3 -D -9 6 -0 0 1 ), states "If
the perm itting authority determ ines that, through im plem entation o f appropriate B M P s required by the N P D E S storm water perm it, the discharges have the necessary controls to provide for attainm ent o f W Q S and any tech nology-based requirem ents, additional controls need not be included in the perm it" . T he B M P s included in the SW PPP are appropriate controlling m ech anism s for this discharge.
Outfall # 0 0 5 - Stormwater Runoff from Roadway
This outfall is representative o f several sim ilar discharges along the plant a ccess road to State H ighw ay 94. Stormwater runoff from the paved access road and the narrow gravel lined drainage sw ale b etw een the access road and the railroad tracks is discharged from corrugated p ip es p la ced beneath the rail line. S everal o f th ese p ip es drain to a low- ly in g area bordered b y the elev a ted plant a c c e ss road and H ighw ay 94, effectively form ing a basin. The basin then drains via a single pipe to a sm all M ississippi R iver backwater pond identified as P oelin g L ake. B M P s are im plem ented to help prevent contam ination o f storm water ru n off and ensure appropriate and tim ely responses to sp ills and other unanticipated even ts and this area m ust b e included in th e SW PPP.
Outfall #005 determination: O u tfall # 0 0 5 appears to c o n tin u e to h a v e n o ind ustrial ex p o su re. T h e d rain age area is m inim al. T h e perm it w riter h a s c o n c lu d e d a de minimis d eterm in a tio n is a c ce p ta b le an d the B M P s in c lu d e d in th e S W P P P are app rop riate for this
discharge.
Rail Spur Stormwater Runoff
A d dition al drainage p ip es are buried beneath the railroad tracks on the com pany ow n ed rail spurs con n ectin g the track loop (on the plant site) to the B urlington Northern Railroad. T hese are sim ilar to those identified as outfall #005. H ow ever these pipes drain to adjacent farm fields, located behind flood control levees, and is therefore not considered to b e a point source discharge to waters o f the
state. T h e d isch a rg e h a s b e e n d eterm in ed to b e de minimis but m u st still b e c o v e r e d b y th e S W P P P .
Barge unloading facility
During barge unloading operations, storm water accum ulated at the barge unloading facility is directed to a spare storage barge. A s necessary, storm water from this spare barge is rem oved b y a vacuum truck and transported to the coal storage area. There is no designated outfall for the barge unloading facility how ever this portion o f the facility m ust be covered by the SW PPP.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 8 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Water Balance Diagram:
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 9 o f 65
Part L Facility Information
SH MANAGEMENT UNITS:
Management Unit
Year Commissioned
F ly A sh Pond Bottom A sh Pond L a n d fill
1994 1967 2010
Surface Area (acres)
~ 60 -47 ~ 58
Total Storage capacity' (acre-ft)
960 2,100
unknown
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Faci Sheet Page 10 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Volume of Stored Ash (acre-ft)
376 1,859
unknown
Maximum Height of Unit (ft)
22 27
unknown
Liner
Y es No Y es
Facility Performance History & Comments:
The electronic discharge m onitoring reports w ere review ed for the last five years. A n inspection w as com pleted on January 28, 2015; the facility w as in com pliance.
The follow in g table show s the perm it exceedances from D ecem ber 2010 to A ugust 2016.
Monitoring Period
Parameter Description
Monitoring Location
PF No. Units Limit Limit Reported Value Limit Limit Reported Value
006 09/30/2013
Total Suspended
S o lid s (TSS)
Effluent Net
m g/L
M onthly
30
75.0 100
Avg.
02A 11/30/2015
Total Suspended Solids (T SS)
M onthly
End o f Pipe
m g/L
30
73
45
Avg.
02A 05/31/2012
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
M onthly
End o f Pipe
m g/L 30
42
45
Avg.
0 2A 11/30/2011
Total Suspended Solids (T SS)
End o f Pipe
M onthly
m g/L
30
26.0 45
A vg.
O utfall # 0 0 6 is ash pond #2; tech nology based net lim itations.
O utfall # 0 2 A is the w astew ater treatm ent facility; technology based lim itations.
D aily M ax. W'e ek ly Avg. W eekly Avg. W eekly Avg.
3 7 5 .0 111 50 51.0
Combustion Control Equipment:
Currently, tw o system s are operable to reduce air em ission s from the tw o S iou x P ow er Plant b oilers and are sum m arized below .
Wet Flue Gas Desulphurization: T h e W F G D fu n ctio n s to red u ce S O * e m is sio n s v ia a b s o ip tio n w ith lim esto n e. See Environmental Projects in th is part.
Rich Reagent Injection & Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (RRI-SNCR): R R I-S N C R eq u ip m en t w a s installed during N ovem b er
2 0 0 6 at the S io u x P ow er Plant. T he P urpose o f the R R I-S N C R system s is to reduce the em issio n o f N O * to the atm osphere from S io u x b o ile r s 1 an d 2 . T h e in sta lla tio n o f th e R R I-S N C R s y s te m s w a s part o f A m e r e n 's p la n to c o m p ly w ith n e w air p o llu tio n control regulations. T he RRI and S N C R function to convert N O * in the boiler into nitrogen by injecting a urea solution into each o f the tw o S iou x P ow er Plant boilers. U p on com pletion o f m od ification s for the U nit 1 R R I-SN C R system , both boilers w ill have 30 RRI injection ports at five different boiler elevation s and 9 SN C R injection ports at tw o different boiler elevations.
E nvironmental Projects:
A sh Sales: T he facility produces approxim ately 100,000 tons o f bottom ash (boiler slag) and 4 0 ,0 0 0 tons o f fly ash per year. B oiler slag is reclaim ed from d ie pond and utilized as blastin g grit and as roofing shingle m aterial. A pproxim ately 65,000 tons per year are provided to these markets. F ly ash w as reused as structural fill for a lim estone haul road and w as also used for construction o f the on-site utility w aste landfill. W etlands D evelopm ent: The facility has conveyed and d eeded about 25 acres o f the plant property bordering the M ississippi R iver for wetland preservation. This land contains bottom land hardw ood trees. C om bustion Control Equipm ent:
o W et Flue G as D esulphurization (W FG D ): R aw W ater Treatm ent Plant: C onstructed to provid e cleaner M ississip p i R iver w ater to plant processes. The plant m em brane filters, then ultrafiltration, flien reverse o sm osis. C hlorine is u sed in the R O treatm ent to prevent scaling. The treatm ent w aste is discharged through outfall #00 2 . T he facility provided 56 points o f data w hich sh ow ed outfall #002 had below the detection lim it (M L 130 pg/L ) o f total residual chlorine.
* W FG D L im estone Storage: The facility constructed tw o storage dom es on the eastern side o f the facility to contain
pow dered lim estone for the system . U tility W aste Landfill: T he facility has constructed a U W L south o f the generating station on the south side o f H igh w ay
94. T he U W L has a 183.5 acre "wet gypsum stack" w ith decant w ater directed to a recycle pond. T he department regulates the gypsum stack through the solid w aste program. G ypsum Slurry containing about 20% solid s is pum ped from the W TG D system to the gypsum stack where the solids separate out and rem ain in the stack. D ecant water flo w s to the recycle pond w hich functions to control suige volum es
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 11 of 65
Part L Facility Information
and contain gypsum stack storm water runoff. W ater from the recycle pons is returned for reuse b y the W FG D system . The construction perm it 2 2 -7 6 6 7 was issu ed on A ugust 5, 2008. o R ich R eagent Injection and S electiv e N on -C atalytic R ed u ction (R R i-S N C R ): R R I-SN C R equipm ent w as replaced in N ovem ber o f 2006. T hese system s reduce em ission o f nitrogen oxid es (N O x ) to the atm osphere from boilers 1 and 2.The system s convert N O x into nitrogen b y injecting urea into ports in the boiler. U rea injection concentrations vary betw een 10 and 50% . Som e urea injected into the boiler d oes not react frilly w ith the N O x and results in e x cess am m onia ("slip ") and ultim ately am m onia can be discharged to the ash ponds. U s e o f the R R J-SN C R equipm ent is dependent upon several factors. The sp ecific N O x controls w ere im plem ented in response to the M issouri N O x B udget Trading Program regulations during ozone season (M ay through Septem ber) and additional M issouri air regulations necessary to com ply w ith the federal Clean Air Interstate R ule (C A IR ). S in ce inception, the CA1R regulations have been vacated. U rea usage rates are highly variable but a m axim um usage rate is 3 0 ,0 0 0 gallon s o f 50% aqueous urea per day. T he fly ash pond (outfall # 0 0 6 ) is then estim ated to m ass load at about 3 to 25 p ou nd s per hour. Intake Pum p R eplacem ent: The four intake pum ps at the coolin g w ater intake structure w ere replaced with four higher capacity intake pu m p s to p rovide m ake-up w ater for the W F G D sy stem T h e p reviou s four pu m ps w ere each rated at 116,650 g a llo n s per m inute (G PM ). T hey w ere replaced w ith 130,000 G PM pum ps. The facility has determ ined thermal discharge w ill not b e changed with this increase. U tility W aste L andfill and R ecy cle Pond: C onstruction perm it # 2 2 -7667 effective A ugust 5, 2008 and expired A ugust 4, 2010 allow ed construction o f a no-discharge recycle pond and utility w aste landfill. This created outfall #007 as an em ergency discharge (no allow ed discharge) for safety purposes. The W FG D system is designed to operate w ith a m axim um o f 50,000 m g'L o f chlorides therefore this system cannot direct discharge to w aters o f the state w ithout violating water quality standards. The U W L c o n sists o f a 1 83.5 acre "w et g y p su m stack " w ith d ecan t w ater d irected to a "r e c y c le p o n d ".
Chemical Usage & Significant Materlals Stored On Site:
T he follow in g table outlines the chem icals and m aterials used or stored at the facility and how each chem ical is controlled or lim ited through the perm it.
Chemical/Mate rial Aluminum Chlorohydrate (50%)
Ammonium Hydroxide (28% as NH40H)
Anticorrosion Chemical (Quality Water Treatment 1590, or equivalent) GE-Betz Hypersperse MDC 220, or equivalent
GEBetz NX 1106 and NX1103, or equivalent
Boiler Chemical Cleaning
Bromine (Quality Water Treatment 2130, or equivalent)
Carbon dioxide
Uses/Storage Used as a coagulant in raw water treatment: usage of 5,000 gallons/year: stored in a 5,000 gallon tank located at the raw water treatment plant. There is a containment structure for this tank.
Used as a boiler treatment chemical in makeup water and for condensate polisher regenerations; usage: 202,000 lbs/year; stored in a 5,800 gallon above ground tank. Plant procedures limit total inventory to less than 3,000 gallons.
used for corrosion control in the Control Room HVAC cooling tower; usage of 600 gallons/year
used as an antisealant in raw water treatment; usage of 5,000 gallons/year
biocide used to control jacket water quality; usage of 135 gallons/year
Occurs approximately every six years. Boiler chemical cleaning wastes are not discharged but are thermally treated at the plant by injecting them into an operating boiler. Boilers are cleaned with a solution of formic and hydroxyacetic acids. The chemicals are brought on site in portable tanks. The boiler cleaning wastewater is stored in a 50.000 gallon tank, until it is thermally treated in an operating boiler. used for bacteriological control in the control room HVAC cooling tower; usage of 30 gallons/year used for neutralization of ash pond #2 effluent and as an inert gas in generator systems; usage of 305,900 lbs/year; liquid carbon dioxide is stored in two tanks: a 12,000 pound capacity tank in the plant's gas tank and a 52,000-pound capacity tank at the fly ash pond discharge structure
Discharge
ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
via the combined drain
sump ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
via the combined drain
sump
no discharge
ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
outfall #006
Permit Control
WET testing ammonia as N monitoring, WET testing WET testing WET testing
WET testing
special condition
#22
WET testing
pH limits
Chlorine tablets (Quality Water Treatment T30, or equivalent)
used for bacteriological control in die Control Room HVAC cooling tower; usage of 1pail/year
ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
WET testing
Ameren Missouri Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 12 of 65
Part L Facility Information
Che MiealAl ate rial
Uses/Storage
Citric Acid
a low pH reverse osmosis cleaning chemical in raw water treatment, 24 gallons'year
Citric Acid (50%) Coal
Coal Dust Suppression Agents & Coal Treatment Chemicals
Coal Freeze Conditioning Agents
Ethylene Glycol Ferric Sulfate Solution (45%)_____________
Fuel Oil
High pH Reverse Osmosis Cleaning Chemical (GEBctzAKlIO. or equivalent)____________
low pH Ultra filtration Membrane cleaning chemical in raw water treatment; usage of 1,000 gallons'year___________ __________________________________ fuel to generate electricity; stored outside uncovered; delivered by gain, truck, or barge and unloaded at the coal receiving area stormwater runoff treat coal or coal combustion systems; Bcnelech products; BT-205W (5,000 gallons'year), BT-415 or 515 (45,000 gallons/vear) and BT100F2 (61,000 gallons/year): surfactants - all are used for coal dust suppression These can be used in coal handling systems; small amount of these products may be discharged from the ash ponds: three dust suppressant products are stored on site, in five above ground tanks located near the crusher house and coal receiving hoppers Each lank sits within a concrete retention berm which is designated to hold the entire contents ol the tank Deliveries are made directly to the tanks. Applied to coal (at the point of shipment) during severe winter weather; consist of various mixtures of ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol, calcium chloride, and'or sodium chloride. When used, freeze-conditioning agents are applied at a rate of approx. 2 pints per ton of coal. Freeze conditioning agents may also be used in the coal handling systems at Sioux Plant Ethylene glycol solutions (50%) --used as an antifreeze agent on coal and as a coolant in mobile equipment; usage of 12,000 lbs'vr.__________ __________________________________ stored in 55-gallon drums. It is mixed 50/50 with water and used as an anti-slip agent on coal conveyors__ ___
used as a precipitating agent ill raw water treatment; infrequent usage
stored in two above ground tanks, with 30.000 and 15,000 gallon capacities. They are located within earthen dikes, which are designated to hold 33,000 and 16,500 gallons respectively Fuel oil is loaded directly into the tanks Note at times, there are also one ro three railroad car tankers on site, with a holding capacity of 21,000 gallons each____________________________________________________
used as a high pH RO cleaning chemical in raw water treatment, usage of 3,600 Ibs/year
Hydrogen Gas
siored in two high-pressure cylinder located in the plant s gas yard and a 52,000 pound capacity lank at the fly ash pond dischatge slnieltirc
lab drains which may include spent reagents, only trace levels are anticipated
Discharge discharged to ash pond # 1 (outfall fi002) ash pond # 1 (outfall fiCO2) outfall #006
outfalls #002 and #006
outfall #002
outfall #002 ash pond # I (outfall #002) no discharge, outfall #002. barge dock, stormwater
outfalls
ash pond # 1 (outfall #002)
n/a (volatilization upon release)
Permit Control pH Jurats,
WET testing limiPtat.ions ELCJ; SWPPP
WET testing; narrative conditions; SWPPP
WET testing
WET testing iron monitonnsr oil and grease limitations. SWPPP, OPA*
pH limitations
Laboratory Reagents
Lime (Calcium Oxide) Nitrogen. Liquid Petroleum (Pet) Coke Phosphoric Acid (75%)
CHF.m ii AL
Methylene chJondc Tetra chloi oethylcnc Toluene Iiicbloroethane Tnchloroethene Methyl chloride Ethyl benzene
CAS Number
/5-09-2 127-18-4 108-88-3 71 55-6 79-01-6 74-87-3 100-41-4
used in raw water treatment: infrequent usage
Stored in a high-pressure cylinder located in the plant's gas yard, with a total capacity of approx. 10,600 pounds.
supplemental fuel; the facility may use lip to a 15% feed rate of pet coke, stored on a portion of the coal pile; not currently used by the facility as supplemental fuel: none stored at this time
used as a low pH Reverse Osmosis cleaning in raw water treatment; usage of 24 gallons'year
ash pond #2 (outfall #006)
ash pond P1 (outfall #002)
tl/a (volatilization upon release)
outfall #002
discharged to ash pond # 1 (outfall #002)
WET testing
limiytautions
ammonia asN
monitonnp WET testing
~pH limitations,
WET testina
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 13 o f 65
Part I Facility Information
Chemical/Material
Polymer
Propylene Glycol Solution (50%) Reverse Osmosis Biocide (GE-Betz BioMate MBC 2881, or equivalent) Sodium Bisulfite (43%) Sodium Chloride
Sodium Hydroxide (solid)
Sodium Hydroxide Solution (50%) Sodium Hypochlorite Solution (10%) Sodium Molybdate Dehydrate (practical grade)
Sodium Tolytnazole Solution (50%)
Sulfur, Molten
Sulliiric Acid (93%)
Tires, Shredded
Transformers
Unleaded Gasoline
Urea Liquor (50%)
Used Oil
Uses/Storage
settling agent in raw water treatment; infrequent usage
source is from residuals in piping: usage of approx. 25 gallons/year used as an RO system biocide chemical in raw water treatment: usage of 500 gallons/year used as a neutralizing agent in raw water treatment; usage of 5,000 gallons/year Used to brine-treat demineralizer anion resin; infrequent usage; stored in several plant areas during winter months. It is used on roadways, sidewalks and parking lots for deicing, as required.
jacket water system additive; usage of 1,100 lbs/year
used for raw water treatment and polisher demineralizer regeneration (alternatively to neutralize Ash Pond H I) - usage of 2,310 lbs/year; stored in a 4,000-gallon tank located at the raw water treatment plant used as a disinfectant in raw water treatment; usage of 12,000 gallons/year
jacket water system chemical additive; 20,000 lbs/year
jacket water system chemical additive, usage of 500 gallons/year
stored in a 70 ton tank located south of the Power Building raw water treatment and polisher regeneration (alternatively to neutralize ash pond H1); usage o f6,485 lbs/year; stored in a 15,000-gallon above ground tank; there is a concrete retaining basin under the tank for containment in the event of a spill; there is also a 300-gallon tank located at the raw water treatment plant alternative feel: stored outside in an uncovered area; discarded tires are burned to recover the energy and reduce coal feel consumption: the maximum storage is 1.000 tons; not currently used as alternative feel; none stored at this time Oil filed transformers are located on site; oil is used for cooling and insulation. These transformers have drains dischargeing to the combined drain sump.
stored in a UL-Listed 1,000-gallon above ground storage tank
stored in a 400,000 gallon tank with secondary' containment
Non-electrical & electrical waste oil are stored in a 4,000 gallon tank located immediately southeast of fee Unit 2 stack. This tank and its transfer equipment are located within a concrete dike of sufficient volume to contain a complete loss of the oil and solvent mixture, plus substantial rainfall.
Discharge
ash pond #2 (outfall #006)
ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond HI (outfall #002)
ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
via the combined drain
sump ash pond #1 and #2 (outfalls #002 and #006) ash pond #1 (outfall #002) ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
via the combined drain
sump ash pond #1 (outfall #002)
via the combined drain
sump no discharge
discharged to ash pond #1
and #2
outfall #002
outlall #002 (bottom ash
pond)
no discharge
no discharge
no discharge
Permit Control
WET testing; Standard Conditions Part I WET testing
WET testing
pH limitations
chloride monitoring
pH limitations
pH limitations
pH limitations
WET testing
WET testing
WET testing
pH limits, WET testing
WET testing
oil and grease limitations special condition #15, OPA* ammonia asN monitoring oil and grease limitations; special condition #15, OPA*
* O PA = O il P ollution A ct o f 1990; any discharge o f petroleum products to waters o f the U nited States is prohibited and any am ount s p ille d in to s u c h w a te rs m u st b e rep orted to tire C o a s t G u ard 's N a tio n a l R e s p o n s e C en ter im m e d ia te ly u p o n d isc o v e ry .
Part II. Receiving Stream Information
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 14 o f 65
Part II. Receiving Stream Information
Applicable Designations o f Waters of the State: S A s p er M is s o u r i's E fflu e n t R e g u la tio n s [1 0 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 (1 ) ( B ) ] , th e w a te rs o f the state are d iv id e d in to th e f o llo w in g se v e n
c a te g o r ie s. E a ch c a teg o r y lis ts efflu en t lim ita tio n s for s p e c if ic p aram eters, w h ic h are p resen ted in e a c h o u tfa ll's E fflu en t
L im itation T able and further d iscu ssed in the D erivation & D isc u ssio n o f L im its section.
M issouri or M ississip p i River:
Lake or Reservoir:
El
L o sin g :
M etropolitan N o-D ischarge:
Special Stream:
Subsurface W ater:
A ll Other Waters:
El
Receiving Water Body's W ater Q uality:
The M ississip p i R iver is the m ajor river located just north o f the facility. O nce-through co o lin g w ater discharges directly to this river from outfall #001.
P oeling Lake is the first receiving w aterbody for several o f the outfalls. See the w aterbody table on the follow in g page in this section. T his lake is not cla ssified but general water quality criteria [1 0 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (4 )] apply. There are no concurrent b iological or water quality data available for this lake.
T he M issouri R iver w as id en tified as the discharge point for the u tility w aste lan d fill's recy cle pond em ergency overflow discharge; outfall #007.
303(d) List:
Section 303(d ) o f the federal C lean W ater A ct requires each state identify waters not m eeting w ater quality standards and for which adequate water pollution controls have not been required. W ater quality standards protect such b eneficial uses o f water as w hole body contact (such as sw im m ing), m aintaining fish and other aquatic life, and providing drinking water for people, livestock and w ild life. T he 3 0 3 (d ) list h elp s state and federal agen cies k eep track o f im paired w aters but not add ressed b y norm al w ater pollution control program s, http://dnr.m o.gov/env/w pp/w atem uahtv/303d/303d.htm
S N o t ap p licab le; T h e M ississip p i R iv er w a s listed o n th e 2 0 0 2 M isso u ri 3 0 3 (d ) list fo r chlord ane and P C B s. It w a s rem oved from
the 303(d) List w hen a T M D L w as approved. The T M D L is still effective.
T h e M isso u r i R iv e r is lis te d o n th e 2 0 1 6 C W A 3 0 3 (d ) for E coli. T h e fa c ility is n o t c o n sid e r e d a so u rce o f th e im pairm ent as
dom estic w astew ater is discharged to the M ississippi.
Total MaximTM Daily Load (TMDL):
A T M D L is a calculation o f the m axim um am ount o f a given pollutant a body o f water can absorb before its w ater quality is affected; hence, the purpose o f a T M D L is to determ ine the pollutant loading a specific w aterbody can assim ilate w ithout exceed in g water quality standards. I f a w ater bod y is determ ined to be im paired as listed on the 303(d ) list, then a watershed m anagem ent plan w ill be d evelop ed w h ich shall inclu de the T M D L calculation. http://dnr.m o.gov/env/w D p/tm dl/
S T h is fa c ility m a y b e c o n sid e r e d a so u r c e o f, or h ad the p o ten tia l to con trib u te to P C B p o llu tio n listed in th e 2 0 0 2 T M D L for th e
M ississip p i R iver and the 2 0 0 6 T M D L for the M issouri R iver. In 1991, the facility noted they cleaned up P C B contam inated soil from b etw een the air heater w ash basin and the road as a result o f previou s releases o f transform er o il. T he facility w as not sp ecifica lly m en tion ed in eith er T M D L therefore there are n o w asteload association s. o P C B s were used in transform er o il because o f their excellen t heat dispersion capabilities. O n A ugust 25, 1982, EPA issu ed a
final rule govern in g the u se and serv icin g o f electrical equipm ent con tain in g P C B s (4 7 FR 3 7 3 4 2 ). This final rule w as issued as a result o f the Court's d ecision to strike dow n th e M ay 1979 rale's classification o f transform ers, capacitors, and electrom agnets as "totally enclosed." In the A ugust 25, 1982 rule, E P A authorized the use o f electrical equipm ent containing P C B s w ith certain conditions and restrictions intended to m inim ize hum an and environm ental exposures to PCBs. On O ctober 21, 1982, E P A issu ed part on e o f a two-part rule to address the 50 ppm regulatory c u to ff (4 7 FR 46980). T his final ru le a d d ressed c lo s e d and c o n tr o lle d w a s te m a n u fa ctu rin g p r o c e s se s . E P A su b m itted a p la n to the C ourt o n N o v e m b e r 1, 1982, that requested a further extension o f the stay o f m andate for the 50 ppm c u to ff and presented plans for the com pletion o f the ralem aking on tins issu e. (T h e O ctober 2 1 , 1982 rule w as superseded later by the "U ncontrolled PC B's Rule" issu ed on July 10, 1984.). Since then, utilities have been retrofitting all transform ers and fillin g w ith m ineral oil w hich does not contain PC B s. It is unknow n i f Siou x has any rem aining transform ers w h ich m ay have P C B s or i f sp ills o f P C B s occurred on site.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 15 of 65
P a rtii Receiving Stream Information
Waterbody Table:
Outfall
Waterbody Name
#001 #002
m zA
Mississippi River
Poeling Lake Tributary to the Mississippi River
(8-20-13 MUDO VI.0) Poeling Lake via Outfall #002
Backwater chutes of the Mississippi River
#003
Mississippi River
#004
Mississippi River
Poeling Lake
#005
Backwater chutes of the Mississippi
River
Poeling Lake
#006
Backwater chutes of the Mississippi
River
Tributary to Jurisdictional Scour Hole
#007 Missouri River
#008
Mississippi River
Class P n/a C n/a C P
P n/a C n/a
c
n/a p
p
WBID 3700 n/a 3960 n/a 3960 3700
3700 n/a 3960 n/a 3960 n/a 1604
3700
Designated Uses*
DW.S, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL)
GEN
IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WWH (AQL)
GEN
DWS, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW'), SCR, WBC-A.
WWH (AQL) DWS, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL) DWS, HHP (HHF), IND. IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL)
GEN
DWS, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL)
GEN
DW'S, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL)
GEN
DWS, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR, LWP (LWW), SCR. WBC-B,
WWH (AQL)
DWS, HHP (HHF), IND, IRR LWP (LWW), SCR, WBC-A,
WWH (AQL)
Distance to Segment 0.0 mi 0.0 0.2 mi 0.0 mi 0.2 mi
0.0 mi
0.0 mi 0.0 mi 0.6 mi 0.0 mi 0.6 mi 0.3 mi 0.7 mi
0 0 mi
12-DiGrrHUC 07110009-0402 City of AltonMississippi River
07110009-0401 Marais Temps Clair-Mississippi
River
07110009-0402 City of AltonMississippi River
07110009-0401 Marais Temps Clair-Mississippi
River
10300200-0804 Outlet Missouri
River 07110009-0401 Marais Temps Clair-Mississippi
River
n/a not applicable WBID = Waterbody IDentification: Missouri Use Designation Dataset 8-20-13 MUDD V1.0 data can be found as an AreGIS shapefile on MSDIS at
-ftn://msdis.missouri.ediyoub/biland W'ater Rcsources/MO 2014 WPS Stream Classifications and Use sho.zip. * .As per 10 CSR 20-7.031 Missouri Water Quality Standards, the department defines the Clean Water Commission's water quality objectives in terms of
"water uses to be maintained and the criteria to protect those uses." The receiving stream and 1" classified receiving stream's beneficial water uses to be maintained are in the receiving stream table in accordance with [10 CSR 20-7.031(1X0],
Uses which may be found in the receiving streams table, above:
10 CSR 20-7.031 (])(C)1.:
AQL = Protection of aquatic life (Current narrative use(s) are defined to ensure the protection and propagation of fish shellfish and wildlife, which is further
subcategorized as: WWH = Warm Water Habitat; CLH = Cool Water Habitat; CDH = Cold Water Habitat; EAH = Ephemeral Aquatic Habitat; MAH =
Modified Aquatic Habitat; LAH = Limited Aquatic Habitat. This permit uses AQL effluent limitations in 10 CSR 20-7.031 Table A for all habitat
designations unless otherwise specified.)
10 CSR 20-7.031(1 ){C)2.: Recreation in and on the water
WBC = Whole Body'Contact recreation where the entire body is capable of being submerged.
WBC-A = Whole body contact recreation supporting swimming uses and has public access;
WBC-B = Whole body contact recreation supporting swimming:
SCR = Secondary Contact Recreation (like fishing, wading, and boating).
10 CSR 20-7.031(1)(C)3. to 7.:
HHP (formerly HHF) = Human Health Protection as it relates to the consumption of fish;
ERR = Irrigation for use on crops utilized for human or livestock consumption;
LWW = Livestock and wildlife watering (Current narrative use is defined as LWP = Livestock and Wildlife Protection);
DWS _ Drinking Water Supply,
IND = Industrial water supply
10 CSR 20-7.031(1)(C)8-11.: Wetlands (10 CSR 20-7.031 Table A currently does not have corresponding habitat use criteria for these defined uses)
WSA =Storm- and flood-water storage and attenuation, WHP = Habitat for resident and migratory wildlife species;
WRC = Recreational, cultural, educational, scientific, and natural aesthetic values and uses; WHC = Hydrologic cvcle maintenance.
10CSR 20-7.031(6); GRW= Groundwater
'
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Pace 16 o f 65
Part II Receiving Stream Information
Receiving Stream Low-Flow Valves:
Outfall
Receiving stream (C, P)
1Q10
Low-Flow Values (C F S )
7Q 10
30Q 10
#001
M is sissip p i R iv e r (P)
18,287
23,385
2 8 ,1 8 0
To calculate 7Q 10, values w ere obtained 0 1 /0 1 /1 9 7 0 to 05/3 1 /2 0 1 5 from 1) M ississip pi river at K eokuk Iow a (U S G S 05474500) and 2) the F ox R iver at W ayland, M O (U SG S 05495000) and 3) the D es M oines R iver at St. F rancisville, M O (U SG S 05490600) and 4) the Illin ois R iver b y V a lley C ity, IL (U S G S 0 5 5 8 6 1 0 0 ) w ere added together as these flo w s enter the M ississip p i R iver upstream o f the facility.
Mixing Considerations Table: Mississippi River (Class P
Mixing Zone (C F S ) (Chronic)
[10 CSR 20-7.03 l(5)(A )4.B .(ID (a)l
1Q10
7Q10
30Q10
Zone of Initial Dilution (C F S ) (Acute)
f10 C SR 20-7.031 (5)(A)4.B.(II)(b)l
IQ 10
7Q10
30Q10
4571 cfe
5846 cfs
7045 cfs
457 cfs
585 cfs
705 cfs
Z ID ca n n o t b e m o re than 10 tim es th e fa c ility d e sig n flo w . (D F Cf5 = 1 1 2 1 C F S )
Stream Mixing Considerations for Outfalls #003, #004, and #007:
Z one o f Initial D ilution: N ot A llow ed [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 l(5 )(A )4 .B .(I)(b )] M ixing Zone: N ot A llow ed [10 CSR 20-7.03 l(5)(A )4.B .(I)(a)]
Lake Mixing Considerations for Outfalls #002, #02A, #005, and #006:
Z one o f Initial D ilution: N ot A llow ed [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 l(5 )(A )4 .B .(IV )(b )] M ixing Zone: N ot allow ed [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(5)(D ) and (E)]
Thermal Mixing Considerations: T h e fa c ility is su b ject to therm al lim ita tio n s an d is a llo w e d m ix in g c o n sid e r a tio n s p e r 10 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1 (5 )(D )(5 ) & (6 ). S e e Part V Effluent Limit Determination; Derivation and Discussion o fLimits; Outfall HOOJ,
Receiving Stream Monitoring Requirements:
The departm ent is establishing temperature lim its for outfall # 0 0 1 , once through coolin g water. T his necessitates the facility determ ine stream temperature and velocity. T he departm ent does not sp ecify h ow the facility is to do this, but the inform ation obtained m ust b e reliable and scien tifically supportable.
The facility is to perform b iological studies to m onitor for im pingem ent and entrainm ent. T he departm ent a lso d o es not dictate the
exact m eth o d s or site s w h ere th ese stu d ies are to b e perform ed. S e e Part ILL Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits and Condition; Impingement and Entrainment at CWIS; C,WA 316(b),
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 17 o f 65
Part III Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
Part III. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
Alternative Evaluations for New Facilities:
A s per [1 0 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 15(4)(A )], discharges to lo sin g stream s shall b e perm itted on ly after other alternatives including land application, discharges to a gam ing stream and con n ection to a regional w astew ater treatm ent facility have been evaluated and determ ined to be unacceptable for environm ental and/or econom ic reasons. 4 N o t a p p lic a b le; the fa cility d o e s n ot d isc h a r g e to a lo s in g strea m as d e fin e d b y [ 10 C S R 2 0 - 2 .0 1 0 ( 3 6 ) ] & [1 0 C S R 2 0
7 . 0 3 1(1 )(N )], o r is an e x is tin g fa c ility .
Anti-backsliding:
A p rovision in the Federal R egulations [C W A 303(d )(4); C W A 4 0 2 (c); 4 0 C FR Part 122.44(1)] requires a reissued permit to be as stringent as the previou s perm it w ith som e excep tion s. >4 A ll lim its in th is op era tin g p erm it are at lea st a s p r o te c tiv e as th o s e p r e v io u sly e sta b lish e d , th erefo re, b a c k slid in g d o e s n ot app ly.
S L im ita tio n s in th is op eratin g p erm it for th e r e iss u a n c e o f th is p erm it c o n fo r m to th e a n ti-b a c k slid in g p r o v isio n s o f S e c tio n 4 0 2 ( o )
o f tire C le a n W ater A ct, and 4 0 C F R P art 1 2 2 .4 4 . >4 M aterial and su b stan tial alteration s or a d d itio n s to th e p erm itted fa c ility occu rred after p erm it issu a n c e w h ic h ju s tify the
application o f a less stringent effluent lim itation. * The fa cility has indicated tw o outfalls are em ergen cy discharges. O utfall # 0 0 3 w as perm itted in the previous perm it with
daily and m onth ly lim its for T S S , O & G , and pFl. T h ese lim its have been rem oved as it is a violation o f this perm it to discharge from these outfalls under 4 0 CFR 122.41(m ) and reported according to 4 0 C FR 122.4 l(m X 3)(i) & (ii). The receiving waterbody is still protected u sin g these m easures. O utfall # 0 0 7 is n ew ly established therefore no backsliding has occurred. *4 T h e D ep a rtm en t d eterm in ed te c h n ic a l m ista k e s or m ista k e n in terp retation s o f la w w e r e m a d e in is s u in g th e p erm it un der se c tio n 402(a)(1)(b). * T his perm it changes W E T test requirem ents for the facility from a pass/fail requirem ent to m onitoring on ly for toxic units. T his change reflects m od ification s to M isso u ri's E ffluent R egulation found at 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 . 4 0 C FR 1 2 2 .4 4 (d )(l)(ii) requires the departm ent to establish effluent lim itations controlling all param eters w hich have the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excu rsion ab ove any state water qu ality standard, in clu d in g state narrative criteria. T he previous perm it im posed a pass/fail lim itation w ithout co llectin g su fficien t data to m ake a reasonable potential determ ination. Furtherm ore, the m ethod o f reporting associated w ith the pass/fail lim itation prevented the department from gathering the data necessary to m ake an analytical findin g o f reasonable potential, im plem en tation o f the toxic unit m onitoring requirem ent w ill allow the departm ent to produce num eric criteria in accordance w ith water quality standards established under 303 o f the C W A . T h is p erm it r e m o v e s th e s p e c ia l c o n d itio n C .4 . "D isc h a r g e o f w'a ste w a te r from th is fa c ility m u st not a lo n e or in co m b in a tio n w ith other sources cause the receiving stream to violate the fo llo w in g (a) W ater tem peratures and temperature differentials specified in M issouri water quality standards shall be m et." T he department has determ ined this statem ent w as not enforceable as written and was capriciously enacted.
Antidegradation:
In a c co r d a n ce w ith M is s o u r i's W ater Q u a lity Standard [1 0 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1 ( 2 ) ] , the D ep a rtm en t is to d o c u m e n t b y m e a n s o f A n tid eg r a d a tio n R e v ie w the u se o f a w ater b o d y 's a v a ila b le a ss im ila tiv e c a p a c ity is ju s tifie d . D e g ra d a tio n is ju s tifie d b y d o cu m en tin g the so cio-econ om ic im portance o f a discharging activity after determ ining the n ecessity o f the discharge. *4 R e n e w a l; n o d egrad ation p r o p o s e d and n o further r e v ie w n ec essa ry .
Benchmarks:
W hen a perm itted feature or outfall con sists o f on ly storm w ater, a benchm ark m ay be im plem ented at the discretion o f the permit writer. B enchm arks require the facility to m onitor, and if necessary, replace and update storm water control m easures. Benchm ark concentrations are not effluent lim itations. A benchm ark is a technology-based threshold. A benchm ark exceedance, therefore, is not a perm it violation; how ever, failure to take corrective action is a violation o f the perm it. B enchm ark m onitoring data is used to determ ine the overall effectiv en ess o f control m easures and to assist the perm ittee in k n ow in g w h en additional corrective actions m ay be necessary to com ply with the technology based effluent lim itations (T B E L ).
B ecau se o f the fleetin g nature o f stornrwater discharges, the dqiartm ent, under the direction o f EPA guidance, has determ ined
m o n th ly a v erages are cap riciou s m ea su res o f storm w ater d isch arges. T h e Technical Support Documentfo r Water Quality Based Toxics Control ( E P A /5 0 5 /2 -9 0 -0 0 1 ; 1 9 9 1 ) S e c tio n 3.1 in d ic a tes m o st p r o c ed u r es w ith in th e d o c u m e n t a p p ly o n ly to w ater q u a lity
based approaches, not end-of-pipe tech nology-based controls. H ence, storm water outfalls w ill only contain a m axim um daily lim it (M D L ), b en ch m a rk , or m o n ito rin g req u irem en t d e te rm in e d b y th e site s p e c if ic c o n d itio n s in c lu d in g th e r e c e iv in g w a te r 's current quality. W h ile insp ection o f the storm water B M P s occurs m onthly, facilities w ith no com plian ce issu es are usually expected to sam ple storm w ater quarterly.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy CentoFact Sheet Page 18 o f 65
Part HI. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
N u m er ic b en ch m ark v a lu e s are b a s e d o n o th er storm w ater p e r m its in c lu d in g th e E n v iro n m en ta l P r o te c tio n A g e n c y 's (E P A 's) Multi Sector General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated With Industrial Activity (M S G P ) or w ater q u ality standards. B ecau se
precipitation even ts are sudden and m om entary, benchm arks based o n state or federal standards or recom m en dations u se the Criteria M axim um C oncentration (C M C ) value, or acute standard. The C M C is the estim ate o f the highest concentration o f a material in surface w ater to w h ich an aquatic com m u nity can be exp osed b riefly w ithout resulting in an unacceptable effect. The CM C for aquatic life is intended to b e protective o f the vast m ajority o f the aquatic com m u n ities in the U n ited States.
A N ot applicable; this facility has storm w ater-only outfalls but there are no benchm ark constraints.
Biosolids & Sewage Sludge:
B io so lid s are solid m aterials resulting from dom estic w astew ater treatm ent that m eet federal and state criteria for beneficial u ses (i.e. fertilizer). Sew age sludge is solids, sem i-solid s, or liquid residue generated during the treatment o f dom estic sew age in a treatment works; including but not lim ited to, dom estic septage; scum or solid s rem oved in prim ary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatm ent process; and a m aterial derived from sew a g e slud ge. S ew a g e slud ge d oes not in clu de ash generated during the firing o f se w a g e s lu d g e in a s e w a g e slu d g e in cin erator or gr it an d sc r e e n in g g e n e ra te d d u n n g p r e lim in a r y treatm ent o f d o m e stic se w a g e in a treatm ent works. A dditional inform ation regarding biosolids and sludge is located at the follow in g w eb address: http:r'/extension.m issouri-edu/m ain/D ispiavC ategorv.aspx'?C =74. item s W Q 422 through W Q 449.
A N o t ap p lica b le; th is c o n d itio n is n o t a p p lic a b le to the p e r m itte e for th is fa c ility .
Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR):
C oal C om bustion R esiduals (C C R ), often referred to as coal ash, are currently considered solid w aste, not hazardous w aste, under an am endm ent to R C R A , the R eso u rce C on servation and R eco v ery A ct. C oal ash is resid ue from the com b u stion o f coal in p ow er plants and com pounds captured by pollution control technologies, like precipitators or scrubbers. Potential environm ental concerns from coal a sh p erta in to p o llu tio n from im p o u n d m e n ts an d la n d fills le a c h in g in to g ro u n d w a ter and str uctural fa ilu r e s o f im p ou n d m en ts.
The U S EPA is prom ulgating the first-ever national rules to ensure the safe disposal and m anagem ent o f coal ash from coal-fired p o w e r p la n ts u n d er th e n a tio n 's p rim ary la w for r eg u la tin g s o lid w a s te , th e R e so u rc e C o n se rv a tio n an d R e c o v e r y A c t (R C R A ) under Subtitle D . E P A published the final rule on April 17, 2015 in the Federal R egister, http://ww w 2.ep a.gov/coalash /coal-ash-n ile. The departm ent is currently review ing th e rule.
W hile the rule m entioned above is geared towards solid w aste, the w ater protection program has begun to consider im plications to groundwater o f the state. Studies on w hich the rule is based indicate im pacts occur to groundwater w hen ponds are unlined or not adequately lined. T his perm it d o es not regulate the fate o f coal ash , this operating perm it contains a sp ecial condition to address co n cern s regarding a sh p on d s/im p o im d m en ts at this fa c ility and th eir p o ten tia l to im p act ground w ater. M issou ri W ater Q uality Standard 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(5)(A ) states, "W ater contam inants shall not cause or contribute to exceed ances o f Table A , groundwater lim its in aquifers and caves..." The established special condition w ill allo w the departm ent to (1) determ ine i f groundwater is being im pacted from either the coal ash im poundm ents, and (2 ) establish controls, lim its, m anagem ent strategies, and/or groundwater
clean u p criteria. S e e Groundwater Monitoring b e lo w .
Assessment:
O n Septem ber 3 0 , 2 0 1 0 , the U nited States E nvironm ental P rotection A gen cy and its engineering contractors conducted a C C R site assessm en t at the S iou x P ow er P lant. T he purpose o f the visit w a s to a ssess the structural stability o f the im poundm ents or other sim ilar m anagem ent units containing "w et" handled C C R s. D u e to new ly prom ulgated regulations for C C R , the facility is m oving to a dry handling system o f C C R disposal.
Compliance and Enforcement:
E nforcem ent is the action taken b y the W ater Protection Program (W P P ) to bring an entity into com pliance w ith the M issouri Clean W ater L aw , its im plem enting regu lations, and/or any term s and conditions o f an operating perm it. T he prim ary purpose o f the enforcem ent activity in the W PP is to reso lv e violation s and return the entity to com plian ce.
A N ot applicable; the perm ittee/facility is not currently under W ater P rotection Program enforcem ent action.
Effluent Limitation Guideline:
Effluent Lim itation G uidelines, or E L G s, are found at 4 0 CFR 4 0 0 -4 9 9 . T hese are lim itations established by the EPA based on the SIC c o d e and the type o f w ork a fa cility is condu cting. M o st E L G s are for pro cess w astew ater and som e address storm water. A ll are tech nology based lim itations w h ich m ust be m et by the applicable facility at all tim es.
A The n ew Steam Electrical P ow er G enerating Point Sources [40 CFR Part 423] ELG becam e effective on January 4, 2 016 and is
incoiporated herein.
A T h e fa c ility h as an a ss o c ia te d E fflu e n t L im it G u id e lin e (E L G ) w h ic h is a p p lic a b le to th e w a stew a ter and storm w ater d isch a rg e at
this facility. T he fo llo w in g table sh o w s the lim its in the E L G at 4 0 C FR 4 2 3 . Sh ould w ater-quality derived efflu en t lim its b e m ore protective o f the receiving w ater's quality, the W Q S w ill be u sed as the lim iting factor.
'A B P T is b e st p ra ctica b le co n tro l t e c h n o lo g y a p p lic a b le to a ll fa c ilitie s at all tim es; 4 2 3 .1 2
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 19 o f 65
Part III Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
S B A T is b e st a v a ila b le te c h n o lo g y e c o n o m ic a lly a c h ie v a b le a p p lic a b le to th is fa c ility ; 4 2 3 .1 3
/ 4 0 C F R 4 2 3 . 1 3 ( g ) ( l) ( i ) is b e s t a v a ila b le t e c h n o lo g y ( B A T ) fo r F G D scru b b er w a stew a ter and b e c o m e s e ffe c tiv e on N o v e m b e r 1,
2018
Pa r a m e te r
Arsenic, Total Chlorine, Free Available
Chlorine, Total Residual
40 CFR 423
BAT - FGD Wastewater BPT - Cooling Tower Blowdown BPT - Once Through Cooling Water BAT - Once Through Cooling Water <25 MW BAT - Once Through Cooling Water BPT - Once Through Cooling Water >25 MW
D a il y M a x im u m
n g g /L
0.5 mg/L
0.2 mg/L
M o nthly A verage
8 Mg/L
0.2 mg/L
n/a
Chromium
BAT - Cooling Tower Blowdown
0.2 mg/L
0.2 mg/L
Copper
BPT Metal Cleaning Wastes
1 rng'L
1 mg/L
Iron
BPT - Metal Cleaning Wastes
1 mg/L
1 mg/L
Mercury
BAT - FGD Wastewater
0.788 pgL 0.356 pg/L
Nitrate plus Nitrite as N
BAT - FGD Wastewater
17.0 mg/L
4.4 mg/L
Oil and Grease
BPT - Low volume wastes, ash transport water, metal cleaning wastes
20 mg/L
15 mg/L
Selenium Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Zinc
BAT - FGD Wastewater BPT - Low volume wastes, ash transport water, metal cleaning wastes BPT - Coal Pile Runoff BAT - Cooling Tower Blowdown
23 pg/L 100 mg/L 50 mg/L
1 mg/L
12pgL 30 mg-'L
1 mg/L
S T he n e w ru le d e fin e s b o tto m a sh transp ort w ater, f ly a sh transp ort w ater, and F G D scru b b er w a s te s as w a stew a ters w h ic h cannot b e d isch a rg ed after D e c e m b e r 2 1 , 2023. In terim targets req uire the d epartm en t to u s e the N o v e m b e r 1,2018 date i f the fa c ility
already has the capabilities o f transporting ash u sin g dry handling m ethods and requiring zero liquid discharge o f FG D w astes.
S e e sp e c ia l c o n d itio n #23. T h e fa c ility w ill c e a s e d isc h a r g in g ash slu ic e w a stew a ter on or b e fo r e M ay 1, 2021.
T he facility is preparing to close the ash ponds in accordance with 40 CFR 257. T he facility subm itted the tim eline below . See special
c o n d itio n # C .2 3 . R e p la c em e n t W a ste w a te r T reatm en t D e v i c e - T e n ta tiv e S c h e d u le:_____________________________________________________
Dates
Scheduled Item
N ovem ber 2015 - January 2018
prelim inary engineering design
February 2018
subm it N P D E S construction and m odification package to D N R
February 2019 - April 2021
construction perm its issued and initial operations perform ed
M ay 2021
com m ence operations o f all n ew ash and wastew ater m anagem ent facilities
S ee also Part III Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits and Conditions: Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR), and Groundwater
Monitoring.
Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD):
S iou x G enerating Station has F G D scrubbers on the air stacks. T he F G D scrubbers are wet scrubbers w hich rem ove up to 90% o f the o x id es o f sulfur (SO *) em issio n s from the air. T h is feature send s the w astew ater to the gyp su m stack onsite. T he m ain com ponents o f the w astew ater associated w ith F G D is an alkaline slurry m ade up o f lim e, lim estone, or sodium hydroxide; the wastewater also contains the sulfur rem oved from the air. B oth units h a ve scrubbers. FG D w astew ater is lim ited in the n ew effluent lim it guid elin e for th e stea m -electric p oin t sou rce c a teg o ry L im its b e c o m e e ffe c tiv e on N o v em b er 1, 2 0 1 8 .
Groundwater Monitoring:
G rou nd w ater is a w ater o f the state a cco rd in g to 10 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 15 (7 ) and 10 C S R 2 0 -7 0 3 1 (6 ) an d m ust b e p rotected accord in gly, v' A pplicable.
W hile th e state d oes not have exp licit regulation requirem ents pertaining to groundw ater m onitorin g for coal fired pow er plant facilities, groundwater is considered a "water o f the state" and therefore, it is w ithin the departm ent's authority to consider groundwater w hen issuing perm its. B oth lined and unlin ed ash ponds w ill b e evaluated to determ ine potential im pacts to groundwater. A s additional perm its for coal-fired p ow er plants w ith surface im poundm ents for CCR's are renew ed, all w ill be evaluated for the need for sim ilar requirem ents and further characterization o f the ash ponds and their toxicity. M uch o f the inform ation about leachates entering groundwater is obtained from the departm ent's S olid W aste M anagem ent Program (10 C SR 80-1 1 .0 1 0 ) for utility w aste landfills and docum ents authored by the E P A and the E lectric Pow er R esearch Institute (EPRI).
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 20 o f 65
Part IIL Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
T he adequacy o f a groundw ater m onitoring program depends greatly on the quality o f the detailed hyd rogeologic site characterization u sed to d esign the program . O n ly after a co m p lete understanding o f the underlying g e o lo g y and h yd rology has been achieved, can the im plem entation o f a groundw ater m onitoring program begin . T he tim e schedu le provided in the perm it is to provide tim e for the utility com panies, their consultants, and the departm ent to evaluate and develop a groundwater m onitoring plan w hich is correct for the sitesp ecific conditions o f each coal ash pond. A d dition ally, this tim e fram e is striving to mirror the federal rule regarding in-situ C C R in im poundm ents.
A groundwater m onitoring plan is required to b e d ev elo p ed and im plem ented to exam in e potential discharges to groundwater from the form er and existin g ash ponds. T he departm ent en vision s sam p les collected quarterly at the U W L for R C R A m onitoring to su ffice for groundwater m onitoring o f the U W L portion o f the facility. H ow ever, groundwater m onitoring is being im plem ented on the ash pond areas as the departm ent washes to explore any im pacts the un lineddnadequately lin ed ash pon ds exhibit in the groundwater. The groundwater m onitoring plan should describe not only the groundwater m onitoring program , but also the strategy for effectively m onitoring groundwater at the facility. T he plan typically details the standard operation and procedures related to field sam pling, laboratory analysis, and data presentation. G roundwater investigation s w ill include an intrusive field program that in volves drilling, hydrological m onitoring, and groundwater sam pling. T he m agnitude o f such investigations is a function o f the size and com plexity o f the facility.
In this perm it ren ew al, the fa cility is bein g required to w ork w ith the M issouri G eological .Survey to establish a groundwater m onitoring program having the capacity to observe and characterize groundwater m ovem ent and potential contam ination, and determ ines the proper location and installation o f m onitoring w ells to fu lly characterize any areas currently or form erly holding ash-- both open and closed, or out o f use. M onitoring w ill occur upgradient and dow ngradient o f the ash ponds (or former ash ponds, capped, or not capped) in m ultiple locations. T he departm ent does not consider closure or inactivity per the new C C R regulations as a m ethod o f relieving or dism issing o f these groundwater m onitoring conditions.
T he facility can exp ect to subm it quarterly data for the follow in g constituents (at a m inim um ):
Metals_____ ;
Alum inum A ntim ony A r se n ic ______ B a riu m _______ B e ry lliu m B o r o n ________ Cadm ium C hrom ium III Chrom ium VI C o b a lt________ C o p p er_______ Iron
Lithium M agnesium M anganese M ercury M olybdenum N ic k e l_______ S e le n iu m S ilv e r ________ Sodium T hallium Z in c
S u lfa te , as S P 4_____________________________ T o ta l O rg a n ic C arb on (T O C )_______________ T otal O rg a n ic H a lo g e n s (T O X )____________ F ie ld P aram eters____________ :______________ |
____________________________
S p e c ific co n d u cta n ce_______________________ O xidation/R eduction Potential (O R P) R a d .o m u .h d e s _____________________________: R a d iu m 2 2 6 ( `~ R a ) ................................................ R adium 228 ( ^ R a ) O t h e r ___ ___ ____________ _ ____________ C h em ic a l O x y g e n D e m a n d (C O D )_________ C h lo rid e____________________________________ F lu o rid e ____________________________________ H ard n ess, a s C a C 0 3________________________ Total D issolved Solids (TD S)
Param eters for co n sid era tio n in the d e v e lo p m e n t o f the m o n ito r in g p la n are b a s e d on E P A 's Characterization o f Coal Combustion Residuesfrom Electric Utilities - Leaching and Characterization Data, the n ew C C R rule at 4 0 C F R 2 5 7 ap p en d ices III and IV , and
10C S R 80-11.
A n y h yd rogeologic evaluation and groundw ater data c o llectio n com p leted prior to the issuance o f the N P D E S perm it and the approval o f a detailed site in vestigation w ill b e volun tary as it pertains to the N P D E S perm it.
T his perm it is to com p ly w ith the requirem ents in R S M o 6 4 4 .1 4 3 and to establish a lon g term approach and stewardship o f the site and th e ben eficial u ses o f the groundwater on this site. 4 0 C F R 2 5 7 is a self-im p lem en tin g rule and covered under RCRA; this perm it does not im plem ent the federal C C R rale. T his perm it does not sh ield a facility from the CC R requirem ents. C om pliance with the term s and conditions o f this perm it identical to or m ore stringent than the requirem ents in the federal C C R rule m ay constitute com pliance with the federal C C R rule although not guaranteed.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 21 o f 65
Part HI. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
The departm ent realizes there are two different tim elines associated w ith this perm it for groundwater m onitoring. O ne is driven solely b y the effective date o f 40 CFR 257, w here the perm ittee w ill publish the results from eigh t statistically independent groundwater sam ples accurately representing background w ater quality and the quality o f the groundwater surrounding the ash ponds pursuant to 4 0 C FR 2 5 7 .9 3 . T he other is so le ly w ater protection program requirem ents and the perm ittee w ill b e required to report that data to the water protection program . W hile the tw o have different dates and reporting requirem ents, the departm ent w ill allow , i f appropriate, the sam e m onitoring w ell netw ork and quarterly sam pling data to b e used for the tw o different requirem ents. A ll investigation s and reports for the w ater protection program m ust be approved by the w ater protection program and M issouri G eological Survey. A n y data gathered b y the facility prior to W P P approval m ay or m ay not b e ack n ow led ged as appropriate m onitoring. Data and subm ittals driven b y 4 0 CFR 257 are not approved by the water protection program .
I m p i n g e m e n t And E n t r a i n m e n t a t CWIS; CWA 316(b):
T he C lean W ater A ct (C W A ) Section 316(b ) provides for protection o f aquatic life from co o lin g water intake structures (C W IS) where the facility withdraw s m ore than 2 M G D . Sioux can withdraw over 125 M G D o f water from the M issouri R iver therefore is
su b je ct to all im p in g e m e n t an d en tra in m en t stu d ie s and r e v ie w s as p r o m u lg a te d in 4 0 C F R 122.21 (r) etseq. and 4 0 C F R Subpart J.
T he facility is expected to subm it all new studies and required inform ation w ith the application m aterials six m onths prior to expiration o f the perm it. The facility should refer to http s://w w w .ep a.gov/sites/p rod u ction /files/2015-04/docum euts^coolingw ater esa-instructional-m enio 1 2 -ll-2 0 1 4 .p d f for additional inform ation.
C o o l in g Wa te r I n t a k e S tr u c tu r e R e q u ir e m e n t s : T h e intake structure at S io u x is lo ca te d at the end o f 1 ,6 0 0 -fo o t lo n g intake canal tliat e x te n d s sou th from the M ississip p i R iver. In 1980, a fish pum p w as installed to reduce im pingem en t associated w ith the plant's intake system . O penings in th e face o f the structure are protected w ith "bar racks" to exclud e large debris. T o enter the intake pum p b ays, water m ust pass through conventional traveling screens, w h ich consist o f horizontal m etal panels faced w ith 3 /8 " m esh openin gs. The panels rotate (vertically) based on either manual timer settings or differential pressure across the screen (w h ich is affected b y debris loading). In 1980 a fish pum p system w as installed to rem ove fish from the area betw een the bar racks and travellin g screens, and transfer them to the R iver, dow nstream o f the intake canal. T he system ceased operations in 1997. C orrespondence dating from 1999 through 20 0 0 , with D N R and U S E P A R egion 7, docum ent the justification and decision to discontinue its use.
F is h R e t u r n S ystem :
In 1983, the fa c ility su p p lied to the departm ent an Evaluation o f the Sioux Power Plant Fish Return System. T his docum ent d escrib es
h o w the fish return system (FR S) w as being u sed at the facility and h o w the fish return system w as selected to satisfy B est A vailable T e c h n o lo g y (B A T ) req u irem en t at that tim e ( 1 9 7 7 ) . T h e F R S fis h c o lle c to r s are m o u n ted h o r izo n ta lly in e a c h sc r e e n 's w e ll fa c in g the traveling screens. T he fish and w ater are pum ped at a rate o f 1,678 gallon s per m inute (2 .4 M G D ) back to the M ississip pi River. The pipe is a 16 inch diam eter polyethylen e p ip e and m ust U avel approxim ately 1,700 feet to get back to the M ississip pi River. The fish are placed about 10 feet b elow the surface o f the w ater ju st dow nstream o f the intake structure. The follow in g diagram show s the d esign o f the fish return system as installed in the 1980s.
The Departm ent approved the S iou x fish pum p system in A ugust 1977 as satisfactory m eeting the requirem ent o f Section 316(b) o f the federal C lean W ater A ct at that tim e. W ith the excep tion o f the intake pum ps and fish return system operation as discussed below , there have been no significant changes to the intake structure sin ce this approval.
Im pingem ent m onitoring w as conducted for 5 2 consecutive w eeks during 2 005-2006.
(see diagram next page)
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 22 o f 65
Part III. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
I n it ia l l& E A ssessm en t: In M arch and D ecem ber o f 1 9 81, 3 5 ,3 9 8 fish w ere collected . T his covered 12 fam ilies and 30 sp ecies. 46% o f the fish w ere recovered b y the FR S, but 54% w ere im pinged upon the screens. G izzard shad w as the m ost frequently collected sp ecies at 93% . Unfortunately, one sh oveln ose sturgeon w as co llected and did not survive the F R S. T he study also noted h igh seasonal variability. The study did not indicate any m u ssels, or any other organism typ e w a s im p in ged or entrained, but on ly inclu ded cordate aquatic gill-bearing fish. Reassessm en ts: During a previous N P D E S perm it subm ittal process, the com pany expressed an interest in providing the State w ith additional
inform ation to reassess the need for continued operation o f the fish return system . T ins action w as prom pted b y a re-exam ination o f fishery data by the com pany and consideration o f the need for a m ajor overhaul o f the fish return system com ponents to support continued operation. Subsequent to this request, D N R required the com pany to subm it a report by Septem ber 1 ,1 9 9 9 . The purpose o f this report w as to reassess the conclu sions o f the original 3 16(b) study regarding fish im pingem ent through a re-evaluation o f previous 3 16(b) studies, su pp lem en ted w ith m ore recen t data generated b y A m eren and various other sources. T he intention o f the request w as narrow ly focused to have the departm ent either reaffirm the n eed for continued operation o f the fish return system , or m ake an affirm ative determ ination that the existin g intake design reflects best teclm o lo g y for m inim izing adverse environm ental im pact, less the fish return system .
O n A u g u st 2 5 , 1 9 9 9 , the co m p a n y su b m itted a report titled A Re-Evaluation o f Water Intake Impingement Impacts at the Ameren Sioux Power Plant to D N R . In th is rep ort, th e c o m p a n y b a se d its c o n c lu sio n o f " n o a d v e r se im p a ct" o n three m ajor points:
1. V ariou s facts and data p rovid e ju stifica tio n to d iscou n t any a d verse im pact a sso cia ted w ith the liig h im pingem en t rates for gizzard shad;
2. Im pingem ent o f important com m ercial and recreational fish are relatively lo w , and 3 L ong-term fishery data supports th e co n clu sio n that a healthy com m unity exists in P ool 26. In late January 2 0 0 0 , the com pany received a letter from U S E P A R egion 7 w h ich approved generalized com m ents in the report. T h e c o m p a n y fo r m a lly resp o n d ed to U S E P A 's c o m m e n ts in c o r r esp o n d e n c e d ated Ju ly 14, 2 0 0 0 . N o further c o m m e n ts or determ inations w ere received b y the com pany follow in g the response.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 23 of 65
Part UI. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
On July 16, 2004, the 316(b) Phase II R ulem aking was published in the Federal R egister and becam e effective on Septem ber 14, 2 0 0 4 . Several actions w ere taken in accordance w ith the currently suspended U S E P A 3 1 6(b) Phase II rulem aking. A "Proposal for Inform ation C ollection " w a s subm itted and approved b y the D N R for condu cting an updated assessm ent o f im pingem ent m ortality at the S io u x P ow er Plant c o o lin g water intake structure. T h is n e w data c o lle cte d served to reaffirm historic im pingem en t mortalitystudies. T he 2 0 0 5 -2 0 0 6 study concluded that nearly 98% o f the data organism s collected w ere gizzard shad and drum. The 1974 1975 study conclu ded that 99% o f the organism s co llected w ere gizzard and drum.
T he P h ase II rulem ak in g a lso required subm ittal o f a "C o m p reh en siv e D em o n stra tio n S tu d y" that w o u ld p rovid e the m easu res to be u sed for com pliance w ith the currently suspended Phase II rulem aking perform ance standards. T h ese m easures w ere to include an appropriate range o f tech n ologies, operational, and/or restoration com ponents; subject to cost-cost and/or cost-benefit criteria and the potential procurem ent o f a site-sp ecific standard, in accordance w ith the P hase II rulem aking. D u e to the suspension o f the Phase II rulem aking, the im pingem ent m ortality study w as the on ly task com pleted as all other activities associated w ith the C om prehensive D em onstration Study w ere term inated.
O p e r a t io n a l O p t im iz o io n : There is the capacity for potentially m inor design and operational changes w h ich w ould optim ize the current technology and could red uce im p in gem en t m ortality that tire A m eren sh o u ld evalu ate and im p lem en t, i f found to b e effe c tiv e . T h ese d e sig n and operational changes m ay include the follow ing: R ecirculate warm w ater to the intake structure on ly w h en n ecessary to prevent ice form ation. Schedu led plant outages should be tim ed to the extent p ossib le to coin cid e w ith period s o f greatest im pingem ent. Operate screens continuou sly and at high speed during periods w hen im pingem ent is greatest. Shape fish buckets or baskets to m in im ize hydrodynam ic turbulence w ithin the bucket or basket. U se sm ooth -w oven screen m esh in
the buckets or baskets to m inim ize descaling. E valuate whether the high pressure and low pressure w ashes can be operated at low er pressures to reduce dam age and stress to fish
w h ile not interfering w ith plant operations. O ptim ize location o f screen w ash sprays to provide a m ore gentle fish transfer from screen to fish return trough. M in im ize turbulence in the fish return system .
N e w 3 1 6 (b ) Re q u ir e m e n t s : To m eet the n ew ly prom ulgated C W A 3 16(b) requirem ents, the facility w ill be required to m eet one o f the identified im pingem ent B T A technologies, how ever as the facility w ithdraw s m ore than 125 M G D for coolin g water needs, w ill also need to address entrainm ent. The im plem entation o f im pingem en t tech n ology is d elayed until the required entrainm ent studies are com plete. The applicability can be found in 4 0 CFR 122.21 (r )(l) studies include:
a. Source Water Physical Data Report: 40 CFR 122.21(r)(2) T h is report requires a d escrip tion and sc a led d raw ings sh o w in g the
ph ysical configuration o f the w ater body, including areal dim ensions, depths, and tem perature regim es, identification and ch a ra cteriza tio n o f th e so u rc e w a te r b o d y 's h y d r o lo g ic a l an d g e o m o r p h o lo g ic a l featu res, e stim a te th e in ta k e 's area o f in flu e n c e w ithin the w aterbody and locational maps.
b. Cooling Water Intake Structure Data Report, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(3): T h is report requires in form ation on the d esig n o f the intake
structure and its location in the water colum n. It includes design intake flow s, daily hours o f operation, num ber o f days o f the year in operation and season al changes, i f applicable; a flo w distribution and w ater balance diagram that inclu des all sources o f w ater to the facility, recirculating flow s, and discharges, and engineering draw ings o f the co o lin g w ater intake structure.
e. Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data Report, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(4): T h is report characterizes the b io lo g ica l
com m u nity in the v icin ity o f the c o o lin g w ater intake structure.
d. Cooling Water System Data Report, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(5): T his report p ro v id es inform ation on th e op eration o f the co o lin g
w ater system including descriptions o f reductions in w ater withdraw als, recycled water, proportion o f the source waterbody w ithd raw n.
e. Chosen Method of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(6). A m eren m ust identify their
chosen com pliance m ethod and i f applicant ch o o ses to com p ly w ith a tech nology option that requires the Im pingem ent T echnology O ptim ization Study, the study m ust be subm itted.
f. Performance Studies, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(7): T h is rule se c tio n req uires a su m m ary o f b io lo g ic a l su rv iv a l stu d ies con d u cted at the
facility and a sum m ary o f an y con clu sion s or results, including; site-sp ecific stu dies add ressin g tech n ology efficacy, entrainment survival, and other im pingem ent and entrainm ent m ortality studies. I f u sin g data m ore than 10 years old , applicant m ust explain w h y the data is still relevant and representative.
g . Operational Status, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(8): T h e op era tio n a l statu s report in clu d es d escrip tio n s o f ea ch un it's operatin g status
in clu d in g age o f the unit, ca p a city u tiliza tio n for the p rev io u s 5 years, and any m ajor upgrades com p leted w ithin the last 15 years, including boiler replacem ent, condenser replacem ent, turbine replacem ent, and fuel change.
h. Entrainment Characterization Study, 4 0 CFR 1 2 2 .2 1 (r )(9 ):F a c ilitie s that w ith d raw 125 M G D or m ore m ust d evelop for
su bm ission to the D irector that includes 2 years o f entrainm ent data. Entrainm ent D ata C ollection M ethod m ust identify and docum ent the data collection period and frequency; identify all organism s co llected to low est taxon p ossible o f all life stages o f fish that are in the vicin ity o f the intake structure; identity threatened or endangered sp ecies, identify and docum ent h ow the location o f the intake structure in the w aterbody are accounted for in data collection . T he B io lo g ica l Entrainm ent Characterization
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 24 o f 65
Part III Rationale arid Derivation o f Permit Limits and Conditions
m ust describe all life stages including a description o f their abundance and their tem poral and spatial characteristics in the vicinity o f the intake structure, based on su fficien t data to characterize annual, season al, and diel variation in entrainm ent including variations related to clim ate, w eather d ifference, feed in g, and w ater colum n m igration; m ay include historical data that is representative o f the cu n en t operation o f the facility; identification o f all life stages o f fish m ust represent both m otile and non m otile life stages A n a ly sis and Support D ocu m en tation o f current entrainm ent o f all life stages, m ay inclu de historical data that is representative o f current operation o f the fa cility and o f b io lo g ic a l co n d itio n s at the site. D ata to support the calculations m u st be collected during p eriod o f representative operational flo w s and flo w s associated w ith data co llection m ust b e docum ented. T he m ethod for determ ining latent m ortality along w ith specific organism m ortality or survival m ust be identified; the facility must identify and docum ent all assum ptions and calculation to determ ine total entrainm ent, along w ith all m ethods and Q A/Q C procedures.
i. Comprehensive Technical Feasibility and Cost Evaluation Study, 40 CFR 122.21(rX10): F acilities that w ithdraw 125 M G D
or m ore must develop for su bm ission an engineering study o f the technical feasibility and costs o f entrainm ent technology options. Technical F easibility m ust include closed cycle recirculation discussion, fine m esh screens w ith m esh size o f 2 m m or sm aller, water reuse or alternate sources o f co o lin g water; description o f all tech n ologies and operational m easures considered; land availability, including evaluation o f adjacent and acres potentially available due to generating unit retirem ents, potential repurposing o f areas devoted to ponds, coal piles, rail yards, transm ission yards, and parking lots; discussion o f available sources o f process water, grey w ater, w astew ater, reclaim ed w ater or other waters o f appropriate quantity and quality; and docum entation o f factors other than co st that m ay m ake a candidate tech n ology im practical or infeasible. T he cost evaluations must include estim ates for all tech nologies considered; m ust b e adjusted to estim ate social costs; all costs must be represented in net present value and annual value; cost clearly labeled as com pliance or social costs; separately discuss facility level costs and social costs; com pliance costs are calculated after-tax, include adm inistrative costs, perm it costs, any outages, dow ntim e; and social costs ad ju stm en t in c lu d e s D ir e c to r 's a d m in istra tiv e c o st.
j. Benefits Valuation Study, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(ll): F a cilities w ith d raw in g 125 M G D or m ore m ust d e v e lo p an ev alu ation o f the
entrainm ent tech n o lo g y and operational m easure b enefits. E ach category o f benefit m ust b e described narratively and benefits should be quantified in physical or biological units and m onetized using appropriate econ om ic valuation m ethods. M ust use the Entrainment Characterization Study. B enefit V aluation Study m ust include: increm ental changes in num ber o f individual fish lost due to im pingem ent m ortality and entrainm ent for all life stages; description o f b asis for any estim ates o f changes in the stock size or harvest lev els o f com m ercial and recreational fish; description o f basis for any m on etized values assign ed to changes in the stock size o f com m ercial and recreational fish, and to any other ecosystem or non-use benefits; discussion o f m itigation efforts com pleted before O ctober 2 014; d iscu ssion w ith quantification and m onetization, w here p o ssib le any other benefits exp ected to accrue, including im provem ents for m am m als, birds, other organism s and aquatic habitats; and discussion o f benefits expected to result from reductions in thermal discharges from entrainm ent tech n ologies (clo sed -cy cle cooling).
k. Non-Water Quality Impacts Assessment, 4 0 CFR 122.21(r)(12): F a cilities that w ith d raw 125 M G D or m ore m ust d ev elo p for
su bm ission to the D irector a detailed site-sp ecific d iscu ssio n o f changes in non-w'ater qu ality environm ental and other im pacts attributed to each te ch n o lo g y and operation al m easure, both in creases and d ecrea ses. M u st in clu d e d iscu ssio n o f estim ate in change in energy consu m ption, estim ate o f air pollutant em issio n s and o f hum an health environm ental im pacts, estim ates in change in noise, discussion o f im pacts to safety, including potential plum es, icin g and availability o f em ergency coolin g water, discussion o f facility reliability, im pacts to produ ction based on p ro cess unit, reliability due to c o o lin g w ater availability; significan t changes in consum ption o f w ater, inclu ding com parison o f evaporative lo sses o f both once through and closed cycle recirculation, docum entation o f im pacts attributable to changes in w ater consum ption, and d iscu ssion o f all attem pts to m itigate each o f these factors.
l. Additional measures to protect federafly listed threatened and endangered species and designated critical habitat, 40 CFR 125.94(g). T he D ir e c to r m a y e sta b lish a d d itio n a l perm it c o n tro l m e a su r es, m o n ito r in g req u irem en ts, rep orting req u irem en ts than
the m inim um established to m in im ize incidental take, reduce or rem ove detrim ental effects, or such control m easures m ay include m easures identified b y the U S F ish and W ild life F ield O ffice during their 6 0 day review'. W h en the D irector requires additional m easures for federally listed sp ecies, m onitoring is required, 4 0 C FR 125.96(g) and m ay require additional studies and m onitoring if threatened or endangered sp ecies identified in the vicin ity o f the intake, 4 0 CFR 125.98(d).
m . Peer Review, 40 CFR 122.21(r)(13): T h e N o n -W a ter Q u a lity Im p acts A sse ssm e n t. B e n e fits V alu ation Stu d y, and C o m p reh en sive
T ech n ical F ea sib ility and C o st E valu ation Stu d y require p eer rev iew . F a cility m ust su bm it the stu d ies for external p eer review'. F acility selects the p eer review ers and m ust n otify the D epartm en t in advan ce o f the peer review'. T he D irector can disapprove a peer review er or require additional peer review ers. The D irector m ay confer w ith E P A , U S Fish and W ildlife, M D C , and PSC to determ ine w hich peer review com m ents m ust b e addressed A m eren m ust provide an explanation for any significant review er com m ent not accepted.
Industrial Sludge:
In du strial slu d g e is so lid s , s e m i-s o lid s , or liq u id r e sid u e g e n era ted d u rin g the treatm en t o f industrial p r o c e s s w astew 'ater in a treatm ent works; inclu ding but not lim ited to, scum or solid s rem oved in prim ary, secondary, or advanced w astew ater treatment process; scum and solids filtered from w ater supplies and backw ashed; and a m aterial derived from industrial sludge. V N ot applicable; this condition is not applicable to the perm ittee for this facility.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux E n ag y Center Fact Sheet Page 25 of 65
Pari III. Rationale and Derivation o f Permit Limits and Conditions
Intake Water Credit (Net Limits):
In accordance w ith federal regulation 40 C FR 122.45(g), pollutants in intake w ater (1) technology-based effluent lim itations or stan dards sh a ll b e a d ju sted to r eflec t credit for p o llu ta n ts in th e d is c h a r g e 's in ta k e w a te r if: ( i) the a p p lic a b le e fflu e n t lim ita tio n s and standards con tain ed in 4 0 C F R subchapter N sp ec ific a lly p ro v id e th e y sh a ll be ap p lied on a net basis; or (ii) the discharger dem onstrates the control system it prop oses or u ses to m eet applicable tech n ology-b ased lim itations and standards w ould, i f properly installed and operated, m eet the lim itations and standards in the absence o f pollutants in the intake w aters. (2 ) Credit for generic pollutants such as b ioch em ical o x y g en dem and (B O D ) or total suspended solid s (T S S ) should not be granted u n less the perm ittee dem onstrates that the constituents o f the generic m easure in the effluent are substantially sim ilar to the constituents o f the generic m easure in the intake w ater or un less appropriate additional lim its are p la ced o n p rocess w ater pollutants either at the outfall or elsew here. (3 ) C redit shall be granted on ly to the extent necessary to m eet the applicable lim itation or standard, up to a m axim um value equal to the influent value. A dditional m onitoring m ay be necessary to determ ine eligib ility for credits and com pliance with perm it lim its. (4 ) Credit shall b e granted o n ly if the discharger dem onstrates that the intake water is drawn from the sam e body o f water into w hich the discharge is m ade. T he Director m ay w aive this requirem ent if [the state] finds no environm ental degradation w ill result. (5 ) C redits do not apply to the discharge o f raw w ater clarifier slu d ge generated from the treatm ent o f intake water, v' A pplicable. W ater used in processing ash is w ithdraw n from the M ississip p i R iver, traverses through outfall # 0 0 2 (ash pond # 1 )
or outfall # 0 0 6 (ash pond #2 ) and then is discharged to P oeling Lake w h ich then discharges to backw ater chutes o f the M ississippi River. Per 40 CFR 122.45(g)(4), the director m ay w aive identical-w aterbody requirem ents as the facility has m ade a dem onstration the net T SS credits w ill not negatively im pact P o elin g la k e . In the previous perm it, the departm ent allow ed net total suspended solids at outfalls #002 and #006; this perm it w ill do the sam e.
S The n ew ly approved M U D D dataset erroneously identifies M ississip pi backw ater chutes as "C " (W B ID #39 6 0 ) streams therefore
the first classified stream for outfalls # 0 0 2 , # 0 2 A , and # 0 0 6 is actually the M ississip p i R iver. V To allow a net lim it, the facility m ust provide a justification for bein g allow ed net lim itations w hen the discharge is not to the
sam e stream (although in this ca se it is to the sam e cla ssified stream ). T he facility h as presented inform ation that additional degradation is not occurring on P oeling Lake due to net lim itations. The subm itted rationale com plies with 40 CFR 122.45(g).
S C haracteristics o f P oelin g L ake inclu de a v ery sm all drainage area and raised berm s to the east o f the lake. A lso , the lake is not in
10 C S R 20 -7 .0 3 1 T able G. I f th e fa cility no lon ger discharges through outfall # 0 0 2 and/or # 0 0 6 , it is lik ely the lake w ould be co m p letely dry during drought con d ition s. C on versely, as ev id en ced b y satellite im agery (1 /1 /2 0 1 6 , 1/4/2016; G o o g le Earth) P oeling Lake is inundated by flood waters o f the M ississippi and M issouri Rivers. >4 T h ere are n o w ater q u a lity lim its fo r T S S ; th e d isc h a r g e to th e lake is n o t n e w o r e x p a n d ed (n o a n tid egrad ation r e v ie w is required), and fish k ills have not been reported at this location indicating the w aterbody does not cause toxicity.
S T h e ash b a s in s w ill b e c lo s e d in the n e x t 2 to 4 y ea rs th erefo re th e d isc h a r g e from o u tfa lls # 0 0 2 a n d # 0 0 6 w ill c o m p le te ly
elim inate ash sluice water.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA):
Federal regulation [40 C FR Part 12 2 .4 4 (d )(lX i)] requires efflu en t lim itations for all pollutants that are or m ay b e discharged at a level that w ill cau se or have the reasonable potential (R P) to cause or contribute to an in-stream excu rsion ab ove narrative or num eric water quality standard (W Q S ). In accordance w ith [4 0 C F R Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (d )(l)(iii)] i f the perm it w riter determ ines that any give pollutant has the reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an in-stream excursion above the W Q S, the perm it m ust contain effluent lim its for that pollutant.
S N o t a p p lic a b le; th e R e a so n a b le P o te n tia l A n a ly s is ty p ic a lly co n d u cte d p er (T S D , E P A /5 0 5 /2 - 9 0 - 0 0 1 , S e c tio n 3 .3 .2 ). w a s n ot
com pleted due to the follow in g reasons: O utfall #001: this outfall pertains to thermal discharge. Tem perature data w as review ed for the past five years; how ever, there
is no T S D m ethod to determ ine RP for temperature data. The perm it writer has determ ined the facility d oes have reasonable potential to exceed M ississip pi temperature allow ances. O utfall # 0 0 2 & #006: ash ponds receive "net" total suspended solids; there is no w ater quality standard for T SS applicable to this w astestream at this ou tfall. T h e ash p on d o u tfa lls h a v e b een m on itorin g fo r su lfates. H o w ev er, M isso u ri's water quality' standards are written w ith the sum o f sulfates plus chlorides. N o analytical R P w as perform ed; the perm it writer used best p ro fessio n a l ju d g m en t to d eterm ine the fa cility m a y h ave R P for su lfates as it is a param eter o f con cern for the industry. W h ole Effluent T ox icity tests w ere perform ed once per year at a 10% allow ab le effluent concentration. H ow ever, the perm it writer has determ ined the outfalls discharge to a lake w h ich cannot allow any toxic m ixin g considerations therefore no dilution should have been considered for W E T testing. T he perm it writer has used best professional judgm ent to determ ine W E T testing is still warranted. O utfall #02A : T his outfall contains tech nology-based effluent lim its, no R P A is warranted. T he parameters on this outfall must rem ain regardless o f RP. E m ergency outfalls # 0 0 3 & #007: T he perm it writer has determ ined the em ergen cy outfalls are non-discharging structures therefore no R P tech n ically ex ists H ow ever, sh ould these outfalls discharge, certain param eters m ust be sam pled. Storm w ater outfalls: R P usin g an analytical R P A for storm w ater is not advised because the T S D is for continuously discharging facilities per section 3.1 o f E P A /5 0 5 /2 -9 0 -0 0 1 ; not for end-of-pipe tech nology based controls.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 26 o f 65
Part III. Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO) And Inflow And Infiltration (I&I):
Sanitary Sew er O verflow s (SS O s) are defined as untreated sew age releases and are considered bypassing under state regulation [10 C SR 2 0 -2 .0 1 0 (1 1 )] and should not be confused w ith the federal definition o f bypass. SSO s result from a variety o f causes including b lo c k a g e s , lin e b reak s, and se w e r d e fe c ts that c a n eith er a llo w w a stew a ter to b ack u p w ith in th e c o lle c tio n sy s te m during dry' w eath er conditions or allow excess storm water and groundwater to enter and overload the collection system dunng w et weather conditions. SSO s can also result from lapses in sew er system operation and m aintenance, inadequate sew er d esign and construction, pow er failures, and vandalism . SSO s include overflow s out o f m anholes, cleanouts, broken pipes, and other into waters o f the state and onto city streets, sidew alks, and other terrestrial locations.
In flow and Infiltration (I& I) is defined as unw anted intrusion o f storm water or groundwater into a collection system . This can occur from p oin ts o f direct con n ection su ch as sum p pu m ps, r o o f drain d ow nspouts, foundation drains, and storm drain cross-con n ection s or through cracks, holes, joint failures, faulty lin e connections, dam aged m anholes, and other openin gs in the collection system itself. I&I results from a variety o f causes inchiding line breaks, im properly sealed connections, cracks caused by soil erosion/settling, penetration o f vegetative roots, and other sew er defects. In addition, ex cess storm w ater and groundw ater entering the collection system from line breaks and sew er defects have the potential to negatively im pact the treatment facility.
M issouri R SM o 644.026.1 (13) m andates the departm ent issue perm its for discharges o f water contam inants into the waters o f this state, and also for the operation o f sew er system s. Such perm it conditions shall ensure com plian ce w ith all requirem ents as established b y se c tio n s 6 4 4 .0 0 6 to 6 4 4 .1 4 1 . Standard C on d ition s Part I, referenced in th e perm it, con tain s p ro v isio n s requiring proper operation and m aintenance o f all facilities and system s o f treatm ent and control. M issouri R SM o 6 4 4 .0 2 6 .1 .(1 5 ) instructs the department to require proper m aintenance and operation o f treatm ent facilities and sew er system s and proper disposal o f residual w aste from all such facilities. T o ensure that public health and the environm ent are protected, any non com p lian ce w h ich m ay endanger public health or the environm ent m ust be reported to the departm ent within 24 hours o f the tim e the perm ittee becom es aware o f the noncom pliance. Standard C on dition s Part I, referenced in the perm it, contains the reporting requirem ents for the perm ittee w h en b yp asses and upsets occur. T he perm it also contains requirem ents for perm ittees to d evelop and im plem ent a program for m aintenance and repair o f the co lle ctio n system . T he perm it requires that the perm ittee subm it an annual report to the departm ent for the previou s calendar year that contains a list o f all SSO s and building backups (locations, features o f collection system w here the SSO /building backup occurred, volum es, durations, receiving stream , causes, m itigation efforts, and actions to prevent reoccurrences), a sum m ary o f efforts taken b y the perm ittee to locate and elim inate sources o f e x cess I&I, a sum m ary o f general m aintenance and repairs to the collection system , and a sum m ary o f any planned m aintenance and repairs to the co llectio n system for the u p com in g calendar year.
S T h is fa c ility is n o t req uired to d e v e lo p o r im p le m e n t a p rog ra m for m a in te n a n c e and rep air o f th e c o lle c tio n sy stem ; h o w e v e r , it is
a violation o f M issouri state environm ental law s and regulations to allow untreated dom estic w astew ater to discharge to waters o f the state.
Schedule of Compliance (SOC):
A sched u le o f rem edial m easures included in a perm it, including an enforceable sequence o f interim requirem ents (actions, effluent lim its, operations, or m ilestone even ts) leading to com pliance w ith the M issouri C lean W ater Law , its im plem enting regulations, and/or the term s and conditions o f an operating perm it. SO C s are allow ed under 4 0 C FR 122.47 providing certain conditions are met. v7 A pplicable; the tim e g iv en for efflu en t lim itations o f this perm it listed under Interim E ffluent L im itation and Final Effluent
L im itations w ere established in accordance w ith [ 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (1 2 )]. T he facility has been given a schedule o f com pliance to m eet final efflu en t lim its for tem perature at outfall # 0 0 1 . P reviou s perm it lim its instituted therm al discharge as an internal energy increase and w a s reported in btu/hr (B ritish Therm al U n its). H ow ever, M issouri w ater quality standards are written to consider the temperature o f the receiving stream and the actual discharge o f the effluent. Tem perature is considered a water contam inant per 10 C SR 20-7.031 (5X D ) and m ust be regulated as such.
Secondary Containment Structures Special Condition:
The previou s perm it's special con d ition s required sam pling o f total petroleum hydrocarbons (T P H ) under the d ecision m odel to d isch arge storm w ater havin g a sh een in secon d ary containm ent. T h e sp ecial con d ition has b een revised in all perm its b egin n in g in 2 0 1 5 to include oil and grease and B T E X (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylen e) sam pling o f the potentially contam inated storm water in secondary containm ent This change w as due to 1) no water quality standards for TPH; and 2) there are no approved m ethods found in 4 0 CFR 136 for TPH . The facility need only sam ple for these constituents prior to release w hen a sheen or petroleum odor is present.
Spill Reporting:
P er 10 C S R 2 4 - 3 .0 1 0 , a n y e m e r g e n c y in v o lv in g a h a z a rd o u s su b sta n c e m u st b e rep orted to th e d ep a rtm en t's 2 4 hour E n viron m en ta l E m ergen cy R esp on se hotline at (5 7 3 ) 6 3 4 -2 4 3 6 at the earliest practicable m om ent after discovery. T he department m ay require the subm ittal o f a m itten report d etailing m easures taken to clean up a spill. T hese reporting requirem ents apply whether or not the spill results in ch em icals or m aterials leavin g the perm itted property' or reaching w aters o f the state. This requirem ent is in addition to the n on com p lian ce reporting requirem ent fou n d in Standard C on d ition s Part I. http.//dnr m o .g o v /e n v /e sp /spillbill.htm
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 27 of 65
Part HI. Rationale and Derivation o f Permit Limits and Conditions
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP):
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.44(k ), B est M anagem ent Practices (B M P s) m ust be used to control or abate the discharge o f pollutants w hen: 1) A u thorized under sectio n 3 0 4 (e ) o f the C lean W ater A ct (C W A ) for the control o f to x ic pollutants and hazardous substances from ancillary industrial activities; 2) A uthorized under section 40 2 (p ) o f the C W A for the control o f stormwater discharges; 3 ) N um eric efflu en t lim itations are infeasible; or 4 ) the practices are reasonably n ecessary to achieve effluent lim itations
and standards or to carry ou t th e p u rp o ses a n d in tent o f th e C W A . In a c co r d a n ce w ith the E P A 's Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, A Guidefor Industrial Operators, (D o c u m e n t nu m ber E P A 8 3 3 -B -0 9 -0 0 2 ) [pu blished b y the U n ited States
Environm ental Protection A gency (U S E P A ) in February 2 0 0 9 ], B M P s are m easures or practices used to reduce the am ount o f pollution entering w aters o f the state from a perm itted facility. B M P s m ay take the form o f a p rocess, activity, or p h ysical structure. A d d ition ally in accordan ce w ith the Storm water M anagem ent, a SW P P P is a series o f steps and activities to 1) identify sources o f pollution or contam ination, and 2) select and carry out actions w h ich prevent or control the pollution o f stonn water discharges.
A SW PPP m ust be prepared by the perm ittee if the SIC code is found in 40 CFR 1 2 2 .2 6 (b )(I4 ) and/or 10 C SR 20-6.200(2). A SW PPP m ay be required o f other facilities w here storm water has been identified as necessitating better m anagem ent. The purpose o f a SW PPP is to com p ly w ith all applicable storm water regulations b y creating an adaptive m anagem ent plan to control and m itigate stream pollution from storm water runoff. D ev elo p in g a SW PPP provides opportunities to em p loy appropriate B M Ps to m inim ize the risk o f pollutants being discharged during storm events. The follow in g paragraph outlines the general steps the perm ittee should take to determ ine w h ich B M P s w ill w ork to a ch iev e the benchm ark v a lu es or lim its in the perm it. T in s sectio n is not intended to b e all en com p assin g or restrict the use o f auy ph ysical B M P or operational and m aintenance procedure assistin g in pollution control. A d dition al steps or revision s to the SW P P P m ay be required to m eet the requirem ents o f the perm it.
A reas w h ich should be included in the SW PPP are identified in 4 0 C FR 122.26(b )(14). O nce the potential sources o f stormwater pollution have beeu identified, a plan should be form ulated to best control the am ount o f pollutant being released and discharged by each activity or source. This should include, but is not lim ited to, m inim izing exposure to storm water, good housekeeping m easures, proper facility and equipm ent m aintenance, spill prevention and response, veh icle traffic control, and proper m aterials handling. O nce a plan has been developed the facility w ill em ploy the control m easures determ ined to be adequate to achieve the benchm ark values discussed above. The facility w ill conduct m onitoring and inspections o f the B M Ps to ensure they are working properly and re evaluate any B M P not achieving com pliance w ith perm itting requirem ents. For exam ple, i f sam ple results from an outfall show values o f T S S a b o v e Lite b en ch m ark v a lu e , th e B M P b e in g e m p lo y e d is d e fic ie n t in c o n tr o llin g storm w ater p o llu tio n . C o rrectiv e action sh o u ld b e taken to repair, im p rove, or rep lace the fa ilin g B M P . T h is intern al ev alu ation is required at least o n ce per m onth but sh ould be continued m ore frequently i f B M P s continue to fail. I f failures d o occu r, continue this trial and error process until appropriate B M Ps have been established.
F or n ew , altered, or expanded storm w ater discharges, the SW P P P shall identify reasonable and e ffectiv e B M P s w h ile accounting for environm ental im pacts o f varying control m ethods. The antidegradation analysis m ust docum ent w hy no discharge or no exposure options are not feasible. T he selection and docum entation o f appropriate control m easures shall serve as an alternative analysis o f tech n ology and fulfill the requirem ents o f antidegradation [ 10 C SR 20-7.031 (3)]. Failure to im plem ent and m aintain the chosen BM P is a perm it violation. For further guidance, consu lt the antidegradation im plem entation procedure f h ttp ://d n r .m o .g o v /e n v /w p p /d o c s /A I P 0 5 0 2 1 2 .p d f).
A lternative A nalysis (A A ) evaluation o f the B M Ps is a structured evaluation o f B M Ps that are reasonable and cost effective. The A A evalu ation should inclu de practices that are d esign ed to be: 1) non-degrading; 2 ) le ss degrading; or 3) degrading w ater quality. The glossary o f AIP defines these three terms. The chosen B M P w ill b e the m ost reasonable and effective m anagem ent strategy w hile ensuring the highest statutory and regulatory requirem ents are achieved and the highest quality w ater attainable for the facility is discharged. The A A evaluation m ust dem onstrate w h y "no discharge" or "no exposu re" is not a feasible alternative at the facility. This structured analysis o f B M P s serves as the antidegradation review , fu lfillin g the requirem ents o f 10 C SR 20-7.031 (3) W ater Q uality
Standards and Antidegradation Implementation Procedure (A IP ), S e c tio n II.B .
I f param eter-specific num eric exceed ances continue to occur and the perm ittee feels there are no practicable or cost-effective B M Ps w h ich w ill su fficien tly reduce a pollutant concentration in the discharge to the benchm ark valu es established in the perm it, the perm ittee can subm it a request to re-evaluate the benchm ark values. T his request n eed s to include 1) a detailed explanation o f w hy the facility is unable to com ply w ith the perm it conditions and unable to establish B M P s to achieve the benchm ark values; 2) financial data o f the com pany and docum entation o f cost associated w ith B M P s for review and 3) the SW PPP, w hich should contain adequate docum entation o f B M P s em ployed, failed B M P s, corrective actions, and all other required inform ation. T his w ill allow the department to conduct a cost analysis on control m easures and actions taken b y the facility to determ ine cost-effectiven ess o f B M Ps. T he request sh all b e su bm itted in the form o f an operatin g perm it m o d ifica tio n ; th e a p p lica tio n is foun d at: h ttp ://d n r.m o.gov/form s/in d ex.h tm l. v' A pplicable; a SW P P P shall be develop ed and im plem ented for this facility.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center F ad Sheet Page 2S of 65
Part UL Rationale and Derivation o f Permit Limits and Cunditions
Technology-Based Effluent Limitations (TBEL):
O ne o f the m ajor strategies o f the C lean W ater A ct (C W A ) in m aking "reasonable further progress tow ard the national goal o f elim inating the discharge o f all pollutants" is to require efflu en t lim itations based on th e capabilities o f the tech nologies available to control those discharges. T ech nology-based effluent lim itations (T B E L s) aim to prevent pollution by requiring a m inim um level o f efflu en t quality attainable u sin g dem onstrated tech n o lo gies for reducing discharges o f pollutants or pollu tion into the waters o f the U nited States. T B E L s are developed independently o f the potential im pact o f a discharge on the receivin g water, w hich is addressed through water quality standards and w ater quality-based effluent lim itations (W Q B E L s). T he N P D E S regulations at Title 40 o f the C od e o f Federal R egulations (C F R ) 125.3(a) require N P D E S perm it writers to d evelop tech nology-based treatment requirem ents, consistent w ith C W A 3 0 1 (b ) and 4 0 2 (a )(1 ), represent the m inim um level o f control that m ust b e im posed in a perm it. The regulation also ind icates that perm it writers m ust include in perm its additional or m ore stringent efflu en t lim itations and conditions, including those necessary to protect water quality. R egardless o f the tech n ology chosen to b e the basis for lim itations, the facility is not required to install the tech nology, on ly to m eet the established TBEL.
C ase-b y-case T B E L s are d evelop ed pursuant to C W A section 40 2 (a )(1 ). w h ich authorizes the adm inistrator to issu e a perm it m eeting either, 1) all applicable requirem ents d evelop ed under the authority o f other section s o f the C W A (e .g ., tech nology-based treatment standards, water quality standards) or, 2) before taking the n ecessary im plem enting action s related to those requirem ents, "such conditions as the adm inistrator determ ines are n ecessary to carry out the p rovision s o f this A c t." The regulation at 125.3(c)(2) sp ec ific a lly cite th is sectio n o f the C W A , stating tech n o lo g y -b a sed treatm ent requirem ents m a y b e im p o sed in a perm it "on a c a se-b y case basis under sectio n 4 0 2 (a )(1 ) o f the A ct, to the extent that E P A -prom ulgated efflu en t lim itations are inapplicable." Further, 125.3 (c)(3 ) ind icates "w here prom ulgated efflu en t lim itations gu id elin es o n ly apply to certain a sp ects o f the discharger's operation, or to certain pollutants, other asp ects or activities are subject to regulation on a c a se-b y -ca se b asis to carry out the provisions o f the act." W hen establishin g ca se-b y -ca se efflu en t lim itations u sin g best p rofession al jud gm en t, the perm it writer should cite in the fact sheet or statem ent o f b asis both the approach used to d evelop the lim itations, d iscu ssed b elo w , and h o w the lim itations carry out the intent and requirem ents o f the C W A and the N P D E S regulations.
B a se lin e s to d eterm ine contam inants o f c o n cern are foun d in the Development Documentfo r Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standardsfo r the Centralized Waste Treatment Industry - Final (E P A 8 2 1 -R -0 0 -0 2 0 , A u g u st 2 0 0 0 ). T h e b a selin es represent the
treatable concentration o f m od el tech n o lo g y w h ich w ou ld effectu ally treat a pollutant. Chapter 6 T able 6 - 1 directs the perm it writer to m ultiply the baseline b y ten to determ ine if the param eter is a pollutant o f concern. T he follow in g table determ ines the parameters for w h ich a T B E L m ust be considered; baseline values are retrieved from chapter six.
No Pollutant is not a POC
W as the pollutant detected at a concentration 10 tim es the baseline value?
Yes
No Pollutant is not a POC
W hen developing T B E L s for industrial facilities, the perm it writer m ust consider all applicable tech nology standards and requirem ents for all pollutants discharged ab ove baseline lev el. W ithout applicable effluent guid elin es for the discharge or pollutant, perm it writers m ust identify any needed TBELs on a case-b y-case basis, in accordance w ith the statutory factors sp ecified in C W A sections 301(b )(2) and 304(b). T he site-specific T B E L s reflect the BPJ o f the perm it writer, taking into account the sam e statutory factors EPA w ou ld use in prom ulgating a national efflu en t gu id elin e regulation, but th ey are applied to the circu m stan ces relating to the applicant. T he perm it writer also should identify w h eth er state law s or regulations govern T B E L s and m ight require m ore stringent perform ance
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy CentoFact Sheet Page 29 o f 65
Part III Rationale and Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
standards than those required by federal regulations. In som e cases, a single perm it could have T B E L s based on effluent guidelines, b est professional judgm ent, state law. and W Q B E L s based on w ater quality standards.
For BPT requirements (all pollutants)
The age of equipment and facilities involved*
The processes) employed*
The engineering aspects erf the application of various types of control techniques*
Process changes*
* Non-water quality environmental impact including energy requirements*
* The total cost of application of technology in Fetation to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from such
application
1
For BCT requirements (conventional pollutants)
I
* All items in the BPT requirements indicated by an asterisk (*) above
I
* The reasonableness of the relationship between the costs of attaining a reduction in effluent and toe derived $
effluent reduction benefits
The comparison of the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants from toe discharge of POTWs to toe cost
and level of reduction of such pollutants tom a class or category of industrial sources
! For BAT requirements (toxic and non-conventional pollutants) I All items in toe BPT requirements indicated by an asterisk f ) above
* The cost of achieving such effluent reduction
B est Practicable C ontrol T ech n o lo g y Currently A vailab le (B P T ) is the first lev e l o f tech n ology-b ased efflu en t controls for direct dischargers and it a p p lies to all typ es o f pollutants (co n v en tio n a l, n o n co n v en tio n a l, and to x ic). T he F ederal W ater P ollution Control A ct (F W P C A ) am en d m en ts o f 197 2 require w h en E P A esta b lish es B P T standards, it m ust con sid er the ind ustry-w ide co st o f im plem enting the tech n o lo g y in relation to the pollutant-reduction benefits. E P A also m ust consider the ag e o f the equipm ent and facilities, the processes em ployed, process changes, engineering aspects o f the control tech nologies, non-water quality environm ental im pacts (including energy' requirem ents), and such other factors as the E P A Adm inistrator deem s appropriate [C W A 304(b )(l)(B )]. Traditionally, E PA establishes B P T effluent lim itations on the basis o f the average o f the best perform ance o f w ell-operated facilities in ea ch industrial category or su b category. W here ex istin g perform ance is u n ifo rm ly inadequate, B P T m ay reflect higher lev els o f control than currently in place in an industrial category if the agency determ ines the tech n ology can be practically applied. See C W A sections 301(b )(1)(A ) and 304(b)(1)(B ). B ecau se the EPA has not prom ulgated T B E L s for the pollutants identified as POCs, the perm it writer fo llo w s the sam e form at to establish site-sp ecific TB E L s. A lthough the num erical effluent lim itations and standards are based on specific processes or treatm ent tech n ologies to control pollutant discharges, E PA d oes not require dischargers to use these technologies. Individual facilities m ay m eet the num erical requirem ents using w hatever types o f treatment technologies, process changes, and w aste m anagem ent practices they choose.
For each parameter, group o f param eters, or outfall treatm ent process, the facility w ill sum m arize the relevant factors below in facility-sp ecific (or w aste-stream sp ecific) ca se-b y -ca se T B E L d evelop m en t. T he perm ittee w ill supply the required inform ation to the departm ent so a tech n o lo g y based efflu en t lim itation can be applied in the perm it i f applicable. V A pplicable; this operating perm it has identified TBELs. v' Som e T B ELs are governed by an ELG.
Temperatifre: 316(a) Cooling Water Intake Structure Reqitrements:
The Sioux Plant co o lin g w ater discharge and the therm al plu m e w ere studied exten sively during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The discharge is a w id e m outh, lo w v e lo c ity outlet into an open chann el connected to the M ississip p i R iver. D uring norm al river stage, the river is approx. 3 ,2 0 0 feet w ide at this location and is lacustrine (p ool-lik e), due to the Corps o f E n gin eers' L ock and D am 26 (at A lton). N either plant operations nor river flo w con d ition s have changed sign ifican tly since the original studies w ere perform ed, thus the fa cility d oes not contem plate revision o f the 3 1 6 (a) studies; h o w ev er the results o f the required 3 1 6(b) studies and changes to the
river m ay c a u se a rvalu ation o f the stu d ies or a d d ition al stu d ies. S e e Part VEffluent Limits Determination; outfall #001; TBEL determination and Part III Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits and Conditions; 316(b) requirements.
V a r ia n c e : A s per the M issouri C lean W ater L aw 6 4 4 .0 6 1 .4 , variances shall be granted for such period o f tim e and under such term s and conditions as shall b e specified b y the com m ission in its order. The variance m ay be exten ded by affirm ative action o f the com m ission. In no even t shall the variance be granted for a period o f tim e greater than is reasonably necessary for com plyin g w ith the M issouri C lean W ater L aw 6 4 4 .0 0 6 to 644.1 4 1 or any standard, rule or regulation prom ulgated pursuant to M issouri C lean WateT L aw 644.006 to 644.141.
S N o t a p p lica b le; th is op era tin g p erm it is n o t drafted u n d er p r e m is e s o f a p e titio n for v a r ia n ce .
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 30 o f 65
Part 01. Rationale aud Derivation of Permit Limits and Conditions
Wasteload Allocations (WLA) for Limits:
A s per [ 10 C SR 2 0 -2 .0 1 0{78)], the W L A is the am ount o f pollutant each discharger is allow ed to release into a given stream after the
departm ent has determ ined total am ount o f pollutant that m ay be discharged into that stream w ithout endangering its water quality.
V A pplicable; w asteload allocations w ere calculated w here relevant usin g w ater quality criteria or water quality m odel results and by applying the dilution equation:
c (CsxQs)+(CexQe) (Qe + Qs)
(E P A /505/2-90-001, Section 4.5.5)
Where
C = downstream concentration Cs = upstream concentration Qs " upstream flow Ce = effluent concentration Qe = effluent flow
A cute w asteload allocations (d a ily m axim um lim its) w ere determ ined u sin g applicable water quality criteria (CM C: criteria m axim um concentration) and stream volu m e o f flo w at the ed ge o f the zo n e o f initial dilution (Z ID ).
C hronic w asteload allocations (m onth ly average lim its) w ere determ ined u sin g applicable chronic w ater quality criteria (CCC: criteria continuous concentration) and stream v olu m e o f flow at the ed ge o f the m ixin g zon e (M Z ).
W ater quality based daily m axim um (M D L ) and m onthly average (A M L ) effluent lim itations w ere calculated using m ethods and
p roced u res ou tlin ed in U S E P A 's Technical Support Document For Water Quality-based Toxics Control or "T S D " (E P A '5 0 5 /2 -
90-001; M arch 1991). N um ber o f S am p les "n ": In accordance w ith the T S D for w ater quality-based perm itting, efflu en t quality is determ ined b y the
underlying distribution o f d aily v a lu es, w h ich is determ ined b y the L on g T erm A v era g e (L T A ) associated w ith a particular W asteload A llocation (W L A ) and b y the C oefficien t o f Variation (C V ) o f the efflu en t concentrations. Increasing or decreasing the m onitoring frequency does not affect this underlying distribution or treatm ent perform ance w hich should b e, at a m inim um , targeted to c o m p ly w ith the v a lu e s dictated b y th e W L A . T h erefore, it is reco m m en d ed that the actual plan ned freq u en cy o f m onitoring norm ally be u sed to determ ine the valu e o f "n " for calculating the A M L . H ow ever, in situations w h ere m onitoring frequency is once per m onth or less, a higher value for "n" m ust be assum ed for A M L derivation purposes. Thus, the statistical procedure b ein g em p loyed u sin g an assum ed num ber o f sam p les is "n = 4 " at a m inim um . For T otal A m m on ia as N itrogen, "u = 50" is used.
WLA Modeling:
P erm ittees m ay subm it site sp ecific studies to better determ ine the site sp ecific w asteload allocations applied in perm its. V N ot applicable; a W L A study w a s either not subm itted or determ ined not app licable b y Departm ent staff.
Water Quality Standards:
Per [1 0 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (4 )], general criteria sh a ll b e ap p licab le to all w aters o f the state at a ll tim es in clu d in g m ix in g zones. A dditionally, [40 CFR 122.44(d )(1)] directs the Departm ent to establish in each N P D E S perm it to include conditions to achieve water quality established under S ection 3 0 3 o f the C lean W ater A ct, inclu ding State narrative criteria for water quality.
Whole Effluent Toxicity (Wet) Test:
A W ET test is a quantifiable m ethod o f determ ining i f a discharge from a facility m ay be causing to x icity to aquatic life b y itself, in com bination w ith or tlirough syn ergistic responses w h en m ixed w ith receivin g stream water.
C A pplicable; under the federal C lean W ater A ct (C W A ) 101 (a)(3), requiting W E T testing is reasonably appropriate for site-
sp ecific M issouri State O perating Perm its for discharges to w aters o f the state issu ed under the N ational Pollutant D ischarge E lim in ation S y stem (N P D E S ). W E T testin g is a lso required b y 4 0 C F R 1 2 2 .4 4 (d )(1 ). W E T testing ensures that the p ro v isio n s in the 10 C SR 2 0 -6 .0 1 0(8)(A )7. and the W ater Q uality Standards 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(4)(D ),(F ),(G ),(I)2.A & B are being m et Under [10 C S R 2 0 -6 .0 1 0 (8 )(A )4 ], the departm ent m ay require other term s and con d ition s that it d eem s necessary to assure com plian ce w ith the C lean W ater A ct and related regu lations o f the M issouri C lean W ater C o m m ission . In addition the fo llo w in g M C W L apply: 6 4 4 .0 5 1 .3 requires the D epartm ent to set perm it conditions that co m p ly w ith the M C W L and C W A ; 6 4 4 .0 5 1 .4 sp ecifically references toxicity as an item w e m ust consider in waiting perm its (alon g w ith w ater quality-based effluent lim its, pretreatment, e tc ...); and 6 4 4 .0 5 1 .5 is the basic authority to require testing conditions. W ET test w ill b e required by all facilities m eeting the fo llo w in g criteria:
F acility is a designated a M ajor
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 31 of 65
Part IV. 2013 Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia
Part IV. 2013 Water Q uality Criteria for Ammonia
U p com in g changes to the W ater Q uality Standard for am m onia m ay require significant upgrades to w astew ater treatment facilities.
On A ugust 22, 2 0 1 3 , the U .S. E nvironm ental Protection A g en cy (E P A ) finalized new w ater quality criteria for am m onia, based on to x ic it y stu d ies o f m u s s e ls an d g ill b rea th in g sn a ils. M is s o u r i's current a m m o n ia criteria are b a s e d o n to x ic ity te stin g o f severa l sp ecies, but did not include data from m u ssels or gill breathing snails. M issouri is hom e to 6 9 o f North A m erica's m ussel species, w h ich are spread across the state. A ccordin g to the M issouri D epartm ent o f C onservation nearly tw o-thirds o f the m ussel sp ecies in M issouri are considered to be "o f conservation concern" . N in e sp ecies are listed as federally endangered, with an additional sp ecies currently proposed as endangered and another sp ecies proposed as threatened.
T he adult form s o f m u ssels that are seen in rivers, lakes, and stream s are sen sitive to pollutants because th ey are sedentary filter feeders. T hey vacuum up m any pollutants w ith the food they bring in and cannot escape to n ew habitats, so they can accum ulate toxin s in their b od ies and die. B ut very you n g m ussels, called gloch id ia, are excep tion ally sen sitive to am m onia in water. A s a result o f a citizen suit, the E P A w as com p elled to conduct toxicity testing and develop am m onia w ater quality criteria that would be protective if youn g m u ssels m ay be present in a waterbody. T hese new criteria w ill apply to any discharge w ith am m onia lev els that m ay p ose a reasonable potential to violate the standards. N early all discharging dom estic w astew ater treatment facilities (cities, su bd ivisions, m obile hom e parks, etc ), as w ell as certain industrial and storm water dischargers w ith am m onia in their effluent, w ill be affected b y this change in the regulations.
W h en n ew w ater qu ality criteria are established b y the E P A , states m ust adopt them into their regu lations in order to keep their authorization to issu e perm its under the N ational Pollutant D ischarge E lim ination S ystem (N P D E S ). States are required to rev iew their w ater quality standards every three years, and i f new criteria have b een d evelop ed they m ust b e adopted. States m ay be m ore protective than the Federal requirem ents, but not less protective. M issouri d oes not have the resources to conduct the studies necessary for d evelop in g n ew w ater quality standards, and therefore our standards mirror those d ev elo p ed b y the E P A ; h ow ever, w e w ill utilize any available flexibility based on actual sp ecies o f m ussels that are native to M issouri and their sen sitivity to am m onia.
M any treatm ent facilities in M issouri are currently schedu led to b e upgraded to com p ly w ith the current w ater quality standards. But th ese n e w a m m o n ia stan dards m a y req u ire a d ifferen t treatm en t te c h n o lo g y th an th e o n e b e in g c o n sid e r e d b y th e p e r m illee . It is im portant that perm ittees d iscuss any new and upcom ing requirem ents w ith their consulting engineers to ensure that their treatment system s are capable o f com plyin g w ith the n ew requirem ents. T he D epartm ent encourages pennittees to construct treatment tech n ologies that can attain efflu en t quality that supports the E P A am m onia criteria.
A m m onia toxicity varies by tem perature and b y pH o f the water. A ssum in g a stable pH value, but taking into account winter and su m m er tem peratures, M issouri inclu des tw o season s o f am m onia efflu en t lim itations. E ffluent lim itations in this perm it w ou ld be:
Sum m er - 3.6 m g/L d aily m axim um , 1.4 m g/L m onthly average W inter - 7.5 m g/L daily m axim um , 2.9 m g/L m onthly average
U nder the n ew E PA criteria, w here m ussels o f the fam ily U n ion idae are present or exp ected to be present, the estim ated effluent
lim itations for a fa cility in a location such as this that discharges to a receivin g stream w ith no m ixin g consideration listed in Part V o f
the Fact Sheet w ill be:
Sum m er - 1.7 m g/L d aily m axim um , 0 .6 m g/L m onth ly average.
W inter - 5.6 m g/L daily m axim um , 2.1 m g/L m onthly average.
A ctual effluent lim its w ill depend in part on the actual perform ance o f the facility.
O perating perm its for facilities in M issouri m ust be written based on current statutes and regulations. Therefore perm its w ill be written w ith the ex istin g efflu en t lim itations until the n ew standards are adopted. T o aid p en n ittees in d ecision m aking, an advisory w ill be added to perm it Fact S h eets n o tify in g perm ittees o f the exp ected efflu en t lim itations for am m onia. W hen setting sch ed u les o f com pliance for am m onia effluent lim itations, consideration w ill b e given to facilities that have recently constructed upgraded facilities to m eet the current am m onia lim itations. For m ore inform ation on this topic feel free to contact the M issouri Department o f Natural R esources, W ater Protection Program , W ater Pollution C ontrol Branch, O perating Perm its Section at (5 7 3 ) 751-1300.
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 32 of 65
Outfali #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
P a rt V. Effluent L imits Determination
Effluent lim itations, benchm arks, and perm it conditions derived and established in the b elo w efflu en t lim itations tables are based o n current operations o f the facility. Future perm it action due to facility m odification m ay contain n ew operating perm it term s and conditions that supersede the term s and conditions, including effluent lim itations, o f this operating perm it. D aily m axim um s and m onthly averages are required under 4 0 CFR 122.45(d )(1) for continuous discharges not from a PO TW . T h e nearest drink in g w'ater intake is lo ca ted at St. L ouis. T h erefore the drink in g w ater (D W ) u se is in e ffe c t and D W lim its m ay apply i f they are m ore stringent and applicable than other u ses' lim its. T echnology based lim itations apply to this facility.
Outfall #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
The m inim um frequency the departm ent is allow ed to apply sam pling requirem ents for a facility is yearly per 40 CFR 122.4 4 (i)(iv )(A )(2 ). T able A -3 in the perm it describes conditional sam pling. E ach year, even i f chlorine or biocid es are not used, to com ply w ith yearly reporting, the facility w ill subm it a short report to the St. L ouis R egional O ffice. T he facility must collect sam ples and analyze for free available chlorine, total residual chlorine, upon every occasion (daily, concurrently) o f chlorine use. T he facility is not required to sam p le for chlorine if the b iocid e u sed is not chlorine based. H ow ever, the facility m ust still collect a sam ple for W ET testing (daily, concurrently) upon biocide/m olluskicide use.
Effluent Limitations Table:
PARAMETERS
Unit
Puvsir \ \ Flow Thermal Discharge EFFLUENT FLOW(Of) Effluent Temperature.(Te) Stream Flow (Q,) Stream Temperature (Ts) AT (Note 3) AT (Note 3) TcapJanuary (Note 4) TdevJanuary (Note 4) TcapFEBRUARY(NOTE 4) TdevFEBRUARY (NOTE 4) TcapMARCH(NOTE 4) TdevMarch (Note 4) TcapAPRIL (NOTE4) TojvAPRIL(NOTE 4) TcapMa y (Note4) TdevMay (Note 4) Te*, June (Note 4) TdevJUNE(NOTE4) Tca, July (Note 4) TdevJuly(Note4) Tcap AUGUST (NOTE 4) Tdevaugust (Note 4) Tcap SEPTEMBER(NOTE 4) TdevSeptember (Note 4) TcapOCTOBER (NOTE 4) TdevOCTOBER (NOTE 4) TcapNOVEMBER (NOTE 4)
MGD BTU/HR
cfs
F
cfs
F F F F F op op op
F F op op op op
F P
op
F
F F
op
F ojp
F
Basis
for
Limits
1 1,6 6 6 6
6
1.6 1,2,3 1, 2,3 1,2,3 1,2.3 1.2,3 1,2,3 1.2,3 1,2,3 1.2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1, 2, 3 1, 2, 3 1, 2, 3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1, 2, 3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3
Daily Max
*
5.50 xlO9 * * * *
5 45 48 45 48 57 60 68 71 78 81 86 89 88 91 88 91 86 89 75 78 65
Monthly Avg.
* * * *
%
*
* *
tf
* * * * * # * * * * * * * * * * 9 9 *
PREVIOUS PERMIT LIMITS
SAME I, SAME
NEW NEW NEW NEW I, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F .new F. NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F.NEW F .new F, NEW F. NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F, NEW F.NEW F, NEW F.NEW' F, NEW'
Minimum Sampling Frfqitncy
Minimum Reporting
Freq.
Sample Type
DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY
MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY
24 Hr. Tot GRAB MEAS. meas. MEAS. MEAS. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. C.ALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC.
PARAMETERS
TdevNovember (Note 4) TcapDecember (Note 4) Tdev DECEMBER(NOTE 4)
T im e o f D e v ia t io n -M o n t h (No te 4)
Total Time of Deviation (Noie 4) Total Time of Deviation (Note 4)
Unit F
F
hours hours
Basis
for
Limits
1 ,2,3 1 ,2,3
1,2,3
1,3
PartV . Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 33 o f 65
Outfall #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
Daily Max
68 52 55
Monthly Avg.
PREVIOUS PERMIT LIMITS
F ,new F .new
F, NEW
I, NEW
I, NEW
Minimum S ampling Frequency
DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY
DAILY
Minimum Reporting
Freq. MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY
YEARLY YEARLY
Sample Type
CALC. CALC. CALC. CALC. CAIA. CALC.
* - monitoring requirement only 1= interim limit F = final limit new - parameter not in previous permit calc. TMcalculation rneas. - measured cond. - conditional
Basis for Limitations Codes: 1. State or Federal Regulation/Law 2. Water Quality Standard (includes RPA) 3. Water Quality' Based Effluent Limits 4. Antidegradation Review/Policy
5. Water Quality Model 6. Best Professional Judgment 7. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL 8. WET Test Policy
N o te 3: AT = [((Q 5/4 ) T 5 + QTe) / ((Q s/4 ) + C!e )]-T .
W here:
AT Q s/4 Qe Ts Te
the change in tem perature in F at the ed ge o f the therm al m ixin g zone the receiving stream flow in cfs divided by 4 effluent flo w in els m easured stream temperature m easured temperature o f effluent
N o te 4: T o calculate the tem perature o f the stream at the ed ge o f the m ixin g zon e, the facility w ill use the follow in g equation: D e sig n a te d as T emz in the e q u a tio n b e lo w , th e fa c ility c a n d eterm in e c o m p lia n c e w ith T dev, T cap, and p ercen t tim e d e v ia tio n allow ance.
Tcuz = [((Qs'4)Ts+ Q J ,) / ((Qs/4) + Qe))]
W here:
T eal2 Q /4 Qe Ts Tc
the temperature o f the receiving stream at the edge o f the thermal m ixing zone the receiving stream flow in cfs divided by 4 effluent flo w in cfs m easured stream temperature m easured temperature o f effluent
Tem perature cap (designated as T ^ , in T able A -2 o f the perm it and the E fflu en t L im itations T able o f the fact sheet) is the effluent tem perature in the receiv in g stream at the ed g e o f th e therm al m ixin g zone. It m ay be exceed ed for no m ore than 5% o f the year (438 hours).
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 34 of 65
Outfall 001: Once-Through Cooling Water
T em p eratu re d e v ia tio n (d e sig n a te d a s T<iw, in T a b le A -2 o f th e p erm it an d the E fflu e n t L im ita tio n s T a b le o f th e fact sh eet) is the m axim um effluent tem perature lim it applicable in the receivin g stream at the edge o f the therm al m ix in g zone w h ich m ay not be exceed ed . M oC W IS is set up to receive one value for the thermal lim itations for each m onth. T he facility w ill violate th e therm al lim it i f the v a lu e en te re d in M o C W IS is a b o v e th e T dev v a lu e for th e m onth.
P ercen t T im e D e v ia tio n A llo w a n c e : M is s o u r i's W ater Q u a lity Stan dards a llo w s p e r m itte es to e x c e e d their ap p lica b le T CBp criteria (but not the T ^ criteria) for 5% o f the year in Z on e IB alon g the M ississip p i R iver. The tim e o f deviation allow ance sh a ll b e tra ck ed in h o u rs p er yea r a n y tim e th eir c a lc u la te d tem p eratu re v a lu e s e x c e e d a s p e c if ic m o n th 's d a ily m a x im u m Tia)l effluent lim it. The perm ittee is required to m onitor and report the total m onth ly exceed an ce tim e. a) I fT .em2 is le s s th an T ca|>. th en th e p er m itte e reco rd s "0 " h ou rs d e v ia tio n . b ) A n y tim e T ^ . is a b o v e T cnp th en th e fa c ility rep orts th e n u m b er o f h o u rs o f d ev ia tio n . c ) T h e p erm ittee sh a ll rep ort o n Jan u ary 2 8 th o f e a ch year th e total nu m b er o f h o u rs th e fa c ility e x c e e d e d their tem perature
cap effluent lim its for the entire year.
A v io la tio n occu rs if:
a. T he percent tim e deviation allow ance is above 5% (438 hours) for the calendar year; and/or
b. The
.value rep orted is a b o v e the T <lci, lim ita tio n .
Derivation and Discussion of Limits:
P hysical:
T he facility reported co lo r w as b elieved absent. N o additional sam p lin g w ill be required at this tim e.
F lo w In accord an ce w ith [4 0 C F R Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (i)(l)(ii)] the v o lu m e o f e fflu en t d isch arged from ea ch ou tfall is n eed ed to assure com pliance w ith perm itted effluent lim itations. I f the perm ittee is unable to obtain effluent flow , then it is the responsibility o f the perm ittee to inform the departm ent, w h ich m ay require the subm ittal o f an operating perm it m odification. The facility w ill report the total flo w in m illions o f gallons per day (M G D ).
Tem perature The departm ent considered therm al discharge a pollutant o f concern for this facility as is required b y the C W A . W hile water quality standards exist, the departm ent m u st a lso form ulate a r ev iew o f the tech n o lo g y , lim itations associated w ith that tech nology, the age o f the equipm ent, and the p rocesses in volved at the facility. P lease see both section s below ; W ater Q uality Lim itations and T ech nology B ased E ffluent Lim itations.
Wa t e r Q u a l it y L im it a t io n s : In accordance w ith 10 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1(5X D )5. water contam inant so u rces shall not ca u se or contrib ute to M ississip p i R iver temperature in ex cess o f the tem peratures listed in the effluent lim itations table. The facility is located betw een Lock and D am N o . 25 and L ock and D am N o . 26, therefore the facility is in Z one IB . M issouri's W Q S tem perature criteria [10 C SR 207 .0 3 1 (5 )(D )1 . tlirough (5 )(D )6 ] establish tw o m ain areas o f com p lian ce for all habitats. The first com p lian ce requirem ent deals with the change o f temperature in degrees Fahrenheit stated as delta temperature (or AT). The second com pliance requirement deals w ith the result o f a calculation o f the receiv in g stream 's tem perature not to ex ceed (T^,,) at the edge o f the thermal m ixing zone.
M issou ri's W Q S tem perature criteria for warm water habitats (W W H ) [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(5)(D )1.] establishes thermal discharges ca n n o t c a u se a c h a n g e in th e r e c e iv in g str ea m 's tem p eratu re (A T ) o f m o re than fiv e ( 5 ) d e g r ee s an d a T c,p o f 9 0 F . M isso u r i's W Q S e sta b lish e s s p e c ific T Cil|) v a lu e s for d isc h a r g e s to th e M is s is s ip p i R iv e r in [1 0 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1 ( S ) ( D ) 5 .] to w h ic h th is fa c ility a p p lies. T h e r eg u la tio n a lso e sta b lish e s a p e r ce n t, in tim e , d e v ia tio n a llo w a n c e fro m th e e sta b lish e d T cap for th e M ississip p i R iver as w e ll a s a m a x im u m tem p eratu re n o t to e x c e e d (Tdev) o f T ,^ + 3 F .
B oth com pliance requirem ents (AT and Tcp^ev) are to be established at the edge o f the thermal m ixin g zone (designated as T ^ ) . Thermal m ixing zones are established on perm anent (P ) stream s or other stream s w here available. M ixing zon e regulations are co n ta in ed in [ 1 0 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1 ( 5 ) ( D ) 6 .] . S trea m s w ith n o m ix in g c o n sid e r a tio n s m u st m e e t A T and T Mp at the end o f the p ip e. Sim ilar to M isso u ri's W Q S 's to x ic m ix in g considerations w h ich use low -H ow considerations (i.e. 7Q 10), the temperature regulations require the departm ent establish a thermal m ixin g zone lim ited to either 25% o f the cross-sectional area or 25% volum e o f a river. T his approach assu m es the receivin g w ater is able to con su m e 100% o f the heat energy b ein g discharged. V o lu m e o f d isc h a r g e (fo r th e river and th e fa c ility ) is m ea su red in c u b ic fe e t p er se c o n d (ft3/s e c , or cl's). T y p ic a lly d isch a rg e is obtained from a nearby upstream U nited States G eological Survey (U SG S) or U nited States A rm y Corps o f Engineers (USAG E) gaugin g station. I f there is a sign ifican t d istan ce from the facility to the nearest upstream gau gin g station, it m ay b e in the best interest o f the perm ittee to fund a n ew gaugin g station. A d dition ally, the departm ent w ill on ly use gauging station data as a viable
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center
Fact Sheet Page 35 of 65
Part V. ! 'fluent limit Determination Chitlali 1*001: Once-Through Cooling Water
source o f receivin g stream flo w . M eam ng effluent flo w s from other point sources m ay not be considered (i e added) to the flow determ ination If there is a near-by gaugin g station dow nstream o f the facility, then the perm ittee can use this data but must subtract their daily effluent discharge from the receiving stream flow . T he departm ent m ay also have the perm ittee subtract other inputs as necessary.
There are no regulatory requirem ents to determ ine a m outh ly average value for tem perature as the regulations are w ritten as shorr-
tetm m a x u n u m s H o w e v er , th e d ep artm en t h a s d eterm in ed rep ortin g m o n tlily a v e ra g e for Tcip ( T ^ i f a p p lic a b le ) and A T to be an
important m easure o f trends.
Meanings of Equations and Variables:
V ariables and calculations w h ich m ay be included in this perm it are described as fo llo w s N ot all variables w ill be u sed in all calculations. Q. is e fflu e n t flo w a n d rep o rted in c u b ic fe e t p er se c o n d ( " ftV sec " or c fs). Q , i s ih e am b ien t u p -strea m stream flo w in cfs. It is th e d ep a rtm en t's e x p e c ta tio n th e p e r m itte e w ill ob tain the Q , data from
an appropriate and nearest upstream U nited States G eological Survey (U S G S ) or U nited States A n ny Corps o f E ngineers (U SA C E ) gauguig stations. T , is the upstream in-stream tem perature and reported in F. For m ost facilities, the am bient stream temperature should be used. H ow ever, tem perature at the intake m ay also b e used lo determ ine T., The perm ittee on ly need inform the department w fiich temperature th ey are u sin g A dditional ju stification m ay be required if the facility is using intake temperature and recirculation water is used for cleaning fish scieen s or m elting ice. The perm itlee m ust accurately calculate com pliance w ith ihe r e c e iv in g strea m 's tem p era n ire at th e e d g e o f th e th erm al m ix in g zon e. T , is th e e fflu en t tem p eratu re a n d rep orted in CF. T lu s is a d irect m easu re o f th e tem p eratu re o f the efflu en t. A T is the calculation o f the am ount o f change in tem perature, as com pared to the upstream tem perature, at the ed ge o f the allow ed thernial m ixin g zone. T , lni is the c a lc u la tio n o f th e r e c e iv in g str ea m 's tem p eratu re at ih e e d g e o f the a llo w e d therm al m ix in g z o n e . T ,,,, and T ,,^ are thermal com plian ce points for the facility
Compliance Detennination with d T ffor a Warm Water Habitat:
M issou ri's W Q S tem perature criteria [ 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (5 )(D )I.| establishes point sou rces discharging thermal pollution to W W H stream s in M issou ri shall not raise or low er the tem perature o f the receiv in g stream b y 5F . B eca u se this is a W Q S , th ese criteria can he applied ai the ed ge o f the thermal m ix in g zone. In th e determ ination o f com p lian ce w ith the tem perature criteria o f AT, several variables m ust be obtained as described below . The fo llo w in g calculation deierm ines com pliance with ihe A5F. If the AT is g ie a te i than 5CF, the fa c ility is in n o n -c o m p lia n c e . A ll fa c ilitie s arc su b je ct to th e AT req u irem en t u n le ss th ere is nu upstream availab le for m easuring.
Compliance Determination with Mississippi River Temperature Cap Criteria:
M issouri W Q S tem perature criteria 110 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 3 1 (5 )(D )5 .] esta b lish es poin t sou rces d isch argin g to th e M ississip p i R iver sh a ll n o t c a u se o r con trib u te to the r e c e iv in g str e a m 's tem p eratu re in e x c e s s o f a m o u th ly tem p eratu re criteria The m e th o d o lo g y for the determ ination o f com p lian ce is sim ilar to the T,,,, for 9 0 F established above H ow ever, the fundam ental difference is the m onthly temperature not to be exceeded. Thus, ihe critena aie established per calendar month and per M ississippi River o n e. as follow s:
M onth
January February M arch A pril M ay June J u ly A u gust Septem ber O ctober Novem ber Decem ber
Mississippi Ri\ kk IIS G S Zone Temperatures
Zone 1a (Area A ) or Zone I B (Area B )
T ,, p in F
Temperature Deviation Td,, in F
Zone 2 (Area C)
T c,,, iu F
Temperature Deviation T ^ in eF
45
48
50
53
45
48
50
53
57
60
60
63
68
71
70
73
78
81
80
83
86
89
87
90
88
91
89
92
88
91
89
92
86
89
87
90
75
78
78
81
65
68
70
73
52
55
57
60
PartV. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 36 o f 65
Outfall #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
Area A = U SG S Z one 1A: D es M oines R iver to L ock and D am N o. 25. Area B = U SG S Zone IB: Lock and D am N o. 25 to Lock and D am N o. 26. Area C = U SG S Z one 2: L ock and D am N o. 26 to the M issouri-A rkansas state line.
Compliance Determination with Mississippi River Deviation Allowance Criteria:
C om p lian ce w ith d ev ia tio n a llo w a n c es are a tw o -step p r o c ess esta b lish ed at [1 0 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (5 )(D )5 ]. First, the fa cility c a lc u la te s the tem p eratu re at th e e d g e o f th e m ix in g z o n e [T emJ . I f th e c a lc u la te d tem p eratu re is b e lo w th e T cap, the fa c ility is in c o m p lia n ce . I f the ca lcu la ted tem p eratu re h as e x c e e d e d th e T ^p, th e n th e Tdev lim it is r e v ie w e d . S e e a b o v e tab le for tem perature d e v ia tio n a llo w a n c e s . T dev= T cap + 3 F . F or e x a m p le , a fa c ility lo c a te d in A rea C is d isc h a r g in g th eir c o o lin g w ater during the m o n th o f January, th eir T^p lim it w o u ld b e 5 0 F an d th eir T dcv lim it w o u ld b e 5 3 F . H ie T^p and T dev c a lc u la tio n s are id en tica l
(Temz)?h o w e v e r , the c o m p lia n c e p o in t (p erm it lim it) is d iffe re n t. T h e T dev is a lso c a lle d a tem p erature m a x im u m an d is n ev er to b e
exceeded.
S e c o n d ly , i f th e T cap h as b e e n e x c e e d e d , the fa c ility m u st th en d e term in e th e a m o u n t o f tim e th e T cap w a s e x c e e d e d . R e g a rd less i f
the
is b e in g e x c e e d e d or n ot, the tim e (in h ou rs) o t'T cap e x c e e d a n c e is still rep orted . T h e tim e d e v ia tio n a llo w a n c e , b a sed on
die U S G S Z one, provides a sp ecific aggregate o f hours per year a facility can ex ceed their m onth ly T^p lim it. T he site-specific
criteria for the M ississip p i R iv er a llo w s the perm ittee to e x c e e d their a p p licab le criteria eith er 1% o f th e year fo r Z on e 1A and
2A; and 5% o f the year for Z on e 1B. It has been determ ined this percent ex ceed a n ces allow ance should be tracked in hours for a
calendar year.
Z o n e 1A (A rea A ) and Z o n e 2 (A rea C ) is 1% = [ (3 6 5 )(2 4 )(0 .0 1 )] = 8 7 .6 hou rs (8 7 h ou rs and 3 6 m in u tes) a llo w ed per year. Zone IB (A rea B ) is 5% = [(365)(2 4 )(0 .0 5 )] = 438 hours allow ed per year. The facility is w ithin IB.
Tracking o f tim e used for percent tim e deviation allow ance, can b e captured and tracked via an effluent lim it in M oC W IS. A ny tim e a fa c ility e x c e e d s T cap th e tim e d e v ia tio n a llo w a n c e "c lo c k " is runn ing. F or e v e r y e p is o d e th e p erm ittee u s e s their a v a ila b le tim e, the operating perm it shall require the perm ittee subm it the tim e w ith their m onthly discharge m onitoring report (D M R ) to state th e y e x c e e d e d th eir T cap.
Pennit Record o f Tltermal Limitations:
The original N P D E S operating perm it w as issu ed to the S iou x E nergy Center (SEC ; then called the Siou x P ow er Plant) on O ctober 3, 1975 w ith therm al discharge lim itations o f 109 F. In D ecem ber o f 1981, the application for renewal stated the perm ittee could operate better i f the lim itations w ere in the form o f a heat rejection lim itation and requested 4 3 2 7 .0 xlO 6 Btu/hr. The subsequent perm it issu ed July 2 3 , 1982 rem oved the m axim um temperature in degrees Fahrenheit requirem ent and established the alternate efflu en t lim itation o f 4.33 x 109 Btu/hr. T he perm it w as reu ew ed M arch 28, 1986 and again July 31, 1987 w ith the sam e lim itations. In a public notice com m ent dated D ecem b er 2, 1992 from th e perm ittee, they requested the thermal discharge lim itation be increased by 6% to allo w the u se o f a n ew m ethod o f estim ating the therm al discharge from the plant. In the perm it issued February 4 ,1 9 9 4 , the lim it w as again changed, and elevated to 4 .6 x 109 Btu/hr to allow for the new calculation as the w ater quality based effluent lim it, w as founded on a revised m eans o f calculating heat rejection from the plant electrical load. A ccordin g to a w ater quality review' sheet, the departm ent revised the lim itations, this tim e because o f "current m ixing zone regulations". This equation incorporated m ixing for the thermal discharge The new penn it lim it applied on January 15, 1999 was 5 .5 0 x 109 Btu/hr as it currently stands as th e interim lim itation before the final efflu en t lim itations based on w ater quality standards are established in this perm it.
Prior to this perm it, and in th e interim , th e fa cility is m ain ta in in g VVQS for AT b y u sin g th e fo llo w in g calculation:
H = C p*p*Q *A T
W here:
H = BTU/hr
Cp = specific heat = 1 B T U /lbF {water}
p = den sity = 8 .3 4 5 lb /g a l = 6 2 .4 2 9 lb/Tr {w ater}
Q = flow rate gal/hr or gal/m in * 6 0 min/hr
AT = change or difference in temperature
R e-arranging to calcu late AT from B T U and flow : AT = H / [C p * p * Q1 and r ev isin g the un its {and restating d en sity in lbs/cu fit, w ith 1 cu ft = 7 .4 8 1 ga l} is:
AT (F) = [H (B B T U /h r) * 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 B T U /B B T U ] - 6 2 .4 2 9 (lb/cu ft) Q (cu ft/sec) * 3 6 0 0 (sec/hr)* 1 (B T U / lb F)
Thus an edge o f m ixin g zone tem perature increase can b e calculated from: Q /4 or Q *0.25 {allow ing for a m ixin g zon e containing 25% o f the stream flow } (in cfs or cu ft/sec) H R {a s rep o rted in th e D M R } (in B B T U /h r or B T U *"10 9) (H R = h ea t reje ctio n )
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 37 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfall 001: Once-Through Cooling Water
A n edge o f m ixin g zone river temperature can then be calculated: T e a = AT + am bient river T {or intake T to use D M R data}
Exam ple: 7Q 10 = 23,385 C FS = /4 = M ixing = 6,846.5 CFS H R = 5.5 x 109 BTU /hr = 5,500,000,000 BTU /hr
A T F = 5 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 B T U - [ ( 6 2 .4 2 9 lb /ft3) * (6 ,8 4 6 .5 ft3/ s e c {river d is c h a r g e } ) * ( 3 6 0 0 sec/h r) * (I B T U /lb F )]
= 5,500,000,000 B T U + 1,538,712,535
= 3 .5 7 4 4 1 6 8 4 2 = AT = ~ 3 .6 F at the edge o f the m ixin g zone. The exam ple sh o w s the AT o f the facility at lo w flo w conditions. W hen the facility is reporting the m axim um heat rejection, the facility changes the temperature o f the discharge by about 3.6 F. Unfortunately, the above equation does not ensure com pliance w ith Tww.
In A pril 2 0 0 9 , the departm ent w rote and finalized a w h ite paper describing h o w perm it w riters should detennine com pliance with thermal lim itations when m ixin g considerations are present, as is the m ethod used above dem onstrates. Until the white paper was finalized, the departm ent had b een searching for an effectiv e m ethod to im plem ent w ater quality standards for thenual discharges to stream s afforded m ixin g in perm its. T his perm it im p lem en ts the calculations the facility m ust perform to derive perm it com pliance.
Determination o f Schedule o f Compliance:
The facility w ill h ave tw o years from date o f issu ance to m eet the new w ater quality based temperature requirem ents. T o com ply with the new m ethod o f calculating thermal discharge, the facility has indicated they require tim e to develop, im plem ent, and test new thermal gauges both in stream and in the plant, and n ew com puter softw are w hich w ill allow them to m anage the thermal discharge o f the facility on a m inute-by-m inute basis. U n til the n ew softw are is running, the facility has no w ay to continuously track tem p eratu re at th e e d g e o f the m ix in g z o n e , w h ic h in turn, ca n n o t a ls o track m in u te s o f e x c e e d a n c e s o f th e T dcv, T h e department has ch o sen to allo w time for these upgrades to occur before final lim itations are instituted, just as the department w ould allow a P O T W tim e to upgrade the facility for a pollutant such as am m onia prior to new m ore restrictive lim itations being enacted.
The previous perm it special condition C .4.(a) enacted in A pril 2 0 0 4 noted "water temperatures and temperature differentials sp ecified in M issouri w ater quality standards shall be m et." T his special condition, w h ile on the surface, required the perm ittee not violate W Q S , the perm ittee w a s not provided w ith a basis to determ ine com p lian ce w ith W Q S. A s indicated above, the basis for com pliance w as determ ined in 2 0 0 9 w hen the departm ent published a thermal com pliance w hite paper.
T e c h n o l o g y B a s e d E f f l u e n t L i m i t a t i o n C o n s i d e r .4 t i o n s f o r T h e r m a l D i s c h h i g e s : B est A vailable T ech n ology E conom ically A chievable (B A T o r B T A ) - S ec 304(b X 2) o f the C W A 1.1.1.3
In general, B A T effluent lim itations guid elin es represent the best eco n o m ica lly achievab le perform ance o f plants in the industrial subcategory or category. T he factors considered in assessin g B A T include the cost o f achieving B A T effluent reductions, the age o f equipm ent and facility involved , the process(es) em ployed , potential process changes, and non-w ater quality environm ental im p a cts, in c lu d in g e n e r g y req u irem en ts. T h e A g e n c y reta in s c o n sid e r a b le d isc r e tio n in a s s ig n in g tine w e ig h t to b e affo rd ed th ese factors. U n lik e B P T lim ita tio n s, B A T lim ita tio n s m a y b e b a s e d o n e fflu e n t r ed u c tio n s a ttain ab le th rou gh c h a n g e s in a fa c ility 's p rocesses and operations. A s w ith B P T , w here ex istin g perform ance is un iform ly inadequate, B A T m ay require a higher level o f perform ance than is currently being achieved based on tech nology transferred from a different subcategory or category. B A T may be based upon process changes or internal controls, even w h en such tech n ologies are not com m on industry practice.
T he departm ent m ust con sid er six factors w h en setting ca se-b y -ca se lim itation s pursuant to 40 C F R 125.3. T h ese are found under B A T at 40 CFR 125.3(d )(3).
T he age o f the equipm ent The process em ployed T he engineering aspects o f the application o f various control techniques Process changes T he cost o f achieving such effluent reduction N on-w ater quality environm ental im pact (including energy requirem ents)
The inform ation b elo w w as provided by the facility. The analysis w as undertaken b y the departm ent to assess a case-by-case te c h n o lo g y b a sed e fflu e n t lim ita tio n ( "T B E L " ) for th erm al d isc h a r g e s fro m th e S io u x E n erg y C en ter (S E C , or the "fa c ility ").
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 38 o f 65
Outfall #001: Onoe-Through Cooling Water
1. Age of Equipment
The fa cility lias tw o generating units w ith a net capability o f 9 8 6 m egaw atts (M W ). T he first unit started operating in 1967 and the sec o n d in 1968. T h e typical annual (g ro ss) generation ranges from four to six m illio n m egaw att hours (4 ,9 0 0 ,0 0 0 to 5,500,000 M W H R for 2013-2015). T he facility w as d esigned as a base load plant w ith once-through co o lin g . T he original N P D E S operating permit w as issued
on O ctober 3, 1975. See Part I Facility Information; Outfall #001; Pennit Record o f Thermal Limitations.
T h e f a c ilit y 's c o o lin g w a ter in tak e structure w a s co n stru cted co n cu rren tly w ith th e u n its and is loca ted a lo n g the M is sissip p i R iver shoreline. T he intake structure consists o f tw o cells, one for each unit. W ithin each cell are 2 bays w hich each contain a 10foot w ide vertical conventional traveling screen for a total o f four traveling screens for the facility. There is an eleven foot w ide by 16.5 foot high opening to each bay. At the m outh o f the openin g are steel trash racks m ade o f bars w ith 2.625 inch spacing. The traveling screens h ave 3/8 inch w o v en w ire m esh and are operated based on either m anual tim er settings or differential pressure across the screens (w hich are affected b y debris loading). C ooling w ater is passed through condensers and other heat exchangers and is discharged to the M ississippi River. The water from each o f the tw o units is discharged through a ten foot diam eter pipe leading to a single seal w ell, where the water flow s over a w eir into an approxim ately 2 2 0 0 foot lon g discharge that em p ties into the R iver ju st upstream o f D resser Island.. A w arm ing line recirculates a portion o f the heated w ater from the seal w ell back to the intake to prevent ice buildup in the winter. The intake structure w as originally designed to m axim ally w ithdraw 6 72 m illion gallon s per day (M G D ) o f water. A s noted in the 2 0 0 8 ren ew al application, all four pum ps w ere replaced (w ith com p letion in 2 0 0 9 ) and the revised withdrawal rate is up to approxim ately 749 M G D . For a three year period ending in D ecem ber 2015, the average Outfall #001 discharge flow w as 637 MGD.
2. Process Employed
T he current process em ployed is once-tlirough cooling. T he coolin g w ater intake structure is located at the end o f a 1,600foot long intake canal that extends south o f the M ississip p i River. It consists o f tw o cells, one for each unit. W ithin each cell are 2 bays containing a 10 foot w id e vertical con ven tion al traveling screen for a total o f four traveling screens for the entire intake. T h ere is a n 11 fo o t w id e b y 16.5 fo o t h ig h o p e n in g to e a ch b ay. A t th e m ou th , th ere are s te e l trash rack s m ad e o f bars w ith 2 .6 2 5 inch spacing. The heated w ater from each o f the tw o units is discharged through a ten foot diam eter pipe leading to a single seal w ell, w here the w ater flo w s over a w eir into an approxim ately 2 2 0 0 foot long discharge channel that em pties into the River ju st upstream o f D resser Island. A w arm ing line recirculates a portion o f the heated w ater from the seal w ell back to the intake to prevent ice buildup in the w inter. O n ce through c o o lin g p rovid es the best p ow er plant e fficien cy o f the alternatives as the source water tends to be the low est temperature heat sink available for m ost o f the year. B elo w in figure 2 1 is a diagram o f how once through cooling works.
3. Engineering Aspects and Application Of Various Types Of Control Techniques
W hile the p oten tially availab le c o o lin g tech n o lo g ies that m ay b e em p loyed at any g iv en fa cility are generally w ell established, their suitability and su ccessfu l application at ind ividu al facilities is strongly dependent on the site sp ecific conditions associated with each facility. In figure 3 below , the m ost com m on technologies are presented.
PartV. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 39 of 65
Outfall #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
O nce-through coolin g system s take w ater from nearby sources, such as the M ississip p i R iver, circulate it through pip es to absorb heat from the steam in system s called condensers, and discharge the then warm er water to the local source. Once-through system s w ere initially the m ost co m m o n c o o lin g tech n o lo g y b ecau se o f their sim p licity, effic ie n c y , lo w cost, and the possib ility o f siting pow er plants in places w ith abundant supplies o f coolin g water. S ee figure 2 above for h o w a once-through cooling system operates. C oolin g ponds typically con sist o f artificially constructed b od ies o f w ater w h ich m ay be created b y dam m ing a natural stream, utilizing an existin g im pounded body o f water, or creating a n ew im poundm ent. T he condenser water is fed into the co o lin g pond or lake, co o led through evaporation and then typically recycled to the condenser. W hile such ponds and lakes are established tech n ologies at M issouri p ow er plants, they have not b een established for pow er plants located in the M issouri and M ississip pi R iver floodplains. Figure 4 below is an exam ple o f h o w a coolin g pond w orks.2
precipitation & stormwater runoff
The m ost com m on option available for replacing a once-through coolin g system is a closed cycle cooling system (w et or dry). W et closed cycle co o lin g system s are closed -loop system s designed to m inim ize the am ount o f water withdrawn from the river. In a w et clo sed cy cle co o lin g system , con d en ser water still exch an ges heat w ith w ater in a heat exchanger; h ow ever the coolin g w ater is recycled b etw een a co o lin g tow er and a heat exchanger. In this system , the co o lin g water is cooled by evaporating a percentage o f the w ater to the environm ent and requires m ake-up water to account for the consum ed water. In the case o f the Siou x Energy Center, the m ake-up water w ould com e from the M ississippi River. W et closed cycle cooling system s consu m e m uch m ore w ater than once-through co o lin g system s as the entire energy exch ange is through evaporation o f the water: a consum ptive use;-how ever w et closed c y cle coolin g system s w ithdraw m uch less w ater than once through coolin g system s. W et closed cy cle coolin g system s can use natural draft or m echanical draff to accom p lish coolin g. Figure 5 b elow is a wet closed cycle cooling tow er sy stem /
D ry c lo sed cy cle co o lin g sy stem s rely on air flo w in c o o lin g tow ers rather than w ater to co o l the steam produced during electrical generation. Steam from the boiler is routed through a heat exchanger. A ir is b low n across the heat exchanger to condense the steam back into liquid, w hich is then returned to the boiler and is reused. Plants using dry coolin g withdraw and consu m e a sm all am ount o f w ater to m aintain and clean the boiler, in clu d in g rep lacing boiler w ater lost through evaporation. D ry coolin g has a higher capital co st than w et coolin g, red uces the overall efficien cy o f a p ow er plant, and does not operate effectively
PartV. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 40 o f 65
OutfalJ #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
at h ig h tem p eratu res. In sta lla tio n o f d ry c o o lin g is m o re c o m m o n o n n e w p la n ts. A s a p o te n tia l retrofit to an e x is tin g plant, this option presents difficulties. E xistin g plants originally d esign ed for once-through co o lin g are equipped with older turbines with m uch m ore stringent lim itations on exhaust pressure than th ose for m od em turbines d esigned for use w ith dry cooling. Figure 6 b elo w is a dry coolin g system .'1
H ybrid coolin g system s are a com bination o f w et and dry co o lin g system s. T h ese system s com bine tw o established cooling processes, uses the advantages o f dry and w et coolin g b y reducing water consum ption com pared to wet cooling, and does not require an air co o led condenser as large as m ay oth erw ise be needed. Figure 7 b elo w is a hybrid co o led system .5
Tuffciss
M echanical C hillers operate w ith heat exchangers and pum ps to control the temperature o f the discharge. M echanical chillers w ork best w hen the temperature reduction and volu m e is low er than that w h ich is discharged from the S iou x Energy Center. H elper coolin g system s transfer heat directly to the atm osphere and supplem ent an open-cycle cooling system before discharge to the receiv in g water. T his cou ld perhaps be accom p lish ed , at least con cep tu ally, via routing o f the p lan t's heated effluent (before discharge) through a coolin g tow er or a coolin g pond. Figure 8 b elo w is a helper coolin g tow er system 0
4. Process Changes The consideration o f process changes inclu des changes at the existin g facility that could b e m odified to im prove the system . This includes changes from operations and m aintenance to a com p lete retrofit o f the entire system . O nce-through c o o lin g is the tech n o lo g y currently in u se. O nce-through system s are less ex p en siv e to build than clo sed cy cle system s, w h ich have a greater infrastructure requirem ent (e.g ., construction o f a co o lin g tow er or coolin g pond). O nce-through system s consum e less w ater than clo sed cycle coolin g system s. A lthough once-through co o lin g system s w ithdraw a greater am ount o f water, essen tially all o f it is returned to the w ater source. C oolin g ponds are an estab lish ed tech n ology in M issouri for plants located in w atersheds w ith sm all stream s that can be dam m ed to create a c o o lin g p on d, su ch as in S p rin gfield o r outsid e M ontrose, M O . Such is not the ca se in the M ississip p i River floodplain. The M ississippi R iver is controlled b y the U S A rm y Corps o f E ngineers and establishm ent o f a dedicated cooling pond w ithin the R iver w ould be incom patible w ith other u ses including navigation and flood control. Other than the M ississippi and M issouri R ivers, there are n o other stream s located near the p ow er plant large enough to support a cooling pond necessary to serv e S io u x 's w a ter n e e d s. C rea tio n o f a c o o lin g p o n d w o u ld req u ire retrofittin g th e e x is tin g p la n ts p ip in g , co n trols, and operations. Additional perm itting w ould be required from the departm ent's W ater R esou rces Center and the U S Corps o f Engineers 4 01/404 program. W ater requirem ents for pond cooling system s are typically higher than tower system s and are m uch
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 41 of 65
Outfall 001: Onoc-Through Cooling Water
m ore variable, as they can b e operated as system s that resem ble recirculating clo sed system and a once-through system w hich im pacts the w ater withdraw al and consum ption rates,
C losed cycle coolin g tow er recirculating system s only w ithdraw enough w ater needed to m aintain the required water level o f the system , but they consu m e w ater through evaporation. T o build a w et or hybrid co o lin g system , a water treatment plant would need to b e constructed to clean the M ississip p i R iver w ater to be used and recirculated through the plant. T he retrofit installation o f clo sed -cy c le c o o lin g at a plant o rigin ally built w ith on ce-th rou gh c o o lin g is com p lex. It is not sim ply a m atter o f installin g a coolin g tow er in the existing circulating water system for several reasons. O ften the plan is to keep the existing condenser, cir cu la tin g w ater flow ' rate, an d a s m u c h o f th e e x is t in g cir cu la tin g W'ater p u m p s, lin e s , an d in ta k e /d isc h a r g e structure as p o s sib le unchanged. The site-specific considerations are dependent on a num ber o f variables, including:
1. A su itab le lo ca tio n w ith en o u g h room for th e tow'er m ust b e foun d on or adjacent to th e plant site. T h is m ay p la ce the tow er far from the turbine hall and require very long circulating w ater lines. The longer the distance, the higher con su m p tion o f e n erg y required to rep len ish the to w ers w ith m akeup w'ater.
2. The discharge head from the circulating w ater pum p m ust be increased in order to get the water to the top o f the cooling tow er and to overcom e any additional head loss in the new circulating w ater lines
3. This additional head m ay b e obtained by replacing or m od ifyin g the existin g pum p to obtain higher discharge head. This w ou ld in v o lv e divertin g the con d en ser d isch a rg e flo w from its current route, in sta llin g a new' lin e to the co o lin g tow'er and a n ew return line back to the existin g intake. A d dition ally, new m ake-up and blow d ow n lines and pum ps w ould need to be installed as described above for n ew installations.
4. The existin g inlet and discharge structures w ill have b een designed for m uch higher flow s than w ill be experienced with the clo sed -cy cle system . T his m ay lead to silting or fouling and w ill require either th ey be m odified to restrict the flow area or be replaced w ith sm aller, m ore suitable structures.
5. W ith this approach, the pressure in the condenser w ater boxes and any rem aining discharge lines from the existing condenser w ill be subject to m uch higher pressure. This m ay require reinforcem ent or replacem ent in order to avoid leakage or dam age.
6. W et and hybrid c o o lin g sy stem s introduce additional ch em ica ls to the sy stem to p reven t fou lin g and scalin g o f the system .
7. W hile heated water discharges w ould decrease, additional heat w ould be released to the atmosphere. M echanical chillers operate w ith heat exchangers and pum ps to control the tem perature o f the discharge. M echanical chillers w ork best w h en the tem perature reduction and volu m e is low er than w hat is discharged from Siou x Energy Center. Corrosion protection chem icals w ou ld also be required. T he installation o f m echanical ch illis w ou ld require energy to operate, still have the large w ithdraw al o f w ater from the river and w ou ld transfer the heat from the water to the atm osphere. A dditional concerns with c lo g g in g and flo o d in g d u e th e M is s is s ip p i R iv e r 's o p e r a tio n an d flo w . H elper coolin g system s supplem ent an op en -cycle coolin g system by rem oving a portion o f the heat energy discharged in a p la n t's e fflu e n t and tran sferrin g it d ir e c tly to th e a tm o sp h e re . A m e r e n e stim a te d th e c o st o f c o n str u c tin g a h elp er c o o lin g to w e r at L abadie and proportionally, w o u ld estim ate the c o st at S io u x to b e app roxim ately S93 m illio n p er unit. T he construction o f a helper co o lin g tow er, pond, spray m od u les, or other technique w ill still have the im pact to aquatic life on the intake structure with im p in gem en t and entrainm ent, it w ill still h a v e w ater w ith h ig h tem perature b e in g d isch arged , it w ill require retrofits to the ex istin g sy stem resu ltin g in a lo s s o f en ergy p rod u ction and it w ill introduce add ition al c h e m ic a ls to the p rocess to preven t fou lin g and scaling. Under C W A 3 1 6(b) requirem ents, the facility is required to evaluate the installation o f closed cycle coolin g for reductions to the im pingem ent and entrainm ent in the intake structure; h ow ever the installation o f the closed cy cle system w ould address the d isch a rg e o f h ea ted w ater b a c k to th e M is s is s ip p i R iv e r as w e ll.5*
5. Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts Including Energy Requirements
A ll coolin g technologies have non-w ater quality environm ental im pacts, including im pacts to energy requirem ents. B ecause im pacts at the Sioux Energy C enter w ould entail a retrofit, the non-w ater quality im pacts w ould include changes to the existing system , w hich could result in energy production loss. O nce-through c o o lin g is the ex istin g in stalled tech n o lo g y . N on -w ater quality im pacts inclu de the im pact o f the intake and the discharge on aquatic com m unities. Intake im pacts are to b e evaluated under C W A S ection 316(b). C ooling pond construction w ou ld entail non-w ater quality and water quality im pacts. Construction o f a coolin g pond would require retrofitting the existin g facility, construction o f a pond, w h ich w ould require the rem oval o f existin g farmland and flood control structures. C lo s e d -c y c le c o o lin g tow 'er c o n str u c tio n w o u ld req uire ad d itio n a l land a c q u isitio n w h ic h w o u ld rem o v e farm land fro m u se. A d d itio n a lly , c o o lin g to w e r c o n str u c tio n W'ould req u ire retro fittin g o f th e in tak e structure and plant op era tio n s. O ther an ticip ated im pacts in clu d e the n ecessity to b u ild a w ater treatm ent p lan t to clean the w'ater for u sa g e. B u ild in g a w ater treatm ent plant sim ilar to wliat is at A m eren C a lla w a y w o u ld introduce ad d ition al w'aste stream s and p ollutan ts to be han dled and potentially discharged. C ooling tow er retrofits w ill require substantial engineering, d esign and construction, including replacem ent o f condensers. C ooling tow er installations w ould b e anticipated to increase parasitic load requirem ents and decrease overall Sioux Energy Center efficiency. C losed cy cle co o lin g tow ers m ay further require replacem ent o f turbines and other equipment, plus c h a n g e s in p ip in g and h a n d lin g m e th o d s o f w a s te str ea m s. A retrofitted c o o lin g s y s te m o f e ith er the w e t or d ty typ e w o u ld h a v e a
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 42 o f 65
Outfall 001: Oncc-Through Cooling Water
deleterious effect on the plant's net heat rate and generating efficien cy. I f a w et co o lin g system , the pow er requirem ents w ill be higher than the current pum ping pow er requirem ents for the once-through system . T his pow er is used for the additional circulating pum ps and for the co o lin g tow er fans and represents p ow er that m ust be generated but cannot be sold. A lso , the plant w ill operate at a higher backpressure and therefore a higher heat rate w ith closed cy cle cooling, w hich is more pronounced for a dry system than for a w et system . C losed cycle cooling w ould also require changes in outages o f pow er from once every three years currently to a m ore frequent for cleaning and m aintenance. F inally, closed c y cle coolin g w ould increase the heat released to the atm osphere and a potential increase in greenhouse gases. M echanical chillers operate w ith heat exchangers and pum ps to control the temperature o f the discharge. Corrosion protection chem icals w ould be required and w ou ld entail en ergy to operate. M echanical chillers w ou ld also include large river water withdraw als and the transfer the heat from processed w ater to the atm osphere. W hile m echanical chillers are som etim es used elsew here in the M id w est, the u sage at such a large p ow er plant (su ch as the Labadie E nergy C enter) on a large river subject to Corps o f E ngineers jurisdiction, fluctuating river lev e ls and flood in g w ou ld lim it th e effectiven ess o f this tech nology. H elper co o lin g system s construction w ou ld have m any o f the sim ilar non-w ater quality im pacts as a full closed cycle cooling system , along w ith the im pacts o f once-through cooling.
6. Total Cost Of Application Of Technology In Relation To Reduction In Effluent
The total cost o f the application o f the tech n ology needs to evaluate the costs o f the benefits o f the reduction in the effluent, the social benefits, the capital and construction costs, the costs in loss generation and electricity to sale, and the overall environm ental im pact. T h e overall environ m en tal c o st n eed s to in clu d e the c o st o f additional ch e m ic a ls, im p acts to w aste stream s b ein g lxandled, and im pacts to the air quality. O nce through coolin g is the installed technology at the facility. C ooling pond: Space available and the M ississip pi R iver preclude this as a viable tech nology for the Sioux Energy Center. C o o lin g tow ers: W h ile the in stallation o f c lo s e d c y c le c o o lin g w o u ld red uce the d isch arge o f heat load into the water, it w o u ld in crease the c o n su m p tio n o f water; it w ou ld h a v e h ig h capital c o sts and en tail the add ition o f n e w ch em icals, and a new' water treatm ent plant. The costs o f these factors m ust be included to determ ine the total cost o f a com plete plant cooling system . M echanical Chillers: M echanical chillers operate w ith heat exchangers and pum ps to control the temperature o f the discharge. C orrosion protection chem icals w ould also be required. The installation o f m echanical chillers w ould require energy to operate, still have the large withdraw al o f water from the river, w ou ld transfer the heat from the water to the atm osphere, additional concerns with clogging, and flooding due the M ississippi R iver's adjacency. H elper coolin g system s: A m eren previously extrapolated the cost o f constructing a helper cooling tow er at Sioux o f $93 m illion (based on estim ates d evelop ed for L abadie). T he construction o f a helper co o lin g system w ou ld still im pact aquatic life via the intake structure, discharge heated water, require retrofits to the existin g system resulting in a loss o f net energy production, introduce additional ch em icals to the process to prevent fo u lin g and scalin g, and put m ore heat into the atm osphere. At the Brayton Point P ow er Plant, w h ich is 1 5 0 0 M W plant (app roxim ately fifty percent larger), the construction cost estim ate from 2002 w as $98 .9 m illion, w ith an estim ated annual m aintenance costs are $ 3 0 0 ,0 0 0 per year. In addition, the Brayton Point estim ated com bined lost annual generation to be 152,148 M W -hr/year. T his con sists o f 112,875 M W -hr/yr o ff additional auxiliary pow er consum ption and 39,2 7 5 M W -hr/yr o f steam turbm e operating penalties.7
7. Reasonableness Of The Cost Of The Application Of Technology And The Removal Of Effluent
The coolin g tech nologies are established tech nologies throughout the country; how ever the construction and establishm ent o f the tech nology at the S iou x E nergy Center requires a detailed engineering evaluation. T he reasonableness o f the application o f the tech nology needs to account for the ability o f the tech n ology to be constructed and u sed on site and to produce a benefit o f rem oving the param eter o f concern (heat). T he installation o f the tech n ology (or a m ix thereof) m ust be reasonable, m that the solution is logical. O nce-through coolin g is the established and existin g tech nology at the Sioux Energy' Center. O nce-through cooling has im pacts on thermal discharge to the M ississip pi R iver and im pacts on im pingem ent and entrainm ent at the intake. W hile oncetlirough c o o lin g w ithd raw s h igh v o lu m es o f M ississip p i R iver w ater, it returns n early all o f th ose w ithdraw als to the river. A coolin g pond is not a reasonable alternative for the S iou x E nergy Center as the location is not appropriate and the heat w ould still be discharged to the environm ent, just w ou ld b e recirculated tlirough the pond. R em oval o f additional farm land from productive use and ch an ges in the flo o d controls in St. Charles C ou nty w ou ld not b e a supported alternative. C losed cycle coolin g tow ers are an established tech nology that m ay be feasible at the Sioux E nergy Center. Siting conditions m ust be considered. T he installation o f closed cycle coolin g m ay reduce the generating capacity o f the facility by 4% or more. W ith clo sed cycle coolin g, m ore water w ould be consum ed in the process, a water treatment plant w ould need constructed to clean the w ater to the level for recirculating, ch em icals w ou ld b e required to prevent fouling and scalin g in the tow ers. C losed cycle cooling m ay require replacem ent o f turbines and other equipm ent, plus changes in piping and handling m ethods o f w aste stream s. C losed c y cle co o lin g w ou ld also require changes in outages o f pow er from on ce every three years currently to a m ore frequent for clean in g and m aintenance. C lo sed cy cle c o o lin g w ou ld further increase the heal released to the atm osphere and a potential increase in greenhouse gases. M echanical chillers operate w ith heat exchangers and pum ps to control the tem perature o f the discharge. Corrosion protection chem icals w ou ld also be required. T h e installation o f m echanical ch illers w ou ld require energy to operate, still have the large
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 43 of 65
Outfall 001: Once-Through Cooling Water
w ithdraw al o f w ater from the river, w ou ld transfer the heat from the w ater to the atm osphere, addition o f concerns w ith cloggin g and flo o d in g d u e the M is s is s ip p i R iv e r 's o p e r a tio n an d flo w . C o n ce rn s c ite d b y th e C arroll C o u n ty , M arylan d w ith u sin g m echanical chillers include air pollution concerns, w ater qu ality such as u sage o f b iocid es, and n oise pollution. H elper c o o lin g sy stem s w o u ld have the im pacts o f both clo sed c y cle c o o lin g sy stem and the on ce through system . W h ile it w ould reduce the im pact o f heat into the M ississip p i R iver, it w ou ld still require the treatment at the water treatment plant, retrofitting o f the system to handle at least partial flo w through a coolin g tow er for recirculation. Additional chem icals to prevent fo u lin g and sc a lin g in the tow er. A m eren e stim a tes it w o u ld c o st ap p roxim ately S 93 m illio n to construct a sin gle helper coolin g tow er at Sioux. At Brayton Point, there w as a high energy penalty w ith the installation o f a helper coolin g tow er w ith the loss o f annual generation o f 152,148 M W -hr/year.8 A s part o f the renew al and the 3 1 6 (b ) requirem ents, changes to the intake structure are required and one option required for evaluation is the installation o f closed cycle cooling.
8. Comparison Of Cost And Level Of Reduction
O nce-through co o lin g is the existin g tech n ology in use. T his is what S iou x E nergy Center was constructed w ith and the cost is cost to continue operating and m aintaining the system . T he level o f reduction is what the thermal studies o f the 1970s set as the operating con d ition s is the lev e l o f reduction. Under the n ew 31 6 (b ) intake structure rule, the facility w ill face upgrades to reduce the num ber o f aquatic larval and fish b ein g im p in ged and entrained on the intake structure. C lo sed cy cle co o lin g tow ers w ou ld reduce the discharge o f heat load into the w ater, but it w ou ld increase the consum ption o f water, it w ou ld have high capital costs, addition o f new ch em icals, and a n ew water treatment plant. There are additional costs w h ich m ust b e inclu ded to determ ine the total c o st o f the w et c o o lin g tow er as part o f a co m p lete plant c o o lin g system . R etrofitting a facility originally designed for once-through coolin g to a recirculating coolin g system w ill result in reduced pow er output from the additional equipm ent needing to be ran, such as pum ps and fans, and from the lo ss o f efficien cy because the co o lin g w ater is gen erally w an n er com in g back from a c o o lin g tow er than it is from the b od y o f water u sed b y a once-through cooling system . A ccordingly, the energy penalty o f retrofitting to a recirculating co o lin g system is the greatest w hen the pow er grid is strained the m ost, during period s o f p ea k sum m er electric dem and. T he loss o f e ffic ie n c y and generation capacity m eans le s s e le c tr ic ity is a v a ila b le to m e e t d em a n d o r to se r v e as r elia b le r e s e r v e c a p a c ity .9,10' lu 12 M echanical C hillers: T he C ity o f C orvallis, O regon estim ated the cost to install m echanical chillers for temperature co m p lia n ce for 11 M O D w o u ld b e S 3 5 .1 m illio n in 2 0 0 8 . M u ltip ly in g th is c o st to the 7 4 9 M O D o f S io u x disch arge, the cost w ould b e S2.4 billion (749M G D /11M G D *$35.1M ). For a 500 M W com bined cy cle greenfield plant, the cost estim ate w as S445 m illio n in 2 0 0 3 , s o the c o st at S io u x at a m in im u m w o u ld b e ap p roxim ately S 8 9 0 m illio n , i f it w as a green field site plu s inflation , retrofitting the existin g system and cost o f service increases over the last 12 years ($445M *2). T he installation o f m echanical chillers w ou ld require energy to operate, still have the large w ithdraw al o f w ater from the river, w ou ld transfer the heat from the water to the atm osphere, addition o f concerns w ith clo g g in g and flo o d in g due the M ississip p i R iver's operation and flow . C oncerns cited b y the Carroll C ounty, M aryland w ith u sin g m ech anical ch illers include air p ollu tion concerns, w ater quality such a s tu rb id ity and u s a g e o f b io c id e s , and n o is e p o llu tio n .1'' 9*14 H elper coolin g system s operate in com bination o f once-through coolin g and the closed cy cle coolin g to reduce the overall heat load to the river. A m eren estim ated the co st o f constructing a sin gle helper coolin g tow er at S iou x o f $93 m illion. The construction o f a helper coolin g tow er w ill still have the im pact to aquatic life on the intake structure w ith im pingem ent and entrainm ent, it w ill still h a v e w ater w ith e le v a te d tem perature b e in g d isch arged , it w ill require retrofits to the ex istin g system resu ltin g in a lo s s o f en erg y prod u ction , it w ill introduce ad d ition al ch em ica ls to the p r o c ess to prevent fou lin g and scalin g, it w ill put m ore heat into the atm osphere. A t the B rayton Point P ow er Plant, w h ich is 1500 M W plant (approxim ately 50% larger than Sioux), the construction cost estim ate from 2 0 0 2 was $ 9 8 .9 m illion , w ith an estim ated annual m aintenance costs are $3 0 0 ,0 0 0 per year. In addition, the B rayton P oin t estim ated com bined lo st annual generation to be 152,148 M W -hr/year. T his consists o f 112,875 M W -hr/yr o f f additional auxiliary pow er consum ption and 39,275 M W -hi/yr o f steam turbine operating penalties.
9. Cost Of Achieving Effluent Reduction
T he costs associated w ith installation o f clo sed cy cle co o lin g to replace an existin g once through coolin g system are substantial. A com preh en sive evaluation o f such costs w as com p leted by M aulbetsch C on su lting in Septem ber 2010.15 That report d evelop ed "an estim ate o f the national co st o f retrofitting w ith clo sed -cy cle co o lin g system s all electric pow er plants w hich had b e e n c la s sifie d as "P h ase II fa c ilitie s" under S e c tio n 3 1 6 (b ) o f the C lean W ater A c t." W h ile the im p etu s for the M au lb etsch report was an evaluation o f tech nologies w hich m ight achieve com pliance w ith Section 3 1 6(b) o f the C lean W ater A ct (i.e., requirem ents governing the intake side o f the p ow er plant co o lin g w ater p rocess), m any o f the report findings are equally applicable to evaluation o f te ch n o lo g ie s p o ssib ly ach ievin g com p lian ce w ith S ectio n 3 1 6(a) (i.e ., requirem ents governing the d ischarge sid e o f the p o w er plan t c o o lin g w ater p r o c ess), and are o f c o n se q u en ce to tire d erivation o f a te ch n o lo g y b a sed efflu en t lim itation in this instance. In its consideration o f over 4 0 0 pow er plants (4 0 4 fossil plants and 4 0 nuclear plants), M aulbetsch found the follow ing:
Part V. Effluent lim its Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 44 of 65
Outfall #001: Once-Through Cooling Water
Plant Type
Nuclear Fossil
Capacity (MW)
61,444 265,592
Capital Cost (MMS)
19,140 46.020
Downtime Cost (MMS)
16,955 14,316
Total Capital + Downtime Cost (MMS)
36,095 60,336
Total Capital-;-Downtime Cost (MMS per MW)
0.587 0.227
A pplying the lesser o f the above cost estim ates to the facility reveals a capital plus dow ntim e cost estim ate in the range o f $ 2 2 3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 w o u ld b e in cu rred d u e to th e in sta lla tio n o f a c lo s e d c y c le c o o lin g sy s te m . O f c o u r se , site sp e c ific c o n d itio n s at Sioux m ay result in an actual cost greater than this. M aulbetsch further evaluated the net present value o f the additional annual operating and penalty costs w ould be incurred by a once through coolin g facility retrofitted to install closed cycle cooling, and found the follow ing:
P lant T ype
N u clear F o ssil
A n n u a l O p e r a t in g P o w e r (M M $ ) 220 449
A n n u a l H ea t R ate P e n a l t y (M M S ) 359 158
N et P r esen t V alu e A n n u a l + In it ia l C o s t s (M M S ) 4 0 ,1 6 2 6 4 ,6 0 0
N et Pr esen t V alue (M M S p e r M W ) 0 .6 5 4 0 .2 4 3
C onsidering th ese annual co sts in addition to the initial costs, results in a total net present value cost o f $ 2 4 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 . A m eren independently authorized com pletion o f a prelim inary assessm ent o f the cost o f installing closed loop cooling at its Labadie E nergy Center. T he assessm ent found installation o f rectangular m ech anical draft co o lin g tow ers w ou ld incur an estim ated initial capital co st o f approxim ately $ 3 9 7 M . Installation o f natural draft coolin g tow ers w as estim ated to cost $456M . B y extrapolation to Sioux, these estim ates w ou ld be $ 159 M and $182 M respectively. N ote these costs represent initial costs o n ly and do not include p lu m e abatem ent (to elim inate icing potential and aesthetic issu es) associated w ith m echanical draft towers. C onsequently, they are com parable to the M aulbetsch cost estim ates cited above. A cost estim ate for installation o f o n ce through c o o lin g has b een prepared for the M errim ack Station P ow er Plant in B o w , N e w H am pshire b y U SE P A . A total present value after tax cash cost o f $ 111,800,000 w as determ ined. T he facility includes two electric generating units w ith nam eplate ratings o f 3 5 0 M W and 120 M W for a total o f 4 7 0 M W , (T he docum ent also cites the
fa c ility has "an electrical output o f approximately 478 megawatts.") and thus a c o st o f a p p roxim ately $ 2 4 0 ,0 0 0 per M W . T h e
Sioux facility has a capacity o f approxim ately 2 tim es the M errim ack Station, and thus the prorated cost applied to Sioux w ould b e a p p ro x im a te ly $ 2 2 4 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 . N o te th e g o o d agreem en t w ith th e S io u x c o st e stim a te s b a s e d o n th e M a u lb e tsc h stu d y .16,17 T he ab ove inform ation su ggests the cost to install c lo sed c y c le co o lin g at the fa cility w o u ld b e in the range o f a quarter o f a b illion dollars. It cou ld certainly be m ore. For exam ple, at the M illstone P ow er Station in C onnecticut, the estim ated capital cost to install natural draft coolin g tow ers w as estim ated to b e approxim ately tw o b illion dollars plu s additional annual operation and m aintenance costs. The M illstone facility has a total capacity o f 2113 M W w hich roughly tw ice (2 .1 4 tim es) the capacity o f the S E C .1S The above cost estim ates provide for com plete replacem ent o f the once through coolin g system at the SEC . A s discussed further above, one alternative to reduce the therm al load to the M ississip p i R iver from the S iou x facility is to install "helper" c o o lin g tow ers d o n 't elim inate the heated discharge, but rather reduce its tem perature before discharge. H ow ever, these co sts are not insignificant either and approach those o f com plete replacem ent o f once through coolin g. A s noted above, A m eren has estim ated such a system w ou ld cost approxim ately $ 9 3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 per unit at Siou x. A dditional co sts including lost pow er generation w ou ld h ave to b e added to these estim ates. T hus, sign ifican t expenditures w ou ld need to be incurred for p ossib ly m arginal benefit in term s o f tem perature reduction o f the discharge. T he co st to install m echanical chillers at the SEC w ou ld be ev en greater than those for the installation o f closed loop cooling.
Conclusion:
T ech nology lim itations have not been im plem ented for this facility in the past. The SEC has been in operation for 49 years u sin g a once-through coolin g system . In evaluation o f the other available tech nologies w h ich are tech n ically feasib le to reduce therm al discharges to the M ississip p i R iver, all such options were found to increase the ch em icals in the discharge, release greater heat to the atm osphere, provide operational and m aintenance issues, and entail significant costs. A fter applying factors listed above, and considering the tech nologies and unique circum stances discussed above, the departm ent has determ ined, based its best professional judgm ent, a once-through co o lin g system is the best available technology at this tim e. Future analysis o f im pingem ent and entraim nent w ill include requirem ents found under C W A 3 1 6(b) and m ay revisit or reverse the B A T ju d gm en t sh ould an im balanced in d igen ou s p op u lation o f aquatic life be ob served at this site. The departm ent has concluded that discharging thermal pollution over discharge o f additional chem icals is preferred at this
tim e.
PartV . Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Pace 45 o f 65
Outfall #001; Once-Through Cooling Water
References:
1. H e n s le y , John. C o o lin g T o w e r F u n d am en tals p . 8 6 . h ttp ://sp x c o o lin g .c o m /p d f7 C o o lm g -T o w e f-F u n d a m e n ta ls.p d f 2. C ooling Pond. BrightHub Engineering. http://w w w .brighthubenaneering.com /pow er-D lants/66493-cooling-pond-or-
w etlands-for-therm al-pow er-plant-condenser-cooling/ 3. H en sley, John. C oolin g T ow er Fundam entals at p. 86. http://st>xcooling.coiii/pdt7C ooling-T ow er-Fundam entals.pclf 4. C ooley, Heather. P acific Institute. W ater for Energy: Future W ater N eed s for E lectricity in the Interm ountain W est.
N ovem ber 2011. http://w w w .paciiist.org/w p-conteiit/uploads/2013/02/w ater for enerav3.pdf 5. H ybrid W et and D ry C ooling. BrightH ub E ngineering.
http://w w w .brighthubeiigineering.com /pow er-plants/66087-steaiii-pow er-plant-condeiiser-cooling-hvbrid-w et-and-di-y-
cooling/
6. H en sley, John. C oolin g T ow er Fundam entals at p. 86. http://spxeooling.com /pdfyC ooling-T ow er-Fundainentals.pdf
7. Am eren Integrated R esource Plan Section 5. https://w w vv.am eren.coni/m issouri/environiuentT enew ables/am eren-m issourilrp
8. A m eren Integrated R esource Plan Section 5. (https://w w w .am eren.com /'m issouri/eiivironm ent/renew ables/am ereii-m issouri-
liE
.
.
.
.
.
9. W heeler, Brian. P ow er E ngineering: R etrofit O ptions to C om p ly w ith 316(b ). 10/01/2010.
h ttp ://v w w .p o w e r -e n g .c o n i/a r tic le s /p r in t/v o lu n ie -1 1 4 / is s u e - 10 /fe a tu r e s/r e tr o fit-o p tio n s -to -c o m n lv -w itli-3 16 -b .h tm l
10. B ailey, D . EPRI. Issues A n alysis o f R etrofitting O nce-T hrough C ooled Plants w ith C losed-C ycle C ooling, T R -052907,
O ctober 2 0 0 7 . http ://w w w .w aterboards.ca.gov/w ater issu es/n rogram s/ocean /cw a.316/docs/ep ri retrofit otc.p d f
11. C orvallis O regon C onclusions and R ecom m endations for W W R P discharge.
https://w w w .corvallisorepon.gov/m odules/show docum ent.aspx?docum entid=496
12. U S Departm ent o f E nergy. E lectricity R eliability Im pacts o f a M andatory C oolin g T ow er R ule for E xisting Steam G eneration
Units. O ctober 2008. http ://w w w .netl.doe.gov/en ergv-analvses/pu bs/C ooling T ow er R eport.pdf
13. P ow erG eu International 2 0 0 3 C om parison o f P ow er E nhancem ent O ptions for G reen field C om bined C ycle P ow er Plants.
http://w w w .tas.com /sites/defauIt/files/com parison-of-pow er-enhancem ent-options-for-greenfield-cofflbined-cvcle-D ow er-
plants.pd f
14. Braytnn Point N P D E S Factsheet Chapter 4: T B E L D eterm ination.
http://w w w .epa.gov/regionl/npdes/bravtoiiPoint/pdfs/B R A Y T O N chapter4 PD F
15. Closed-Cycle Retrofitting Study: Capital and Performance Cost Estimates, prepared b y M au lb etsch C on su ltin g for EPRI
(P alo A lto , C'A) et a l., F in al Report Septem ber 2 0 1 0 .
16. New England Clean WaterAct NPDES Permitting Determinationsfor the Thermal Discharge and Cooling Water Intake Structures at Metrimack Station in Bow, New Hampshire, NPDES Permit No. NH0001465.
17. A ttachm ent D to 2011 Fact Sheet for Draft N P D E S perm it, prepared b y U S E P A N e w E ngland R eg io n I, Septem ber 2 7 , 2011.
18. Comprehensive Evaluation o f Cooling Water System Alternatives at Millstone Power Station (MPS) Final Report, Project
N o. 19998242.10400, prepared by UR S, A ugust 2012.
C o n v e n t io n a l P o l u t a n t s : For the purposes o f perm it renew al, several conventional param eters w ere sam pled. T he facility reported biochem ical oxygen dem and at 4 mg/L. T h e fa c ility reported c h em ica l o x y g e n d em an d at 22 mg/L. T h e fa c ility rep orted total organ ic carbon at 6 .6 mg/L. T he facility reported O il and G rease at 2 .2 mg/L. T he facility reported total suspended solid s at 178 m g/L . The perm it writer has determ ined n on e o f the ab ove pollutants are o f concern at this outfall. T he M ississip p i R iver is inherently turbid and w h ile the oncethrough coolin g w ater system condenses the water, the concentration o f additional solids is negligible. The facility reported total residual chlorine w a s b eliev ed absent. H ow ever, the E L G id en tifies once-thorough co o lin g w ater as subject to B P T and B A T regulations for chlorine.
PH
6.5 to 9.0 SU . T he W ater Q uality Standard at 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(5)(E ) states w ater contam inants shall not cause pH to be outside the range o f 6.5 to 9 .0 standard pH units.
Chlorine. Free Available
The facility is lim ited per the ELG at 40 CFR 4 2 3 .1 2 for best practicable control tech nology (B P T ) o f once through coolin g water at 0 .5 m g /L d a ily m a x im u m , and 0 .2 m g /L m o n th ly a v e r a g e c o n cen tra tio n . T h e fa c ility is n o t a ffo rd ed a sc h e d u le o f c o m p lia n ce because the E P A has prom ulgated the E L G and these conditions are subject to all applicable facilities at all tim es. The facility has stated th ey in freq u en tly u se c h lo rin e a s a b io c id e . T h e departm en t h a s co n sid ered and ap p roved an "u n sch ed u led " sam p lin g regim e.
PartV. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Pape 46 o f 65
Outfall #001: Oncc-Through Cooling Water
Chlorine, Total Recoverable
The facility is lim ited per the ELG at 40 CFR 423.13 for best available tech n ology (B A T ) o f once through coolin g water at 0.2 m g/L d a ily m axim um con cen tration The fa cility is not afford ed a schedule o f com p lian ce because the E P A has prom ulgated the E L G and th ese co n d itio n s are su b ject to all ap p licab le fa cilities at all tim es. T h e fa cility h as stated they infrequently u se chlorine as a biocide. T he departm ent has considered and approved an "unschedu led" sam pling regim e.
M etals: T he facility reported any m etals fou n d in the once-th rou gh c o o lin g w ater discharge are already present in the river. T he perm it writer has determ ined no additional testing o f any m etals is required at this outfall at this tim e.
N if t r ie n t s : T he facility reported any nutrients fou n d in the once-th rou gh c o o lin g w ater discharge are already present in the river. T he perm it writer has determ ined no additional testing o f nutrients at this outfall is required at this tim e.
O ther: The facility reported any brom ide, D ioxin, fluoride, radioactivity, sulfate, sulfide, sulfite, or surfactants found in the once-through coolin g water discharge are already present in the river. T he perm it writer has determ ined no additional testing o f these param eters is n eed ed at this outfall at this tim e.
W ET T e st A cute P revious perm it lim itations w ere pass/fail; h o w ever the departm ent cannot perform R P A o n narrative data. T he perm it writer has determ ined several b iocid es including chlorine m ay be used on the coolin g tow er therefore W ET m onitoring is required w hen the
b io cid es are in use. See Part VIIAdministrative Requirements, Public Notice Comments.
For classified perm anent stream s, the A llow able E ffluent C oncentration (A EC )% is determ ined as follow s: A c u te A E C % = [D F cfs - ( Z I D ,Q10 + D F cft)] x 100% = # # % A c u te A E C % = [1 1 2 1 C F S - (5 8 5 + 1121 C F S )] x 100% = 6 5 .7 % ~ 66% 10
10 CSR 2 0 -7 .0 1 5((9)(L )4.A . states the dilution series m ust be proportional. Each dilution w as determ ined by m ultiplying or dividing 0.8 from the A E C and then each consecutive value. The calculated dilution series for this facility is: 83% , 66% , 53% , 42% , and 34% .
Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 47 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s T a b l e :
PARAMETERS Outfalls #002 & #006
Untt
PlD SICA-
Row
MOD
Conventional
_ '
Cyanide-Amenable (CATC) Oil & Grease
p&tmg'L
pH i
SU
TSS (Actual)
uig/L
TSS (NET)
mg/L
MetalsAi umintm, Total Recov
* Mg'L
Arsenic, Total Recover.
ftg/L
Boron, Total Recover.
P&'L
Chromium TV, Dissolved Iron, total Recoverable
PgU Hg/L
Molybdenum, Total Rec.
pg/L
Selenium, Total Recover.
P&'U
Titanium, Total Recover.
pg-u
Nl--rifm s Ammonia as N
mg'L
Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
mg'L
Nitrate+ Nitrite as N
mg'L
Nitrogen, Total n (TN)
mg'L
Phosphorus, Total P (TP)
mg'L
OlHtR
Chloride
mg'L
Fluoride Sulfates
mg'L mg/L
Sulfates + Chlorides
mg'L
WET Test, Chronic
TUc
Basis FOR Limits
1
I, 3 1. 3 1, 3 4
1 1,2,3 1,2,3
6,9 1,2,3 1,2,3 6,9 1.2,3 6, 9
Daily Max
*
Monthly Avg
*
PREVIOUS PERMIT LIMITS
-
SAME
*
15 6.5 to 9.0
*
100
*
10 6.5 to 9.0
*
30
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NEW 20,15 6.0 ro 9.0 SAME SAME
NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW
Minimum Sampling Frequency
Minimum Reporting Frequency
:
once/week
ONCE'MONTH
!
`
once/quarter once/quarter
once/month
once/month
ONCE/WEEK
ONCE/MONTH
ONCE/WEEK
once/month
once/week
once/month
-
once/quarter once/quarter
once/quarter once/quarter
once/quarter once/quarter
once/quarter ONCE/QUARTER
once/quarter once/quarter
once/quarter once/quarter
once/quarter once/quarter
once'quarter once/quarter
Sample Type
24 Hr. Tot
GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB
GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB GRAB
6,9
lie
6,9
*
6,9
*
1
*
1
*
NEW
once/quarter once/quarter
GRAB
-
NEW
once/quarter once/quarter
GRAB
*
NEW
once/quarter once/quarter
GRAB
*
NEW
once/quarter once/quarter
GRAB
*
NEW
once/quarter ONCE/QUARTER
GRAB
1.3
6,9
*
1,3
1.3
eft
8
*
NEW
ONCE/QUARTER once/quarter
GRAB
*
NEW
ONCE/QUARTER once/quarter
GRAB
*
NEW
once/quarter ONCE-'QUARTER
GRAB
*
NEW
once/quarter ONCE/QUARTER
GRAB
-
PASS/FAIL
once/year
ONCE/YEAR
GRAB
* - Monitoring requirement only t The facility will report the minimum and maximum pH values: pH is not to be averaged. NEW- Parameter not established in previous state operating permit I - interim limits F - final limits
Basis for Limitations Codes; 1. State or Federal Regulation''Law (inch ELG) 2. Water Quality Standard (includes RPA) 3. WateT Quality Based Effluent Limits 4. Antidegradation Revicw/Policy
5. Water Quality Model 6. Best Professional Judgment 7. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL 8. WET Test Policy
9. TBELPOC
TBELPOC T a b l e :
Par am eter NIT7JEFTS Ammonia as N Nitrate + N itrite as N Nitrogen, Total N Phosphorus, Total P F o u r C o r A pp lic a tio n F o x P f r s t i Re m i :<. : O th e r Bromide Chlorine, Total Residual Cyanide. Total Fecai Cohform (Colony Forming Units/100 mL) Fluoride O il and Grease Phenols. Total Sulfate as SO,2 Sulfide as S:' Sulfite as SOj2' Surfactants
M e t a l s (a s t o t a l p e c o v o u b u -, r w J z s s P E r s F iE O ):
Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium Cohalt Copper Ir o n Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury M olybdenum Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Tin T ita n iu m Zinc = a d d ressed b y 4 0 C I'R 4 2 3 < = reported b elow quantifiable analytical lim its
, Lnils
mgT, rn g l. mgT. mg/L
mg/L mg/L Mg'L CFU m g 'L mg'L Mg/L m g'L m g 'L mg/L mg.'I
Mg 1 Mg/L MgL Mg'L Mg'L Mg'! Mg'L Mg'L Mg/L Mg'L Mg/L Mg'L Mg'L Mg'L ug/I. Mg/L Mg'L Mg'L Mg'L MgL Mg/L MgL Mg'L
Amcicn Missouri Sijux hnag y Center Fact Sheet Page 48 of 65
Pari V. Effluent Limits Dcterm ination Outfalls 002 & #006- Ash Tonds
O u tfa ll #002 Out fall 1/006 Baseline Baseline x 10 POL
0.5
2.0
2.2
<0.01
'f * :
*3
11 0,08 <50 198 0.3
2 <5 54 1.5 <2 004
2.BOO; 1120 <5; <1 <5: 1.4 100; 115 <5; <1 700; 51 <5: <0.4 <5; 1.4 <5; 1 5.1
2,500; 923 5; 0 9
13.600, 21,500 80; 50
<0.2; <0.2 40; 5 12; <1 5, 1.3
12; <0.4 6; <1 <5; 5
100; 70 44. 19
5.6 25 0.07 <0.01
35 0.06 50
10 1.9 2.8 <5 640 1.5 <2 001
. .
400:418 <5; <1 33; 17.1
480; 556 <5; <1 2,600; 1,890 <5; <0.4 22: 14.1 <5; 3 <5. <1 80;315 <5; 1 17,600 10; 29 <0.2; <0 2 280, 154 18.9 26. 20 8 30; <0.4 15: <1 <5; 9 7; 34 24; 21
0.05 0.05 none 0.01
none none 20 none 0.1
5 50 none i none none
0_5 0.5 none 0.1 H R . . S K yfl none none 200 none i 50 500 none 10 none none
YES YES n/a no
n/a n/a no n/a YES
no n/a no n/a n/a
/ ip 20 10 200 5 100 5 10 50 25 100 50 5.000 15 0.2 10 40 5 10 10 30 5 20
2.000 200 100 2.000 50 1.IMMI 50 100 500 250 1,000 500 50.000 150
2 100 400 50 100 100 300 50 200
YES no no no no
YES no no no no
YES no no no no
YES no no no no no YES no
l B E L d e t e r m in a t io n f o r P o l l u t a n t s o f C o n c e r n f r o m t h e a s h Po n d s a t t h e S io u x E n e r g y C e n t e r : F ollow in g the E PA P en ult W riters M anual, six param eters m et the criteria for Pollutants o f C oncern (PO Cs): am m onia, nitiate/nitrite as nitrogen, fluoride, boron, m olybdenum and titanium . T h ese can be divided into tw o categories, nutrients, and inorganics/traec m eta ls, as d is c u s s e d b e lo w It is im p ortan t to n o te on S e p te m b e r 3 0 , 2 0 1 5 . the U n ite d S ta te s E n viron m en tal P rotection A g e n c y sig n e d a final rule, revising the Steam E lectric E ffluent G u idelin es (4 0 C F R Part 4 2 3 ). T hese regulations w ill result in substantial changes w hich, w h ile not explicitly targeting nutrients or the inorganic/trace m etal PO C s identified for the S iou x Energy Center (SE C ), w ill significantly reduce or ehm innte discharges o f these parameters
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 49 o f 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfa]Is #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
N u t r ie n t s D ischarges o f nutrients including am m onia as nitrogen and nitrate/nitrite as nitrogen is an em ergin g issu e for point source dischargers inclu ding those to major river sy stem s im plicated as contributors to the G u lf o f M ex ico H yp oxia problem . A dditional m onitoring, including D N R 's V olunteer E arly N utrient M onitoring Program w ill better d efin e th ese contributions and thus guid e future regulatory developm ent.
E levated concentrations o f these param eters w ere reported b y A m eren in their 2 0 0 8 N P D E S perm it renew al application; those processes included tw o significant sources o f am m onia and its degradation byproducts (nitrate/nitrite residuals).
The first o f these w as the use o f am m onium hydroxide m the regeneration o f p olish er dem ineralizers (u sed to purify water used in the plant's steam cycle). W hile this use is on goin g, A m eren is w orking to optim ize the use o f am m onium hydroxide and as part o f replacem ent w astew ater treatm ent system s (as describ ed b elow ) is further evalu atin g treatm ent tech n ologies.
T he secon d source w as the u se o f am m onia and urea in exhaust gas treatm ent system s to reduce nitrous oxid e (N O x) em ission s. T h ese c h em ica ls w ere added to the exh au st g a s and e x ce ss/c a ir y o v e r feed s resulted in residual concen trations in the fly ash slu iced to the ash pond (O utfall # 0 0 6 ) for treatment. W hile these system s (and the feed o f these chem icals into exhaust stream s) have currently been suspended, they w ill lik ely resum e, in order to m eet N O x em ission lim its. H ow ever, as described b elow , replacem ent wastewater treatment system s w ill elim inate discharges o f fly (and bottom ) ash transport w ater, and thus elim inate the discharge o f w astew aters containing these chem ical associated w ith N O x controls.
B ecau se these replacem ent w astew ater system s are currently being designed and perm itted, developm ent o f treatment technologies based on the liistoric efflu en t data w ou ld b e inappropriate. The departm ent h as determ ined elim ination o f the w astestream is the B A T to elim inate the discharge o f nutrients from the facility.
I n o r g a n ic s a n d TR -iC E M e u l s A n alysis o f ash indicates elevated concentrations o f boron and m olybdenum , and to a lesser extent, fluoride and titanium . A ll are lik ely associated with coal ash.
The new ly revised federal Steam E lectric E ffluent G uidelines w ill require the SE C to elim inate the discharge o f fly and bottom ash transport water, as so o n as p o ssib le beginn in g N o v em b er 1, 2018 but n o later than D ecem b er 31, 202 3 . A m eren is currently designin g replacem ent w astew ater treatment system s to m anage the other (non-ash) w astestream s and has engaged D N R in discussions regarding construction and operating perm it im plications. T he federal C oal C om bustion R esidual regulations (40 C F R P art 257) w ill a lso im pact the SEC and lik ely result in closure o f ash p on d s w ithin this sam e tim e frame.
A s stated above, since these replacem ent w astew ater system s are currently b ein g designed and perm itted, developm ent o f treatment tech n o lo g ies based on tlie historic efflu en t data w ou ld b e inappropriate. Part o f the en gin eerin g d esig n inclu des assessm ent o f internal w astestream s w h ich w ill continue to be treated prior to discharge. T h ese assessm en ts and resultin g data w ill be used to support permit applications to either construct and/or m od ify operating perm its for these facilities. T he departm ent lias determ ined elim ination o f the sluice water wastestream is the B A T to elim inate (or significantly reduce) the discharge o f the listed inorganic constituents from the facility in accordance w ith the overall goal o f the N P D E S system .
C o n c l u s io n : T he facility w ill cease sluicin g ash on or before M ay 1, 2021 thereby elim inating discharge o f all o f the ab ove T B E L POCs.
#002 #006: D e r i v a t i o n a n d D i s c u s s i o n o f L i m i t s f o r O u t f a l l s
and
P h y s ic a l : T he perm ittee reported color w a s b eliev ed absent at th ese outfalls. T h e perm ittee reported tem perature associated w ith sum m er and w inter discharges at th ese outfalls. T h e perm it writer has determ ined tem perature is not a pollutant o f concern at th ese outfalls.
F low In accordance with [40 C FR Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (i)(l)(ii)] the v o lu m e o f effluent discharged from each outfall is needed to assure com plian ce w ith perm itted efflu en t lim itations. I f th e perm ittee is unable to obtain efflu en t flo w , then it is the responsibility o f the perm ittee to inform the departm ent, w hich m ay require the subm ittal o f an operating perm it m odification. T he facility w ill report the total flo w in m illion s o f gallon s per day (M G D ). W eek ly sam p lin g required: continued front p reviou s permit.
C o n v e n t io n a l : T h e fa c ility rep o rted 4 m g /L at o u tfa ll # 0 0 2 , and 4 m g /L at o u tfa ll # 0 0 6 for 5 - D a y B io c h e m ic a l O x y g e n D e m a n d (B O D 5). T h e p erm it w riter has determ ined B O D 5 is n ot a con tam in an t o f con cern at th ese o u tfa lls T h e fa c ility reported 18 m g/L at ou tfall # 0 0 2 , and 10 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 for ch em ical o x y g en dem and (C O D ). T he perm it writer has determ ined C O D is not a contam inant o f concern at
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 50 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
th ese outfalls. T he facility reported 6 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and 1.3 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 for total organic carbon (TO C ). T he perm it writer has determ ined TO C is not a pollutant o f concern at these outfalls. The facility reported 198 CFU/lOOm L at outfall #0 0 2 , and
10 C F U /lO O m L at o u tfa ll # 0 0 6 fo r fe c a l c o lifo rm . W h ile f e c a l c o lifo r m and E. coli m easu re d is tin c tiv e ly d ifferen t o rgan ism s, the p erm it w riter s e e s th em as related . T h ere ar e no w a ter q u a lity standards for fe c a l c o lifo r m , but th ere are for . coli. S e e outfall # 0 2 A .
Chlorine. Total Residual (TRC)
The facility subm itted data from D ecem ber 13, 2 007 through M ay 8 ,2 0 0 8 show ing no detections o f TRC from outfall #002. The perm it writer has determ ined no reasonable potential for this param eter. Perm it ren ew al testin g sh ow ed 0.08 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and 0 .0 6 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 ; both sign ifican tly b elo w the M L. B ecau se outfall # 0 0 6 is essentially sim ilar for this parameter, the perm it writer has determ ined no reasonable potential for both outfalls for TRC.
Cyanide. Amenable to Chlorination fCATCl
T he perm it renew al m aterials sh ow ed total cyan id e at < 5 0 p g /L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and at 50 p g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 . The perm it writer h as d eterm in ed a d d itio n a l te stin g is req uired for C A T C . M is s o u r i's w ater q u a lity stan d ard s are for C A T C , n o t total c y a n id e s therefore the cyan id es present in the efflu en t m ay h ave been overestim ated u sin g the total cyanide testing m ethod. T ypically, effluent lim its in perm its are b elow the accepted m inim um quantification level (M L). The departm ent has determ ined the current acceptable M L for C yanide A m enable to C hlorination (C A T C ) to be 10 pg/L w hen using SM 4500-C N ' G. Cyanides A m enable
to C hlorination after D istilla tio n in Standard Methodsfo r the Examination o f Water and Wastewater, 2 2 nd E dition. T he perm ittee
w ill conduct analyses in accordance w ith this m ethod, or equivalent, and report actual analytical values. M easured values equal to or greater than the m inim um quantification lev el o f 10 p g 'L w ou ld be considered violation s o f the perm it and values less than the m inim um quantification lev el o f 10 p g /L w o u ld b e considered to be in com p lian ce w ith the perm it lim itation The m inim um quantification lev e l d oes not authorize the discharge o f C A T C in e x cess o f the effluent lim its. H ow ever, this perm it establishes m onitoring only, n ew requirem ent this perm it, quarterly sam pling and repotting.
Oil & Grease C o n v en tio n a l pollu tan t, in a c co r d a n ce w ith 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 T a b le A : Criteriafo r Designated Uses', 10 m g /L m o n th ly average (chronic standard). T he d a ily m a x im u m w a s ca lcu la ted u s in g the Technical Support Documentfor Water Quality-Based Toxics Control (E P A /5 0 5 /2 - 9 0 - 0 0 1 ) . S e c tio n 5 .4 .2 in d ic a te s the w a ste lo a d a llo c a tio n ca n b e s e t to th e ch ro n ic standard. W h en the
chronic standard is m ultiplied b y 1.5, the d aily m axim um can be calculated. H en ce, 10 * 1.5 = 15 m g/L for the daily m axim um . The ELG allow s discharge o f 2 0 m g/L daily m axim um and 15 m g/L m onthly average. H ow ever, these lim its are not protective enough o f the receiving lake therefore w ater quality lim its w ill be used. M ontlily sam pling and reporting; continued from previous perm it
fill
P revious perm it lim its w ere 6 .0 to 9 .0 , h o w ev er, th ese lim its are for treatm ent w ork s treating d o m estic sew a g e for stream s w'here m ix in g con sid eration s are a v ailab le. T h e p rev io u s lim its h a v e b een a ssesse d and d eterm in ed th e y are not protective o f w'ater quality o f P o elin g L ake. The m inim um value from ou tfall # 0 0 2 reported in the last fiv e years w as 7.2, the m axim um is 8.7. The m inim um value from outfall # 0 0 6 in the last fiv e years w a s 6 .6, and the m axim um w a s 8.8 SU . The facility is able to m eet the m ore restrictive perm it lim its therefore no sch ed u le o f co m p lia n ce is afforded. W eek ly sam p lin g continued from previous permit.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
The effluent lim it guidelines (ELG ) for steam electric point source category for fly & bottom ash transport water BPT [40 CFR 423.12(b )(4)] is 100 m g/L daily m axim um , and 3 0 m g/L m onthly average. F acility w ill report total and net. N et lim itations
a llow ed ; se e Part III Rationale and Derivation o fPermit Limits; Intake Credits. W e e k ly sa m p lin g and reporting; continued from
previous perm it.
M etals: T he facility tested for all o f the m etals o n M issouri F orm s C and D for perm it renew al. T he follo w in g table sh ow s the best professional judgm ent m ethod to determ ine w h ich m etals should be included in the perm it using water quality standards as the guide (this differs from the T B E L PO C analysis). A d d ition ally, th e facility retested for the param eters w here m ore than one number is below'. T he perm it writer asked the perm ittee to resam ple as the testing perform ed in 2 0 0 8 w h en the perm it renewal w as due is outdated com pared to current analytical procedures. The second num ber b elow w as provided on M arch 4, 2016 and w as used to make th e fin a l rea so n a b le p o te n tia l d eterm in a tio n . A n "X " m e a n s a sa m p le w!as n o t c o lle c te d .
W Q B E L D e t e r m in a t io n :
M etal, T otal Re c o v e r a b l e
Aluminum
A ntim ony
O utfall #002 h g /L
2800,1120
< 5, <1
U se
AQL
DW
PR P O utfall #002 B e s t P r o f e s s io n a l Ju d g e m e n t D e c is io n
YES
no
O utfall #006 iig /L
400,418
< 5 , <1
U se
AQL
DW
PR P O utfall #006 B e s t P r o f e s s io n a l Ju d g e m e n t D e c is io n
YES no
M etal, T otal
Reco verable
Arsenic
B a r iu m B e ry lliu m Boron Cadm ium Chrom ium Chrom ium HI
Chromium IV
C o b a lt Copper
Iron
Lead M agnesium M olybdenum M anganese M ercury N ickel
Selenium
Silver T h a lliu m T in T ita n iu m Z in c
O utfall #002
mG/L
<5,1.4
100, 93 < 5, <1 7 0 0 ,5 1 < 5 , < 0 .4 < 5 ,1 .4 X ,< 1 0
X, <5
<5, <1
5, 1
2500,923
5 ,0 .9 1 3 6 0 ,2 1 5 0
4 0 ,5 80, 50 < 0 .2 , < 0 .2 12, <1
5,13
1 2 , < 0 .4 6, <1 < 5 ,5
100, 70 44, 19
U se
AQL
DW AQL IR R AQL AQL AQL
AQL
NW QS AQL
AQL
AQL NW QS NW QS NW QS
AQL AQL
AQL
AQL DW NWQS NW QS AQL
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 51 o f 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
PRP O u t f a l l # 0 0 2
B e s t P r o f e s s io n a l
J u d g e m e n t D e c is io n
no
no no no no no no
no
no no
YES
no no no no no no
no
no no no no no
O utfall #006
aG/L
33,17.1
480, 556 < 5, <1
2 6 0 0 ,1 8 9 0 < 5 , < 0 .4 22 X ,< 1 0
X, 15
< 5 ,3 < 5, <1
80,315
<5, 1 1 7 6 0 ,2 7 4 0
280, 154 10, 29
< 0 .2 , < 0 .2 1 8 ,9
26, 20.8
3 0 , < 0 .4 15, <1 < 5 ,9 7, 34 2 4 ,2 1
U se
AQL
DW AQL IRR AQL AQL AQL
AQL
NW QS AQL
AQL
AQL NW QS NW QS NW QS
AQL AQL
AQL
AQL DW NW QS NW QS AQL
PRP O u t f a l l # 0 0 6
B e s t P r o f e s s io n a l
J u d g e m e n t D e c is io n
YES
no no no* no no no
YES
no no
no
no no no no no no
YES
no no no no no
< * AQL DW: IRR: NW QS: PRP: Yes: No:
B e lo w detection lim it (analytical m ethod used show ed no legitim ate observation above the value reported) See parameter discussion Protection o f A quatic L ife W ater Q uality Standard (also know n as W W H ) D iin k in g W ater Q uality Standard; the M ississip pi R iver is designated as a drinking water supply Irrigation W ater Q uality Standard; the new'ly classified "C " stream is designated as an irrigation water N o applicable M issouri W ater Q uality Standard (W Q S) for the param eter Potential R easonable Potential A dditional sam pling required to determ ine i f RP exists A dditional sam p lin g not required. T he perm it w riter has u sed best p rofessional jud gm en t to determ ine the values subm itted for the purposes o f perm it renew al are reasonably b elo w the M issouri w ater quality standards therefore have no RP to violate M issouri W Q S.
T he facility m ust u se su fficien tly sen sitive m eth od s as found in 4 0 C F R 136. N o m etals w ere addressed in any perm it at either o f the ash pond outfalls in the past. A ll requirem ents found b elow are new . A ll m etals found b elo w w ill b e required to sam ple and report quarterly for ea ch ash p o n d outfall.
Aluminum. Total Recoverable
10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(4)(D ) and (F) are general criteria applicable to all stream s. A dditional m onitoring w ill determ ine if reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to general criteria violation s o f w aters o f the state.
Arsenic. Total Recoverable
10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1(4)(D ) and (F) are general criteria applicable to all stream s. A dditional m onitoring w ill determ ine i f reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to general criteria violation s o f w aters o f the state.
Boron. Total Recoverable
10 C SR 20-7.031 (4X D ) and (F) are general criteria app licable to all stream s; h o w ever, th ese protections are only afforded to param eters d eem ed toxic to aquatic life, w atering anim als, and hum ans. B oron has not been identified as a toxic param eter as only an irrigation u se ex ists for surface waters; to x icity to terrestrial plants has not b een inclu ded in the general criteria protection d irective. H ow-ever, this param eter w'as id en tified as a T B E L P O C . A d d ition al m on itorin g w ill determ ine if tech n o lo g y based lim its are appropriate for this parameter.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 52 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
Copper. Total Recoverable
The facility does not discharge chemical metal cleaning wastes to waters o f the state therefore the BPT ELG 40 CFR 423.12(f>X5) does not apply. The facility does not have reasonable potential to cause an excursion above in-stream water-quality limitations. No monitoring required. See special condition #21.
Chromium, Hexavalent. Dissolved
10 C S R 20-7.031 (4)(D ) and (F) are general criteria applicable to all stream s. The facility m ust use a su fficien tly sensitive analytical m ethod (5 pg/L w a s u sed for the renew al application resam pling w h ich is an appropriate level) to sh ow the efflu en t's true concentration is below the w ater quality standard. R esam pling on 1/27/2015 reported 15 pg/L dissolved hexavalent chrom ium . T he acute W Q S is 15 pg/L , and the chrom e W Q S is 10 pg/L . M onthly m onitoring wall determ ine i f reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to general criteria violation s o f waters o f the state.
Iron. Total Recoverable
The facility does not discharge chem ical m etal cleaning w astes to waters o f the state therefore the BPT ELG 40 CFR 423.12(bX 5) does not apply. H ow ever, the facility m ay have reasonable potential to cause an excursion above in-stream water-quality lim itations and has also been identified as a T BEL POC.
Molybdenum. Total Recoverable
T his param eter w as identified as a T B E L POC.
Selenium. Total Recoverable
10 C S R 20-7 .0 3 1 (4 )(D ) and (F) are general criteria applicable to all stream s. M onitoring w ill determ ine if reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to general criteria violations o f w aters o f the state.
Titanium. Total Recoverable
T his param eter w as identified as a T B E L POC.
NlTRIENTS:
T he fo llo w in g nutrients w ill b e evaluated quarterly b y the perm ittee. A ll nutrients are n ew for tills permit.
Ammonia as N
The facility reported 0.5 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and 5.6 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 for am m onia as nitrogen The TBEL evaluation has determ ined A m m onia as N is a pollutant o f concern for the facility.
Kieldahl Nitrogen. Total (TKN)
A d ded u sin g the perm it w riter's best professional judgm ent. T K N is the sum o f am m onia-nitrogen plu s organically bound nitrogen but d oes not include nitrate-nitrogen or nitrite-nitrogen. T he departm ent is ask in g the facility to also provide this data.
Nitrate plus Nitrite as Nitrogen
The T B E L evaluation has determ ined nitrate p lu s nitrite as N is a pollutant o f concern for the facility. T he facility reported 2 m g/L at ou tfall # 0 0 2 , and 25 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 .
Nitrogen. Total N (TN)
The facility reported 2.2 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 2 and 0.07 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 o f total nitrogen. Total N itrogen (T N ) is the sum o f n itra te-n itro g eu (N O -.-N ), n itr ite -n itro g e n ( N 0 2- N ) , a m m o n ia -n itr o g en (N H 3- N ) an d o r g a n ic a lly b o n d e d n itro g en . Per 10 C S R 2 0 7 .0 1 5 (9 )(D )7 , nutrient m onitoring shall b e instituted on a quarterly basis for facilities w ith a d esign flo w greater than 0.1 M G D .
Phosphorous. Total P (TNI
The fa cility indicated phosphorus w a s not present in either outfall. H ow ever, per 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 15(9)(D )7, nutrient m onitoring shall b e in stitu ted on a quarterly b a sis for fa cilities w'ith a d e sig n flo w greater than 0.1 M G D .
Other:
T he facility tested for sulfide, sulfite, and surfactants at these outfalls how ever, uo water quality standards exist for these parameters therefore the perm it writer has u sed b est p rofession al ju d gm en t to not include th ese param eters in the permit. T he facility sam pled for alpha radioactivity and both outfalls sh o w ed b elo w d etection lim its. N o RP. T h e fa cility sam p led for total radium and radium 2 2 6 , all sam p les w ere b elo w detection lim its; no R P. T he facility reported a non -detect valu e at ou tfall # 0 0 2 , and 16.8 pC i/L at outfall # 0 0 6 for beta radioactivity. T he federal prim ary drinking w ater standards to w h ich D N R regulations refer at 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 3 (5 )(I) are written in
m rem /year. E P A 8 1 6 -F -0 0 -0 0 2 Implementation Guidancefo r Radionuclides d e sc r ib e s h o w 1 con cen tration v a lu es m ust b e converted
to roentgen equivalent m an (rem ) p er year (yr) to determ ine the cancer causing exposu re rate w h ich is h ow the drinking w ater standard is written. H ow ever, the facility did n o t su p p ly each isotop e o f each elem en t w h ich w as em itting p radiation therefore the calculation
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 53 of 65
Pan V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfalls #002 & #006: Ash Ponds
c a n n o t b e c o m p lete d . H o w e v er , i f the h e a v ie s t b e ta -em ittin g e le m e n t ( 40K ) w a s u s e d to c o n v e r t 100% o f th e a n a ly tica l v alu e into d rin k in g w a ter u n its, th e n 1 6 .8 p C i/L * 7 3 0 L /y [= stan d ard m a x im a l e x p o su r e ] * 1.88e"5 m rem /p C i [ o f 40K ] = 0 .2 3 m rem /yea r, a v a lu e w ell b e lo w the standard o f 4 m rem /yr; additional m onitorin g w ill n ot b e required at this tim e.
Q uarterly m onitoring and reporting is required for all param eters b elo w (except W E T testing).
Chloride
The facility has indicated sulfates are present in the discharge, because M issouri water quality standards are written for the inclu sion o f chloride w ith sulfates, the facility m ust m onitor for this parameter. N e w param eter this perm it, m onthly m onitoring and reporting required.
Fluoride
The fa cility reported fluorid e at 0.3 m g /L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and 1.9 m g /L at ou tfall # 0 0 6 . The T B E L P O C a n alysis has identified this param eter is a POC therefore addrtional sam pling is required. Currently, the discharge d o es not appear to have reasonable potential to cause or contribute to exceed an ces o f in-stream w ater quality standards.
Sulfates
The facility reported 54 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 2 , and 6 4 0 m g/L at outfall # 0 0 6 . Current w ater quality standards indicate sulfates must be added to chlorides to determ ine com p lian ce. T he p reviou s perm it required m onitorin g su lfates quarterly; no lim its. H ow ever, file previou s perm it writer did not im plem ent the requirem ent correctly because the sulfate lim it is tied to the addition o f chlorides.
Sulfates Plus Chlorides
10 C SR 20-7.031 (4)(D ) and (F) are general criteria applicable to all stream s. A dditional m onitoring w ill determ ine i f reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to general criteria violation s o f waters o f the state. T he facility w ill m easure sulfates and chlorides individually and report the sum total.
WET Test, Chronic
Y e a r ly m o n ito r in g req u irem en t o n ly , m o n ito r in g is req u ired to d eterm in e i f r ea so n a b le p o te n tia l e x is ts for th is fa c ility 's d isch a rg e to ex ceed w ater quality standards. Several n ew toxic param eters have been identified in these effluents therefore W ET testing is required. There is no dilution o f the receiv in g w aterbody therefore a chronic test is m ore appropriate than the acute test. A chronic test w ill better characterize actual in-lake conditions because there is no m ixing. P revious perm it lim its w ere pass/fail, how ever, the departm ent has conclu ded p ass/fail requirem ents cannot effe c tiv e ly m easured reasonable potential. The previous permit required yearly testing in January, the perm ittee m ay test for W E T at any m onth in th is perm it h ow ever yearly testing is still req u ired , c o n tin u e d fr o m p r e v io u s p erm it and in a cco r d a n ce w ith th e d e p a r tm en t's p erm it w r iter 's m anual.
The chronic allow able effluent concentration (A E C ) for facilities discharging to un classified, C lass C, C lass P (with default m ixing considerations), or lakes [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 3 1 (4 )(A )4 .B .(lV )(b )] is 100%.
The dilution series is standardized as 100% , 50% , 25% , 12.5% , & 6 25% .
T he previous perm it required only a 10% A E C . A s the lake does not provide m ixing, this w as assuredly a typographical error and s h o u ld h a v e b e e n 100% . T h e p r e v io u s p erm it lim ita tio n s a ls o o n ly req uired a sin g le d ilu tio n test. T h e d ep artm en t's current W E T testing p o licy indicates all W E T tests perform ed shall be o f m ultiple dilution series and thus the perm it requirem ent is am ended.
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 54 o f 65
Internal Monitoring Point #02A: Domestic Wastewater
Internal Monitoring Point #02A: Domestic Wastewater
E f f l u e n t L im it a t io n s T a b l e :
PARAMETERS
Unit
PinMCAL
Flow Conven; ionai
BOD;
E. Cou E. Cou PH I
TSS
MGD
MG/L #/100ML #/100mL
su
MG/L
B asis
for
Limits
1
1.2
1.6 1,6 1,2 1,2
D aily M ax
*
45 * 630 6..0TO9.0 45
Monthly Avg.
*
30
*
126 6.0 TO 9.0
30
PREVIOUS PERMIT LIMITS
* *
'
<
45,30
I-NEW
F - NEW
6.0 TO 9.0
45, .30
Minimum Sampling Frequency
t > >.
ONCE. QUARTER
*
ONCE/QUARTER ONCE/QUARTER ONCE/QUARTER ONCE/QUARTER ONCE/QUARTER
Minimum Reporting Frequency
ONCE/QUARTER
ONCE-'QUARTER ONCE/MONTH ONCE/.MONTH ONCE/QUARTER QNCE/'QUARTER
Sample Type
24 Hr. Tot
grab grab grab grab
GRAB
* Monitoimg requirement only i The facility will report the minimum and maximum pH values: pH is not to be averaged.
Basis for Limitations Codes: 1. Stale or Federal Regularion/Law 2. Water Quality Standard (includes RPA) 3. Water Quality Based Effluent Limits 4. Antidegradation Review/Policy
5. Water Quality Model 6. Best Professional Judgment 7. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL 8. WET Test Policy
D e r iv a t io n a n d D is c u s s io n o f L im it s :
P h y s ic a l :
F lo w In accordance w ith [40 C FR Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (i)(l)(ii)] the volum e o f effluent discharged from each outfall is needed to assure com plian ce w ith perm itted efflu en t lim itations. I f the perm ittee is unable to obtain efflu en t flo w , then it is the responsib ility o f the perm ittee to inform the departm ent, w hich m ay require the subm ittal o f an operating perm it m odification. T he facility w ill report the total flo w in m illions o f gallons per day (M G D ).
C o n v e n t io n a l :
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODri
Effluent lim itations from the previous state operating perm it have been revised. P revious lim itations: 45 uig/L w eek ly average; 30 m g/L m onthly average. H ow ever, daily m axim um and m onthly average lim itations required per 40 CFR 122.45(d); w eekly and m onthly averages not applicable as this discharge is not from a PO TW [40 CFR 122.45(d)(2)], T echnology based lim its from 10
C S R 2 0 - 7 0 1 5 a p p lied a s d a ily m a x im u m 4 5 m g /L , m o n th ly a v e ra g e 3 0 mg/L. W ater q u a lity lim ita tio n s are n o t a p p lic a b le at this
outfall as th is is an internal m onitorin g point.
Escherichia coli (E. coli)
The facility reported 198 C F U /1 0 0 m L at ou tfall # 0 0 2 , and 10 C F U /1 0 0 m L at ou tfall # 0 0 6 for fecal eoliform . W h ile fecal
c o lifo r m and E. coli m ea su re d is tin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t o r g a n ism s, the p erm it w riter s e c s th e m a s related . T here are n o w a ter q u ality standards for f e c a l c o lifo r m , b u t there are for E. coli. A d d itio n a lly , there are n o r ecrea tio n a l u s e s for P o e lin g L ake, h o w ev e r,
P oeling L ake discharges to backw ater chutes o f the M ississip p i R iver havin g recreational uses. B ecau se the discharge is w ithin tw o m iles [10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 (9 )(B )l.D ], the facility m ust sam ple for this parameter. B y the nature o f the discharge, reasonable potential exists. Per 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 (9 )(D )6 .C . the facility m ust report daily m axim um s and m onthly averages to the department during recreational season. T he recreational season is defined as April 1 through O ctober 31 per 10 C SR 20-7.031 T able A.
A verages are to be the geom etric m ean should the facility sam ple m ore than one tim e per m onth. The geom etric m ean is ca lcu la ted b y m u ltip ly in g all o f th e d ata p o in ts an d th en ta k in g th e n tb. r o o t o f th is p ro d u ct, w h ere n = # o f sa m p le s c o lle c te d . F or
exam ple: F iv e E. coli s a m p le s w e r e c o lle c te d w ith r esu lts o f 1, 4 , 5 , 6, and 10 (# /1 0 0 m L ). G eo m e tric m ean = 5,lh root o f
(1)(4)(5)(6)(10) = 5 * root o f 1,200 = 4.1 #/1 0 0 mL.
The facility is currently not equipped to disinfect. T he facility w ill have a tw o year sched u le o f com pliance to m eet water quality lim ita tio n s fo r W B C '- A w h ic h are 6 3 0 # /1 0 0 m L d a ily m a x im u m p e r 10 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 1 5 (9 )(B )1 .E . and 126 # /1 0 0 m L m o n th ly average per 10 C SR 20-7.031 Table A.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 55 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfall #003 - Emergency Discharge Sump
m
6 .0 to 9.0 SU ; continued from previous perm it. T ech n ology based lim its at 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 are protective as this is an internal m onitoring point. The facility w ill m easure and report the m inim um and m axim um values; pH is not to be averaged. W ater qu ality lim itations are not app licable at this outfall for this param eter as this is an internal m onitoring point.
Total Suspended Solids fTSSl
E ffluent lim itations from the previou s state operating perm it h ave b een revised . P reviou s lim itations: 45 m g/L w eek ly average; 30 m g/L m onthly average. H ow ever, daily m axim um and m onthly average lim itations required per 40 CFR 122.45(d); w eekly and m onthly averages not applicable as this discharge is not from a PO TW [40 C FR 122.45(d)(2)]. T echnology based lim its from 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 1 5 applied as daily m axim um 45 m g'L , m onthly average 30 m g/L . W ater quality lim itations are not applicable at this outfall as this is an internal m onitoring p o in t
Outfall #003 - Emergency Discharge Sump
Effluent Limitations Table:
PARAMETERS
Untt
| Physic u
Flow
Co w l m io n a l
Oil & Grease
pH t
TSS
Nutrients.
. .
Nitrogen, Total N (TN)
Phosphorus, Tot. P (TP)
Other:
-
Chlorides
Sulfates
Chloride + Sulfate
MGD
mg/L SU MG/L
mg/L mg/L
MG/L mg/L mg/L
Basis
for
Limits
Daily Monthly
Max
Avg
PREVIOUS PERMIT LIMITS
Minimum Sampling Frequency
Minimum Retorting Frequency
Sample Type
1
S.AME
:
once/day/discharge
1, 6
*
1,6
1,6
*
20,15 6.0-9.0 100,30
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE once/ day/ discharge ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
'
1
#
NEW
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
1
* *.......' ' ...
NEW
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
a
24 Hr. Tot
{
a
GRAB
a
GRAB
a
GRAB
a
GRAB
a
GRAB
L 6
*
1,6
*
1,6
*
NEW
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
a
-
NEW
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
a
NEW
ONCE/DAY/DISCHARGE
a
GRAB GRAB GRAB
n - The facility must repon the analytical findings no more than 30 days from the day of discharge. k The facility will report the minimum aad maximum pH values; pH is not to be averaged. New - new requirement
Basis for Limitations Codes
1. State or Federal Regulation/Law 2. Water Quality Standard (includes RPA) 3. Water Quality Based Effluent Limits 4. Antidegradation Review/Policy
5. Water Quality Model 6. Best Professional Judgment 7. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL 8. WET Test Policy
Derivation and Discussion of Limits:
Physical:
Flow
In accordance w ith [40 C F R Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (i)(l)(ii)] the volum e o f effluent discharged from each outfall is needed to assure com pliance w ith perm itted effluent lim itations. If the perm ittee is unable to obtain effluent flow , then it is the responsibility o f the perm ittee to inform the departm ent, w hich m ay require the subm ittal o f an operating perm it m odification. T he facility w ill report the total flo w in m illions o f gallons per day (M G D ).
Conventional:
Oil & Grease
Sam pling required w hen discharging
m
Sampling required when discharging.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Sam pling required w hen discharging.
PartV. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 56 o f 65
Outfall 003 - Emergency Discharge Sump
Nl'TRIENTS:
Nitrogen. Total N (TNI
Per 10 C S R 2 0 -7 .0 15(9)(D ) 7, nutrient m onitoring shall be instituted on a quarterly b asis for facilities with a d esign flow greater than 0.1 M G D .
Phosphorous. Total P (TN)
Per 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 15(9)(D )7Snutrient m onitoring shall be instituted on a quarterly b asis for facilities w ith a d esign flo w greater than 0.1 M G D .
Other:
Chloride
The facility m ust sam ple for chlorides w h en the em ergency discharge structure is discharging.
Sulfate
The facility m ust sam ple for sulfate w hen the em ergen cy discharge structure is discharging.
Chlorides Plus Sulfates
The facility m ust report sulfate plus chloride w hen the em ergency discharge structure is discharging.
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 57 o f 65
Ouriall #007 - Emergency Discharge Recycle Pond
Outfall #007 - E mergency D ischarge R ecycle Pond
Effluent Limitations Table:
0 - The facility must report the analytical findings no more than 30 days from the day of discharge, t The facility will report the minimum and maximum pH values; pH is not to be averaged. New - new requirement 1 = interim F = final
Basis for Limitations Codes. 1. State or Federal Regulation/Law 2. Water Quality Standard (includes RPA) 3. Water Quality Based Effluent Limits 4. Antidegradation Review/Polioy
5. Water Quality Model 6. Best Professional Judgment 7. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL 8. WEI Test Policy
Derivation and Discussion of Limits:
P h y s ic a l :
Flow
Iii accordance w ith [40 C FR Part 1 2 2 .4 4 (i)( l)(ii)] the volu m e o f effluent discharged from each outfall is needed to assure com pliance w ith perm itted efflu en t lim itations. I f the perm ittee is unable to obtain effluent flow , then it is the responsibility o f the perm ittee to inform the departm ent, w h ich m ay require the subm ittal o f an operating perm it m odification. T he facility w ill report the total flo w in m illions o f gallons per day (M G D ).
Conventional:
Oil & Grease
Sam pling required w hen discharging.
eS
Sampling required when discharging.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS1
Sam pling required when discharging.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 58 of 65
Part V. Effluent Limits Determination Outfall #007 - Emergency Discharge Recycle Pond
FGD Scrubber Wastes:
Arsenic. Total Recoverable
B A T req u irem en ts b eg in N o v e m b e r 11, 2 0 1 8 : 11 p g /L d a ily m a x im u m , 8 p g /L m o n th ly a v era g e. M isso u ri w ater q u a lity standards are 20 pg/L m onthly average. The tech nology based lim itations are m ore protective.
Mercury. Total Recoverable
B A T requirem ents begin N ovem ber 11, 2018: 788 nanogram s/L (ng/L ) [0.788 pg/L ] daily m axim um , 356 ng/L [0.356 gg/L ] m onthly average. M issouri water quality standards are 2.4 pg/L daily m axim um and 0.5 p g/L m onthly average. The technology based lim itations are m ore protective.
Selenium. Total Recoverable
B A T requirem ents begin N ovem ber 1 1 ,2 0 1 8 : 23 pg/L daily m axim um , 12 pg/L m onthly average.
Nitrate plus Nitrite as N
B A T requirem ents begin N ovem ber 11, 2018: 17.0 m g/L daily m axim um , 4.4 m g/L m onthly average. There are no M issouri W Q S for surface w ater for this parameter.
Nutrients:
Nitrogen. Total N (TNI
Per 10 C S R 2 0 - 7 .0 1 5 (9 )(D )7, nutrient m on itorin g sh all be instituted on a quarterly b a sis for fa cilities w ith a d esig n flo w greater than 0.1 M G D .
Phosphorous, Total P (TN>
Per 10 C SR 2 0 -7 .0 15(9)(D )7, nutrient m onitoring sh all be instituted on a quarterly b asis for facilities w ith a d esign flo w greater than 0.1 M G D .
Other:
Chloride
The facility m ust sam ple for chlorides w h en the em ergency discharge structure is discharging.
Sulfate
The facility m ust sam ple for sulfate w hen the em ergency discharge structure is discharging.
Chlorides Plus Sulfates
The facility m ust report sulfate plus chloride w hen the em ergency discharge structure is discharging.
Part VI. Sampling and R eporting Requirements
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Ccnler Fact Sheet Page 59 of 65
Pari VI. Sampling and Repotting Requirements
R efer to e a c h o u tfa ll's d e riv a tio n an d d is c u s s io n o f lim its s e c tio n to r e v ie w in d iv id u a l sa m p lin g and rep ortin g fr eq u e n c ie s and sam pling type.
Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) Submission System:
The U .S . E nvironm ental Protection A gen cy (E P A ) prom ulgated a final rule on O ctober 22, 2015, to m odernize C lean W ater Act reporting for m un icipalities, industries, and other facilities b y converting to an electron ic data reporting system . T his final rule requires regulated en tities and state and federal regulators to use inform ation tech n o lo g y to electron ically report data required b y the N ational Pollutant D ischarge E lim ination S ystem (N P D E S ) perm it program instead o f filin g paper reports. To com ply w ith the federal rule, the Departm ent is requiring all perm ittees to b egin subm itting discharge m onitoring data and reports online.
Per 40 C FR 127.15 and 127.24, perm itted facilities m ay request a tem porary w aiver for up to 5 years or a perm anent waiver from electronic reporting from the Departm ent. T o obtain an electronic reporting w aiver, a perm ittee m ust first subm it an eD M R W aiver R equest Form: http://dnr.m o.gov/foim s/780-2692-f.pdf. A request m ust be m ade for each facility. I f m ore than one facility is ow ned or operated b y a single entity, then the entity m ust subm it a separate request for each facility based on its specific circum stances. An approved w aiver is non-transferable.
T he D epartm ent m ust review and notify the facility w ithin 120 calendar days o f receipt if the w aiver request has been approved or rejected [40 C FR 124.27(a)]. D uring the Departm ent review period as w ell as after a w aiver is granted, the facility m ust continue subm itting a hard-copy o f any reports required b y their perm it. T he Departm ent w ill enter data subm itted in hard-copy from those facilities allow ed to do so and electronically subm it the data to the E PA on b eh a lf o f the facility. V The perm ittee/facility is currently using the eD M R data reporting system . See special condition #C .24
y R eporting for Therm al and pH C om pliance: T he facility w ill report their findings in the eD M R system . D aily m easurem ents are
reported in tabular format as an attachm ent. The facility w ill report the day w ith the h igh est reading in the "daily m ax" b ox for each: stream flow , stream temperature, discharge flow , and discharge temperature at end o f m ixing zone using the calculations provided in the perm it.
Permit Condition (Parameter)
Discharge M o C W I S
N o.
Param. #
M o C W I S Parameter Name
Units
Limit
F lo w
001 T
50050
F low , in conduit or thru
M gal/d
treatment plant
(M G D )
Thermal D ischarge Effluent F low (Q e) cfs
001 T 001 T
Therm al discharge m illion
00015
M BTU/hr
5.5
btus per hr.
78886
Flow , P rocess water
tv'/sec (C FS)
*
Effluent Tem perature (T e) F (m onitoring location = end o f pipe)
001 T
00011
Temperature, W ater, deg. F
F
Stream F low (Q s) cfs
001 T
74069
Stream F low - Estim ated =
cfs
*
(m onitoring location = instream )
Stream Temperature (T s) F
001 T
52240
Temperature, background
F
*
(m onitoring location = instream )
AT F
Temp. D iffbetw een
001 T
03772
F
5
U p /D ow n stream
Ternz F (m onitoring location = dow nstream )
001 T
00011
Temperature, W ater, deg. F
varies F
m o n th ly 2
m onthly total
Tim e o f D eviation - M onth
T cap m ay be ex ceed ed 1% o f the tim e
001 T
82577
M onth E xcursion Tim e
and year-to-
*
(H ours)
date total
(m onthly m onitoring)
(hours)
T cap m ay b e ex ceed ed 1% o f the tim e (yearly lim it)
001 Y
82577
M onth E xcursion Tim e (H ours)
annual total (hours)
438 hours
= W hile the lim it set param eter nam e says "estim ated" the facility m ay not estim ate stream flo w and m ust use an appropriate gaging
station to retrieve stream flow values.
X The com pliance point is listed as the T dev value for each m onth as such is the value w h ich shall not be exceeded.
Sampling Frequency Justification:
Sam pling and reporting frequency w as generally retained from previous perm it. D aily sam pling o f therm al discharge is required to c o in cid e w ith other sim ilar fa c ilitie s. T h is fa c ility is sa m p lin g for n e w ly id e n tifie d co n tam in an ts o f con cern at the ash p on d s therefore m onth ly sam p lin g is required to determ ine i f the facility w ill b e in com p lian ce w ith the operating perm it in accordance w ith A ppendix
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center F ad Sheet Page 60 o f 65
Part VII. Administrative Requirements
U o f M issou ri's W ater P ollution C ontrol Perm it M anual. Sam p lin g frequency for storm w ater-only outfalls is typically quarterly even though B M P in sp ectio n occu rs m onthly. T he fa c ility m ay sa m p le m ore freq uently i f th ey n eed additional data to determ ine i f thenbest m anagem ent practices or tech n ology is perform ing as expected. 4 0 C FR 122.45(d )(1) indicates all continuous discharges shall be perm itted with daily m axim um and m onthly average lim its.
W E T T e stin g s c h e d u le s and in te rv a ls are e sta b lish e d in a c co r d a n ce w ith the d ep a rtm en t's P erm it W riters M anual; S e c tio n 5 .2 Effluent Limits/ WET Testingfor Compliance Bio-monitoring.
Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity EkI - N o le s s than Once/Year:
ER1 -In d u strial d isch a rg ers w ith to x ic p aram eters in th e d isc h a r g e , w h ic h m a y alter p r o d u ctio n p r o c esses; or fa c ilitie s w h ich h an d le large quantities o f toxic substances or substances w h ich are toxic in large am ounts shall conduct chrom e W E T test at a frequency o f once per year. Outfall #001: O nce through coolin g water - w ill be perform ed concurrently o f biocid e use. O utfalls # 0 0 2 and #006: A sh ponds - required yearly.
Sampling Type Justification:
Sam pling type w as generally continued from the previous perm it. T he sam p lin g types are representative o f the discharges, and are protective o f water quality. D ischarges w ith altering effluent should have com posite sam pling; discharges w ith uniform effluent can have grab sam p les. G rab sam p les are u su a lly appropriate for storm w ater. Param eters w h ich m ust h a v e grab sam pling are: pH ,
a m m o n ia , E. coli, total resid ual c h lo rin e , fr ee a v a ila b le c h lo rin e , h e x a v a len t ch r o m iu m , d is s o lv e d o x y g e n , total p h osp h o ru s, an d
volatile organic sam ples. C om posite sam pling w as changed to grab sam pling at outfall # 0 2 A to m atch other sam pling types throughout the rest o f the permit.
Part VII. A dministrative R equirements
O n the b asis o f prelim inary sta ff review and the application o f applicable standards and regulations, the Departm ent, as adm inistrative agent for the M issouri C lean W ater C om m ission, proposes to issue a perm it(s) subject to certain effluent lim itations, schedules, and sp ecial conditions contained herein and w ithin the operating perm it. T he proposed determ inations are tentative pending public com m ent.
Permit Synchronization:
T he D epartm ent o f Natural R esou rces is currently undergoing a synchronization process for operating perm its. Perm its are norm ally issu ed on a five-year term, but to achieve synchronization m any perm its w ill need to be issu ed for less than the full five years allow ed b y regulation. The intent is all perm its w ithin a w atershed w ill m ove through the W atershed B ased M anagem ent (W B M ) cycle together w ill all expire in the sam e fiscal year, http://ckff.m o.gov/env/w pp/cpp/docs/w atershed-based-m auagem ent.pdf. This w ill allow further stream lining b y placin g m ultiple perm its w ith in a sm aller geographic area on pu blic notice sim ultaneously, thereby reducing repeated adm inistrative efforts. T his w ill also a llo w the departm ent to explore a w atershed based perm itting effort at som e point in the future. R enew al applications m ust continue to b e subm itted w ithin 180 days o f expiration, h ow ever, in instances where effluent data from the previous renew al is less than three years old, data m ay be re-subm itted to m eet the requirem ents o f the renew al application. If the perm it provides a schedule o f com pliance for m eeting n ew w ater quality b ased effluent lim its b eyond the expiration date o f the perm it, the tim e rem aining in the schedule o f com plian ce w ill be allotted in the ren ew ed perm it.
y Because o f the time required by thepermit to conduct studies according to new CWA 316(b) regulations, thepermit will be issuedfor afullfive year term.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 61 of 65
Part VTI. Administrative Requirements
Public Notice:
T he D epartm ent shall g iv e public notice a draft perm it has been prepared and its issuance is pending. h ttp ://d n r.m o .g O v /en v/w D p /p erm it.s/p n /in d ex.h tm L A d d itio n a lly , p u b lic n o tic e wall b e issu e d i f a p u b lic h earin g is to b e h eld b e c a u se o f a significant degree o f interest in and w ater quality concerns related to a draft perm it. N o public notice is required w hen a request for a perm it m odification or term ination is denied; h ow ever, the requester and perm ittee m ust b e n otified o f the denial in writing. T he Departm ent m ust issu e pu blic notice o f a p end ing operating perm it or o f a new' or reissued statew id e general perm it. The public connnent period is the length o f tim e not less than 30 days follow in g the date o f the public notice which interested persons m ay subm it w ritten com m ents about the proposed perm it. For persons w anting to subm it com m ents regarding this proposed operating perm it, then please refer to the Public N otice page located at the front o f this draft operating perm it. T he P ublic N o tice page g ives direction on h ow and w here to subm it appropriate com m ents.
The first Public Notice period for this operating permit was from 9/2/2016 to 10/3/2016.
Public Notice Comments:
Letter #1
Comment 1 D N R 's B A T determ ination is unlaw ful. T he fact sheet for th e draft perm it docum ents the elem en ts that D N R considered, as it conducted a TBEL analysis for therm al discharges at Sioux. D N R con clu d ed in its best p rofessional judgm ent a once through cooling system represents B A T . T his is a surprising result given the explicit charge o f the C W A to elim inate all polluting discharges as w ell as the clear instruction that the B A T standard should focus on the best perform er in the industry.
D N R 's T B E L determ ination su perficially considers the relevant factors w h ile qu ick ly d e v o lv in g into a m isgu id ed cost-benefit analysis contrasting once-through coolin g w ith closed cy cle cooling. W hile D N R is correct to consider the cost o f com pliance, there exists no legal charge to conduct a cost-benefit analysis. To the contrary, w hereas the less protective best practicable control technology currently available (B PT ) standard that w as in place in the early years o f the C W A required a consideration o f co st in relation to e fflu e n t r ed u ctio n b e n e fits, th e B A T standard s im p ly lis ts c o s t a m o n g se v e ra l o th er factors. In d eed , D N R 's fact s h e e t id e n tifie s the proper relationship betw een co st and benefit as it pertains to various types o f analyses. Sp ecifically, the consideration o f cost plays a lesser role in condu cting B A T determ inations than w ith other analyses. It is perplexing then that D N R proceeds to m isapply the B A T requirem ents.
The fact sheet correctly identified clo sed -cy cle co o lin g as the m ost com m on option available and an established tech nology that m ay b e feasib le for rep lacing the antiquated once-through c o o lin g system s at Siou x. A sid e from adm itting that closed c y cle co o lin g w ou ld reduce the discharge o f heat load in the w ater -w h ic h is leg a lly required solution to S io u x 's thermal p ollution p r o b le m - the rem aining purported B A T analysis reads as a list o f hurdles to c lo sed -cy cle co o lin g im plem entation. For instance, D N R states that closed -cycle c o o lin g w o u ld in crease the con su m p tion o f water, it w o u ld h a v e a h igh cap ital c o sts and entail th e add ition o f n e w ch em icals, and a n ew w ater treatment plant. There is no discussion o f the best perform ing tech n ology applied at Sioux, w ou ld rem edy the thermal pollution problem . There is no calculation o f the extent to w hich thermal pollution w ould be reduced or elim inated from outfall #001 by application o f alternative tech n ologies. D N R 's inappropriate and poorly executed cost analysis is m islabeled a B A T analysis. R egrettably, it is h eavy on the purported cost o f c lo sed c y cle co o lin g and bereft o f its m an y b en efits, it quantifies costs but fails to quantify pollution-red uction b en efits, and it d ocs n ot co m e c lo se to com p lyin g w ith the C W A .
D N R m ust set perm it lim its for outfall #001 based on bona fid e assessm en t o f B A T . D N R m ust issu e a revised draft N P D E S permit subject to public notice and com m ent that describes and docum ents a legally su fficien t B A T analysis to reduce thermal pollution from the antiquated once-through co o lin g system currently em p loyed at Sioux.
Response 1 The perm it writer determ ined the B A T at this tim e for the fa cility is once-th rou gh coolin g. N o w h ere in the regulations is a perm it writer required to prom ote c lo s e d c y c le c o o lin g i f it is n o t warranted at the site. W h en the fa c ility has com p leted the required stu dies in accordance w ith C W A 3 16(b ) requirem ents, the perm it writer m ay m ake a different con clu sion i f the facility has contributed to an im balanced ind igenou s population o f aquatic life.
Comment 2 D N R 's four year sch ed u le o f com p lian ce is unlaw ful. A s a general rule, the C W A required that discharges com p ly im m ediately w ith all T B E L s in fu rth eran ce o f th e sta tu te 's g o a l that a ll d isc h a r g e s o f p o llu tio n u ltim a te ly b e e lim in a te d . E P A 's C W A reg u la tio n s therefore prohibit E PA from granting a discharger a schedu le for com in g into com plian ce w here the statutory deadline has been passed; even w here this is not the case, a com plian ce sched u le cannot be issued w hen the w ater quality standards to b e m et are more than three years old. To obtain such a com p lian ce sch ed u le, the perm ittee m ust estab lish that such a schedule is necessary-that the standard could not otherw ise be m et- and even then, the perm ittee m ust achieve com plian ce as soon as possible.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 62 of 65
Part VH. Administrative Requirements
D N R has a history o f increasing therm al lim its at S io u x 's outfall #00 1 . T he original operating perm it included a lim it o f 109 F. In 1981, A m eren decid ed that it co u ld operate S iou x better w ith a hear rejection lim it o f 4 3 2 7 .0 x 106 Btu/hr. D N R con sen t! to this request and issued a perm it in 1982 w ith a heat rejection lim it o f 4.33 x 109 Btu/hr. T w o perm it cycles follow ed w ith this sam e lim it, until the lim it w as raised again in 1992 to 4 .6 x 109 Btu/hr. In 1999, d ie tiierm al lim it w as elevated on ce m ore to 5 .5 0 x 109 Btu/hr w hich rem ains the current m etric.
D N R 's fa ct sh e e t a ttem p ts to j u s t if y th e s c h e d u le o f c o m p lia n c e b y sta tin g that p rior perm it lim its (an d d ie in terim lim its in th e draft) are stated in Btus/hr w h ile the final perm it lim its are stated as tem perature lim its reflecting the applicable water quality standards. H o w e v e r , S io u x 's e x is tin g p erm it a lre a d y req u ires it to c o m p ly w ith th e sta te 's w ater q u a lity stan dards. T h u s, r e m o v in g this req uirem en t and rep lacin g it w ith a four-year e x ten sio n to c o m e in to c o m p lia n ce w ith w ater q u ality standards vio la tes the anti backsliding requirem ent o f the CW A .
A m eren is a so p h istica ted utility. It k n o w s w hat the w ater q u ality standards are, it k n o w s h o w to m eet them , and it sh ould already be m eeting them . A m eren 's N P D E S renew al application did not seek an exten sion and the fact sh eet d o es not sp ecify w hy the exten sion is necessary. S im ply put, anodier four-year exten sion for S io u x to co m e into com p lian ce w ith W Q S is far too long.
D N R m ust elim inate the four-year ex ten sio n for Siou x to m eet the already applicable w ater quality standard.
Response 2 T he departm ent has review ed additional inform ation related to the thermal discharge at the facility and revised the SO C to allow for a tw o year S O C fo r th erm al c o m p lia n c e . T h e p r e v io u s p e r m it's c a lc u la tio n s c o n s is te d o f m e a su r in g tem p erature o n th e intake condensers and m easuring the temperature on the discharge condensers. T his is a s in g le subtraction calculation to determ ine discharge B T U s.
In D ecem ber 2 0 1 6 follow in g a m eeting w ith the perm it writer, the facility subm itted a request to change the SO C a tw o year SO C citing that they believe it w ill take 2 4 m onths to design, perm it, construct, and validate the instrum entation and procedures to com ply w ith the lim itation. T his includes the am ount o f tim e required to install river and end o f pipe m onitoring gauges and softw are w hich w ill be u sed in real-tim e in the control room to determ ine com p lian ce w ith W Q S. Currently, the therm ocouples installed at the facility m easure temperatures w hich m ay not accurately represent the actual river tem perature and the actual discharge temperature.
In review in g the previou s narrative perm it con d ition w h ich required com plian ce w ith th e therm al water quality standard (W Q S) it is apparent that the departm ent w a s in error in p lacin g such a con d ition related to W Q S com p lian ce in the perm it. 4 0 C FR 12 2 .4 4 (d )(l)(iii) requires that in instan ces w ere reasonable potential (R P ) to cause or contribute to an exceed ance o f a water quality standard exists, a num eric lim itation m ust be included in the perm it. T he previous perm it inclu ded a num eric B T U lim itation to address the ch an ge in river tem perature RP. T lie p rev io u s perm it did n ot in clu d e a num eric lim itation to address R P for the tem perature cap. A narrative blanket exp ression o f W Q S com p lian ce w here RP exists is clearly in con flict o f 4 0 C FR 1 2 2 .4 4 (d )(l)(iii). For this reason die narrative W Q S com p lian ce condition has b een rem oved from the perm it. Furthennore the draft perm it requires com plian ce w ith a num eric tem perature cap lim itation giv en RP exists to ex ceed the tem perature cap criteria beyond the allow able m ixing zone.
Comment 3 T he draft perm it fails to elim inate the discharge o f fly ash and bottom ash at outfalls # 0 0 2 and # 0 0 6 .
T he fact sheet for the draft perm it states that: the n ew ly rev ised federal Steam E lectric G u idelin es w ill require [Sioux] to elim inate the discharge o f fly and bottom ash transport w ater a s so o n as p ossib le b egin n in g N ovem b er 1 ,2 0 1 8 but no later than D ecem ber 31, 2023. A m eren is currently designin g w astew ater treatm ent system s to m anage the other (non-ash) w astestream s and has engaged D N R in discussions regarding construction and operating perm it im plications.
A lthou gh an accurate partial description o f the revised E L G s as applied to Siou x, the fact sh eet is unenforceable. T he draft perm it d oes not com p ly w ith the revised E L G s b ecau se th ey are not incorporated into the perm it The perm it m ust be am ended to explicitly incorporate the revised ELGs.
O utfalls # 0 0 2 and # 0 0 6 discharge ash transport w astew ater T h e revised ELG ex p licitly prohibits discharges o f tins transport water at Sioux. A lthough the fact sheet m entions discussions betw een D N R and A m eren regarding the elim ination o f fly and bottom ash traasport water, the draft perm it fails to incorporate both a deadline and a lim it. T o com p ly w ith the revised ELG s, D N R m ust endure that th e fin a l p erm it e x p lic itly req u ires the e lim in a tio n o f b o tto m and fly a sh transport w a ter b y N o v e m b e r 1, 2 0 1 8 .
Ameren Missouri --Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 63 o f 65
Part VII. Administrative Requirements
Response 3 T he facility has determ ined M ay 1 ,2 0 2 1 or before w ould b e the final sluice date. T he date w as approved by the department and lias been incorporated as sp ecial con d ition # C .23 o f the perm it.
Comment 4 T he draft perm it failed to establish lim its on F G D w astew ater at Sioux. D N R m ust establish lim its on FG D w astew ater at outfall #007. O utfall # 0 0 7 is designated as the em ergen cy o v erflo w from S io u x 's no-d isch arge recycle pond, w h ich inclu des F G D slurry. Pursuant to the revised E LG s, discharges o f FG D w astew ater from existin g FG D system s are subject to lim its for arsenic, m ercury, selenium , and nitrogen. A ccord in gly, any discharges - including during an em ergen cy - m ust b e su bject to these lim its. A lthough the fact sheet recognizes that the revised E L G s im pose lim its on F G D w astew ater effective N ovem b er 1, 201 8 , the draft perm it d oes not incorporate those lim its. T o com ply w ith the revised EL G s, D N R m ust exp licitly describe in the final perm it the arsenic, m ercury, selenium , and n itro g en lim its a p p lic a b le b e g in n in g N o v e m b e r 1, 2 0 1 8 at o u tfa ll # 0 0 7 .
Response 4 The purpose o f the N ational P ollution D ischarge E lim ination System (N P D E S ) program is elim ination o f all sources o f pollutants. B y disallow ing discharge o f this outfall, the departm ent has effectiv ely contr o lled for the pollutants listed in the effluent lim it guideline (ELG ) m ore effe c tiv e ly than a llo w in g discharge w ith lim itations. R egardless, to co m p ly w ith the spirit o f the ELG , the lim itations w ere added to the outfall even though no-discharge is m ore stringent than num eric effluent lim itations.
Letter #2
Comment 1 T he draft perm it substantially changes the (final) m onitoring param eters and m ethods to b e used to assess com pliance w ith M issouri's th erm al w a ter q u a lity stan dards. It c o n ta in s tw o p r o v is io n s reg a r d in g the th erm al e fflu e n t fro m th e C e n te r 's o n ce-th rou gh c o o lin g w ater system . T he first is the estab lish m en t o f "interim E ffluent L im itations" w h ich con tin u e the ex istin g heat rejection lim its for a period o f up to four years. T his tim e is provided in conjunction w ith a requirem ent that w e im plem ent changes necessary to achieve th e "F in a l E fflu e n t L im ita tio n s" and m o n ito r c o m p lia n c e w ith M is s o u r i's th erm al w a te r q u a lity stan d ard s, a p p lica b le to M is sissip p i River Zone IB p a - 10 CSR 20-7 031 (5)(D ).
The draft perm it contains sim p le dilution form ulas to be u sed to calculate the tem perature and change in temperature at the ed ge o f the m ixin g zone to a ssess com plian ce w ith the final lim its. F acin g sim ilar criteria in prior draft perm its for other A m eren E nergy Centers, w e raised concerns regarding our ability to m aintain com plian ce (particularly during periods o f high dem and) w hen circum stances b e y o n d th e f a c ilit y 's con trol s u c h as w h e n a m b ie n t strea m tem p eratu res are v e r y c lo s e to o r e x c e e d the m o n th ly lim its s p e c ific in the water quality standards.
A t this tim e, w e b elieve the S iou x E nergy Center (SE C ) w ill routinely and consistently achieve com pliance using the formulas provided in the perm it w ithin the norm al variability o f am bient stream flo w s and temperatures. H ow ever, during extrem e conditions our ab ility to operate could be im pacted and in such circu m stan ces A m eren reserves the right to seek a provisional variance from the A g en cy as provided b y M issouri law . In addition, A m eren m ay seek D N R 's approval o f alternative m easures o f com pliance including use o f site sp ecific therm al plu m e m od els, or other m ech anism s as m ay be available. In addition, w e m ay work w ith the Departm ent to im plem ent an alternative therm al discharge co m p lia n ce equation, b a sed o n m od elin g that w ou ld m ore p recisely calculate the change in tem p eratu re (A T ) a n d tem p eratu re (T iIlu.) at th e e d g e o f th e m ix in g z o n e . A m e r e n in ten d s to u tiliz e s o m e or all o f th e tim e a llo w e d under the interim lim its, to d evelop appropriate m onitoring m ethods and assess challenges posed b y extrem e am bient conditions as m ay occur during this period. T he required annual report w ill provide the Departm ent w ith details regarding com pliance with the final outfall #001 lim itations.
Response 1 T he department d oes not dictate how the facility is to use the tim e w ithin the schedule o f com pliance (SO C ), how ever, the facility must m eet the final effluent lim itations w h en required or as soon as p ossible. The SO C w as changed to a tw o year schedule as outlined in an em ail dated 12/9/2016.
Comment 2 A m eren believ es the annual chronic W E T test requirem ent for outfall #001 (coolin g w ater) as listed on the tables and special condition # 1 9 m ay not be necessary. Further, the required m ethods m ay not y ield representative sam p les o f the discharge during the planned m ollu sk icid e treatm ent o f the intake bays. D uring the annual treatm ent, the intake bays are clo sed and isolated prior to adding m olluskicide. T he treatment is com pleted on a w eek en d as the plant has to be de-rated. T w o air lances provide m ixing within the bays. A fter app roxim ately 8 hours, tire in tak e b a y s are o p en ed and p u m p ed through the sy stem at near 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 gpm . O utfall #001 sam p les co llected fo llo w in g treatm ent are < 0 .0 5 ppm o f the product (G E Spectrus C T 1300). S in ce the intake bay flo w rates are extrem ely high and the m ollu sk icid e volum es and concentrations are relatively low , it w ould be un lik ely to collect a representative sam ple (chrom e W E T s require m ulti day grabs) containing residual m ollu sk icid e present from outfall #001.
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 64 o f 65
Part VH. Administrative Requirements
Response 2 T he perm it writer has considered the m ethod b y w hich m ollu sk icid es are used and has changed the type o f test from chronic to single grab acute.
Comment 3 Special condition 12 requires develop m en t and im plem entation o f a storm water p ollution prevention plan and provides details regarding the scope and conditions. U nder paragraph 13(c) it noted the plan m ust include a schedule for once per m onth inspections. W e b eliev e this is m uch m ore frequent than necessary and w ou ld create an adm inistrative burden w ithout com m ensurate benefits necessary to m aintain appropriate controls. W e note that SW PPP obligations for recently issu ed perm it for A m eren's C allaw ay and Labadie E nergy Centers, sp ecify quarterly inspections instead. W e ask the SEC perm it be revised to be consistent w ith these and allow for a quarterly schedule.
Response 3 T he departm ent h as determ ined m onth ly in sp ection s are necessary for facilities discharging to w aters o f the state and the standard tem p la te la n g u a g e w a s c h a n g e d a c co r d in g ly . W'i t h a s ite a s c o m p le x a s th is o n e , th e p e r m it w riter h a s k ep t th e fr eq u e n c y at m o n th ly .
A dditionally the follow in g changes have been m ade to the perm it draft since the public notice.
It w a s d e te rm in e d th e fa c ility 's o u tfa ll # 0 2 A is a p p lic a b le to E. coli lim ita tio n s b e c a u s e th e nature o f th e d isc h a r g e in fers RP. T he
facility w ill have a 2-year SO C to install U V treatm ent as no treatm ent currently exists on site for bacteria. T his change requires a second public notice. O utfall #001 perm it table units w ere changed from m g/L to pg/L for free available chlorine Fact sheet perm itted features table o f flow s w as changed to add total flo w correctly for outfall #006 L ow flo w values w ere recalculated to include the Illin ois River W eek ly averages for dom estic wastew ater were com m uted to daily m axim um s as only PO T W s are afforded this concession.
The second Public Notice period for this operating permit was from 2/20/2017 through 3/20/2017.
One letter was received:
Comment 1 E ssen tially sam e as C om m ent 1 in Letter # 2 for P N #1.
Response 1 T h e d ep artm en t h as d e te rm in e d th e standard e q u a tio n i s cu rren tly r ep resen ta tiv e o f th is f a c ility 's d isc h a r g e an d the fa c ility m a y su b m it for review , through perm it m odification, an alternate equation or m odelin g to revise the perm it conditions.
Comment 2 Special condition #23 has the incorrect date for legacy wastew ater.
Response 2 S p ecial con d ition # 2 3 w as edited to reflect the correct legacy w astew ater date o f M ay 1, 2021.
Comment 3 The SO C com pliance date for outfall #001 w as listed as 4 years. T ables A - l , A -2 . and fact sheet list the SO C for outfall #001 as 2 years.
Response 3 T ypographical errors w ere corrected regarding the SO C tim efram e (changed four to tw o) in section D o f the permit. P ublic notice is not required as text in section A o f the perm it and the fact sheet clearly indicate it is a tw o year SO C.
Comment 4 T he facility noted the last sentence o f paragraph tw o on page three o f outfall # 0 0 7 's discussion w as rem oved as it w as m isleading and not entirely correct.
Response 4 The sentence was rem oved.
Comment 5 T h e fa c ility n o te d th e fa ct s h e e t 's s e c tio n e n title d " A s h Im p o u n d m en t C lo su r e s" w a s n o t la b e le d co rrectly and w o u ld b e b etter su ited in the ELG com pliance section. A lso , th e dates supplied are tentative (except for the final slu ice date).
Ameren Missouri - Sioux Energy Center Fact Sheet Page 65 of 65
PartVII. Administrative Requirements
Response 5 T h e se c tio n e n title d "A s h Im p ou n d m en t C lo su r e s" w a s m o v e d to th e E L G c o m p lia n c e se c tio n and la b e le d a s ten tative. S p ecia l condition #23 rem ains for the final sluice date.
A d d ition ally the fo llo w in g changes have b een m ade to the perm it draft sin ce the public notice. O utfall #007 fact sheet E ffluent L im itations T able -to ta l recoverable selenium ; changed to reflect ELG values as W Q RP not established. Effluent lim itation table A -8 for outfall #007 w as correct. A sectio n w as added under "Part VI: Sam pling and R eporting R equirem ents" to assist the perm ittee is entering the required inform ation into eD M R .
N on e o f these ch an ges require an additional public notice.
Date of Fact Sheet: March 21,2017 Completed By: Pam Hackler, Environmental Scientist Missouri Department of Natural Resources Water Protection Program Operating Permits Section - Industrial Unit
(573)526-3386 pam .hackler@ dnr.m o.gov
IDEM
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment.
100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN46204
(800) 451-6027 (317)232-8603 www.idem.IN.gov
Eric J. Holcomb
Governor
Bruno Pigott
C owinissionej
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 28, 2017
Mr. Wayne Games, VP of Power Supply SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station P.O. Box 209 Evansville, IN 47702
Dear Mr. Games:
Re: Final Permit No. IN0002259 SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station Newburgh, IN Warrick County
Your application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for authorization to discharge into the waters of the State of Indiana has been processed in accordance with Section 402 and 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.), and IC 13-15, IDEM's permitting authority. All discharges from this facility shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
One condition of your permit requires periodic reporting of several effluent parameters. You are required to submit both federal discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and state Monthly Monitoring Reports (MMRs) on a routine basis. The MMR form can be found on IDEM's web site at http://www.in.qov/idem/cleanwater/2396.htm.
Once you are on this page, select the "IDEM Forms" page and locate the "Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR) for Industrial Discharge Permits-30530" under the Wastewater Facilities heading. We recommend selecting the "XLS" version because it will complete all of the calculations when you enter the data.
All NPDES permit holders are required to submit their monitoring data to IDEM using NetDMR. Please contact Rose McDaniel at (317) 233-2653 or Helen Demmings at (317) 232-8815 if you would like more information on NetDMR. Information is also available on our website at http://IN.gov/idem/cleanwater/2422.htm.
Another condition, which needs to be clearly understood, concerns violation of the effluent limitations in the permit. Exceeding the limitations constitutes a violation of the permit and may subject the permittee to criminal or civil penalties. (See Part II A.2.) It is therefore urged that your office and treatment operator understand this part of the permit.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
0
AState that Works
A response to the comments contained in the letters dated January 12, 2017, from Tony Mendoza of the Sierra Club and February 13, 2017 from Angela CasbonScheller of Vectren Corporation, pertaining to the draft NPDES permit is contained in the Post Public Notice Addendum. The Post Public Notice Addendum is located at the end of the Fact Sheet.
It should also be noted that any appeal must be filed under procedures outlined in IC 13-15-6, IC 4-21.5, and the enclosed Public Notice. The appeal must be initiated by filing a petition for administrative review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within fifteen (15) days of the emailing of an electronic copy of this letter or within eighteen (18) days of the mailing of this letter by filing at the following addresses:
Director Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North Room 501 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North Room 1301 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
If you have any questions concerning the permit, please contact Jennifer Carlino at 317/232-8702 or Jcarlino@idem.in.gov. Questions concerning appeal procedures should be directed to the Office of Environmental Adjudication, at 317/232-8591.
Sincerely,
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Enclosures cc: U.S. EPA, Region V
Warrick County Health Department Lisa Messinger, Vectren Corporation Angela Casbon-Scheller, Vectren Corporation
Page 1 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the "Act"), and IDEM's authority under IC 13-15,
VECTREN CORPORATION SIGECO F.B. CULLEY GENERATING STATION is authorized to discharge from the steam electric generating facility that is located at 3700 Darlington Road in Newburgh, Indiana, to receiving waters identified as the Ohio River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, I, III and IV hereof. This permit may be revoked for the nonpayment of applicable fees in accordance with IC 13-18-20.
Effective Date: May 1,2017__________________ Expiration Date: April 30, 2022_____________ In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information and forms as are required by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management no later than 180 days prior to the date of expiration. Issued March 28, 2017, for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Page 2 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
PART I
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
1. The permittee is authorized to discharge in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit from Outfall 001 [2], The discharge is limited to condenser cooling water and ash pond discharge from internal outfalls 101 and 201 and stormwater. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter
Averaae
Maximum
Flow[11]
Report
Report
TRO[8]
-
-
Chlorination/Bromination[12, 13]
Frequency -
-
Duration -
-
Plant Capacity Factor (% of Total Capacity)
Temperature [3]
Intake
-
-
Effluent -
-
Mixed River [9] -
-
Mercury [ 1, 5, 7] -
-
Arsenic [ 1 , 5 ] -
-
Cadmium [1] -
-
Selenium [ 1 , 5 ] -
-
Nickel [1]
-
-
Aluminum [1] -
-
Silver [1,5]
-
-
Zinc [1]
-
-
Free Cyanide [5, 6] -
-
Sulfate
-
-
Copper [1][14]
Interim
-
-
Final
-
-
Iron [1]
-
-
Boron
-
-
Chloride
-
-
Fluoride
-
-
Bromide
-
-
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [4, 10]
Outfall 001 Table 1
Units MGD -
_
-
. -
_
-
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
-
0.06
Units mg/l
_
Report
4
Times/day
40 Minutes/Dose
-
% Daily Avg.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
TvDe
1 X Day
Continuous
1X Day
Grab
1 X Day 1 X Day 1 X Day
Report Report Report
Report Report Report 12
Report 2.1 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Report Report Report 20 Report 4.2 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
"F
1 X Hour
Grab
F
1 X Hour
Grab
F
1 X Day
Report
ng/i 1 X Bi-Monthly Grab
mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
ug/i 2 X Month mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
ug/i 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 1 X Month
Grab
mg/l 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
Report 31 Report Report Report Report Report
Report 63 Report Report Report Report Report
ug/i 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
ug/l 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 1 X Quarterly[15]
Grab
mg/l 1 X Quarterly[15]
Grab
mg/l 1 X Quarterly[15]
Grab
mg/l 1 X Quarterly!! 5]
Grab
Page 3 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Parameter pH
[1] [2]
[3] [4] [5]
[6] [7]
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Frequency
Type
1 X Month
Grab
The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
Beginning December 31, 2020, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from Unit 3. Beginning December 31, 2023, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from Unit 2.
Beginning November 1, 2018, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water.
Temperature shall be monitored and measurements recorded every hour. The highest single recorded measurement for each day shall be reported on the state monthly monitoring report for each day. The highest single recorded daily measurement shall be reported on the federal discharge monitoring report as the maximum daily temperature for that month.
See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Arsenic Arsenic Selenium Selenium Selenium Cyanide, Free Cyanide, Free Silver Silver
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B 200.9 200.8 3113B or 3114B 200.8 200.9 4500-CN-G 1677 3113B or 272.2 200.8 (Rev. 5.4
LOD 0.2 ng/l 1 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.4 ug/l 2 ug/l 2.1 ug/l 0.6 ug/l 5 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.2 ug/l 0.001 ug/l
LO Q
0.5 ng/l 3.2 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 1.3 ug/l 6.4 ug/l 6.7 ug/l 1.9 ug/l 16 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 0.64 1.0 ug/l
Sample preservation procedures and maximum allowable holding times for total cyanide, or available (free) cyanide are prescribed in Table II of 40 CFR Part 136. Note the footnotes specific to cyanide. Preservation and holding time information in Table II takes precedence over information in specific methods or elsewhere.
Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit using
Page 4 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM. [8] The monitoring requirements and effluent limitations for Total Residual Oxidants (TRO) will apply at any time chlorine or bromine is used and may be in the discharge. Use the test methods for Total Residual Chlorine to determine Total Residual Oxidants. At present, two test methods are considered to be acceptable to IDEM, amperometric (4500-C!-D,E) and DPD colorimetric method (4500-CI-G), to determine TRO concentrations at the level of 0.06 mg/l. If another EPA test method is to be used, the method must first be approved by this Department.
[9] The discharge from Outfall 001, as determined at the edge of the mixing zone described in 327 IAC 2-1-4, shall not exceed the maximum limits in the following table more than one percent (1%) of the hours in the twelve (12) month period ending with any month. At no time shall the water temperature at such locations exceed the maximum limits in the following table by more than three degrees Fahrenheit (3F) (one and seven-tenths degrees Celsius (1.7C)).
Table 1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec F 50 50 60 70 80 87 89 89 87 78 70 57 C 10 10 15.6 21.1 26.7 30.6 31.7 31.7 30.7 25.6 21.1 14
The permittee will have the option of either meeting the above limits at the end of pipe, or by meeting the limits with a mixed river temperature that takes into account the mixing zone allowed by 327 IAC 2-1-6(b). The mixed river temperature is to be determined by employing the following mathematical model:
Qe(Te-Tu) Tmr= T u + ..............
3553 Where:
Tmr = mixed river temperature (F) Tu = upstream river temperature (F) Te = effluent temperature (F) Qe = effluent flow (MGD) 3553 = one-half of the Cb.io low flow value of the receiving stream in MGD
[10] See Part III of the permit for additional requirements.
[11] Flow is to be measured continuously using a flow measuring device. The permittee may use engineering calculations to measure flow as approved by the commissioner.
Page 5 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
[12] Chlorination/Bromination reporting requirements for frequency, duration and duration/day apply when the facility is chlorinating/brominating.
[13] During intermittent treatment, compliance monitoring samples will be collected 1 X Day, 15 minutes after initial injection of treatment chemicals. This will result in one sample collected during intermittent treatment conducted during the work week (Monday - Friday).
[14] The permittee has a 3 year schedule of compliance as outlined in Part I.F. in which to meet the final effluent limitations for Copper.
[15] Samples shall be taken once at any time during each of the four annual quarters:
(A) January-February-March; (B) April-May-June; (C) July-August-September; and (D) October-November-December.
For quarterly monitoring, in the first quarter for example, the permittee may conduct sampling within the month of January, February or March. The result from this reporting timeframe shall be reported on the March DMR, regardless of which of the months within the quarter the sample was taken.
Page 6 of 55 Permit No. N0002259
2. The permittee is authorized to discharge in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit from Outfalls 101. The discharge is limited to discharge from the West Ash Pond. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to mixing with any other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1, 3, 4]
Internal Outfalls 101
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter
Averaae
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
Oil & Grease[2] -
-
TSS[2]
-
-
Units MGD -
*
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
15
20
30
70
Table 2
Parameter PH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Units s.u.
Units mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Day
24 Hr. Total
1 X Week
Grab
1 X Week
Grab
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv 1 X Day
Im . Grab
[1] See Part III of the permit for additional requirements.
[2] With the next permit renewal application, the permittee is required to submit flow data for all regulated, non-regulated, and dilution wastestreams and the concentration of the selected parameters contributed by each of these wastestreams for use in developing alternate limitations using the combined wastestream formula (CWF). At the next permit renewal limits will be developed using either the combined wastestream formula or by establishing internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423.
[3] Monitoring at Internal Outfall 101 is only required when a the outfall is discharging to the discharge tunnel which leads to Outfall 001.
[4] The West Ash Pond ceased receiving bottom ash, fly ash and FGD wastewater in October 2015.
Page 7 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
3. The permittee is authorized to discharge in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit from Outfall 201. The discharge is limited to discharge from the East Ash Pond. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to mixing with any other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [2, 4, 6, 7]
Internal Outfalls 201
Table 1
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter
Averaae
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
Oil & Grease[5] -
-
TSS[5]
-
-
Copper [1,3,5] -
-
Iron [1,3,5, 8] -
-
Units MGD -
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
15
20
30
70
-
0.2
1.0
1.0
Units mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Day
24 Hr. Total
1 X Week
Grab
1 X Week
Grab
1 X Day
24 Hr. Comp.
1 X Day
24 Hr. Comp.
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
ly g e
1 X Day
Grab
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[2] See Part III of the permit for additional requirements.
[3] These limitations and monitoring requirements apply only during discharge of metal cleaning wastes.
[4] Monitoring at Internal Outfall 201 is only required when the outfall is discharging to the discharge tunnel which leads to Outfall 001.
[5] With the next permit renewal application, the permittee is required to submit flow data for all regulated, non-regulated, and dilution wastestreams and the concentration of the selected parameters contributed by each of these wastestreams for use in developing alternate limitations using the combined wastestream formula (CWF). At the next permit renewal limits
Page 8 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
will be developed using either the combined wastestream formula or by establishing internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423.
[6] Beginning December 31, 2020, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from Unit 3. Beginning December 31, 2023, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from Unit 2.
[7] Beginning November 1, 2018, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water.8
[8] Net limits may apply. Net limitations are to be calculated by subtracting the measured background levels of these parameters in the ash pond from the actual measured concentrations of these parameters when limitations apply. These background levels are to be calculated by monitoring the ash pond effluent concentrations of Iron and Copper over a period of time, to consist of a minimum of ten samples taken over a minimum of thirty (30) days when there is no discharge of metal cleaning wastes during a period that is a least 30 days but not to exceed 90 days preceding each discharge of metal cleaning wastes. The background levels demonstrated by this monitoring, along with supporting data are to be submitted with monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) when reporting discharge of metal cleaning wastes. A new database shall be established in the quarter preceding each subsequent discharge of metal cleaning wastes.
Page 9 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
4. The permittee is authorized to discharge in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit from Outfall 301. The discharge is limited to FGD WWTP discharge. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken prior to entry into the Unit #3 (East) Ash Pond. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [5][6]
internal Outfall 301
Table 1
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
TSS
"
Arsenic [1, 3]
Interim
-
-
Final[4]
-
-
Mercury[1, 2, 3]
Interim
-
-
Final[4]
-
-
Selenium [1]
Interim
-
-
Final[4]
-
-
Nitrate/Nitrite as N
Interim
-
-
Final[4]
"
-
Units MGD "
-
'
-
-
"
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
30
100
Report 8.0
Report 11.0
Report 356
Report 788
Report 12.0
Report 23.0
Report 4.4
Report 17.0
Table 2
Parameter
pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6 .0
9 .0
Units s.u.
Units mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Day
24 Hr. Total
2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
ug/l 2 X Month ug/i 2 X Month
Grab Grab
ng/i 6 X Year ng/l 6 X Year
Grab Grab
ug/l 2 X Month ug/l 2 X Month
Grab Grab
mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month
Grab Grab
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv 2 X Month
Im . Grab
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metals as total recoverable metals.
[2] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly (every other month) in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit from the effective date of this permit using EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E.
Page 10 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
[3] The following EPA test methods and/or Standard Methods and associated LODs and LOQs are to be used in the analysis of the effluent samples. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM.
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Arsenic Arsenic
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B 200.9 200.8
LOD 0.2 ng/l 1 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.4 ug/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l 3.2 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 1.3 ug/l
[4] No later than February 1, 2021, discharge of FGD waste water shall meet the limits in Table 1 as noted above.
[5] See Part III. A and Part III. B of the permit for additional requirements.
[6] See Permit Part I.G. for a Reopener Clause related to FGD Discharge.
Page 11 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Parameter Flow TSS TBOD5 E. coli [1]
4. The permittee is authorized to discharge in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit from Outfall 004. The discharge is limited to sanitary wastewater from the sanitary wastewater treatment plant. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [4, 5]
Outfall 004
Table 1
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report -
Report .
-
-
*
Units MGD _ -
Quality or Concentration
Monitoring Requirements
Monthly
Daily
Measurement Sample
Averaae
Maximum
Units Freauencv
Type
-
-
-
2 X Month
24 Hr. Total
30
45
mg/l 2 X Month
Grab
Report
45
mg/l 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp
125 [2]
235 [3] !count/100 ml 2 X Month
Grab
Parameter pH
[1]
[2]
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
2 X Month
Grab
The E. coli limitations and monitoring requirements apply from April 1 through October 31 annually. The monthly average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
IDEM has specified the following methods as allowable for the detection and enumeration of Escherichia coli (E. coli):
1. Coliscan MF Method 2. EPA Method 1603 Modified m-TEC agar 3. mColi Blue-24. 4. Colilert MPN Method
The monthly average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean. Per 327 IAC 5-10-6, the concentration of E. coli shall not exceed one hundred twenty- five (125) cfu or mpn per 100 milliliters as a geometric mean of the effluent samples taken in a calendar month. No samples may be excluded when calculating the monthly geometric mean.
Page 12 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
[3] If less than ten samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, no samples may exceed two hundred thirty-five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. However, when ten (10) or more samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, not more than ten percent (10%) of those samples may exceed two hundred thirty-five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. When calculating ten percent, the result must not be rounded up. In reporting for compliance purposes on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form, the permittee shall record the highest non-excluded value for the daily maximum.
[4] See Part III. A and Part III. B of the permit for additional requirements,
[5] See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards,
Page 13 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
5. The permittee is required to collect intake water samples in conjunction with certain discharge samples. The intake structure is designated as 000 on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the intake water characteristics. Such samples shall be monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Parametern 1 Mercury[2] Arsenic[2] Cadmium Selenium[2] Nickel Aluminum Silver[2] Zinc Copper lron
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Intake Structure 000
Units -
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Units
ng/i mg/l ug/i mg/l mg/l mg/l
ug/i mg/l
ug/i mg/l
Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample Frequency 1 X Monthly Grab 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr, Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp. 1 X Monthly 24 Hr. Comp.
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Arsenic Arsenic Selenium Selenium Selenium Silver Silver
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B 200.9 200.8 3113B or 3114B 200.8 200.9 3113B or 272.2 200.8 (Rev. 5.4
LOD 0.2 ng/l 1 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.4 ug/l 2 ug/l 2.1 ug/l 0.6 ug/l 0.2 ug/l 0.001 ug/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l 3.2 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 1.3 ug/l 6.4 ug/l 6.7 ug/l 1.9 ug/l 0.64 1.0 ug/l
Page 14 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
B. NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
At all times the discharge from any and all point sources specified within this permit shall not cause receiving waters:
1. including the mixing zone, to contain substances, materials, floating debris, oil, scum, or other pollutants:
a. which will settle to form putrescent, or otherwise objectionable deposits;
b. which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
c. which produce color, visible oil sheen, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance;
d. which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans;
e. which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants or algae to such a degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated uses.
2. outside the mixing zone, to contain substances in concentrations which on the basis of available scientific data are believed to be sufficient to injure, be chronically toxic to, or be carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic to humans, animals, aquatic life, or plants.
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING
1. Representative Sampling
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge flow and shall be taken at times which reflect the full range and concentration of effluent parameters normally expected to be present. Samples shall not be taken at times to avoid showing elevated levels of any parameters.
2. Monthly Reporting
The permittee shall submit monitoring reports to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) containing results obtained during the
Page 15 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
previous month and shall be submitted no later than the 28th day of the month following each completed monitoring period. The first report shall be submitted by the 28th day of the month following the month in which the permit becomes effective. These reports shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and the Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). All reports shall be submitted electronically by using the NetDMR application, upon registration, receipt of the NetDMR Subscriber Agreement, and IDEM approval of the proposed NetDMR Signatory. The NetDMR website (for initial registration and monthly DMR/MMR submittal) is: https://netdmr.epa.gov/netdmr/public/home.htm. The Regional Administrator may request the permittee to submit monitoring reports to the Environmental Protection Agency if it is deemed necessary to assure compliance with the permit.
a. Calculations that require averaging of measurements of daily values (both concentrations and mass) shall use an arithmetic mean, except the monthly average for E. c o li shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
b. Daily effluent values (both mass and concentration) that are less than the LOQ that are used to determine the monthly average effluent level shall be accommodated in calculation of the average using statistical methods that have been approved by the Commissioner.
c. Effluent concentrations less than the LOD shall be reported on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms as < (less than) the value of the LOD, For example, if a substance is not detected at a concentration of 0.1 pg/l, report the value as <0.1 pg/l.
d. Effluent concentrations greater than or equal to the LOD and less than the LOQ that are reported on a DMR shall be reported as the actual value and annotated on the DMR to indicate that the value is not quantifiable.
e. Mass discharge values which are calculated from concentrations reported as less than the value of the limit of detection shall be reported as less than the corresponding mass discharge value.
f.
Mass discharge values that are calculated from effluent
concentrations greater than the limit of detection shall be reported
as the calculated value.
Definitions
a. "Monthly Average" means the total mass or flow-weighted concentration of all daily discharges during a calendar month on which
Page 16 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
daily discharges are sampled or measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such calendar month. The monthly average discharge limitation is the highest allowable average monthly discharge for any calendar month.
b. "Daily Discharge" means the total mass of a pollutant discharged during the calendar day or, in the case of a pollutant limited in terms other than mass pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-11 (e), the average concentration or other measurement of the pollutant specified over the calendar day or any twenty-four hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day for the purposes of sampling.
c. "Daily Maximum" means the maximum allowable daily discharge for any calendar day.
d. A "24-hour composite sample" means a sample consisting of at least 3 individual flow-proportioned samples of wastewater, taken by the grab sample method or by an automatic sampler, which are taken at approximately equally spaced time intervals for the duration of the discharge within a 24-hour period and which are combined prior to analysis. A flow-proportioned composite sample may be obtained by:
(1) recording the discharge flow rate at the time each individual sample is taken,
(2) adding together the discharge flow rates recorded from each individuals sampling time to formulate the "total flow" value,
(3) the discharge flow rate of each individual sampling time is divided by the total flow value to determine its percentage of the total flow value,
(4) then multiply the volume of the total composite sample by each individual sample's percentage to determine the volume of that individual sample which will be included in the total composite sample.
e. "Concentration" means the weight of any given material present in a unit volume of liquid. Unless otherwise indicated in this permit, concentration values shall be expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/l).
f.
The "Regional Administrator" is defined as the Region 5 Administrator,
U.S. EPA, located at 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604.
Page 17 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
g. The "Commissioner" is defined as the Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, which is located at the following address: 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204.
h. "Limit of Detection" or "LOD" means the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero (0) for a particular analytical method and sample matrix.
i.
"Limit of Quantitation" or "LOQ" means a measurement of the
concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a specified
laboratory procedure calibrated at a specified concentration above the
method detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at
which a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a
specified laboratory procedure for monitoring of the contaminant. This
term is also sometimes called limit of quantification or quantification
level.
j.
"Method Detection Level" or "MDL" means the minimum concentration
of an analyte (substance) that can be measured and reported with a
ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is
greater than zero (0) as determined by procedure set forth in 40 CFR
136, Appendix B. The method detection level or MDL is equivalent to
the LOD.
k. "Grab Sample" means a sample which is taken from a wastestream on a one-time basis without consideration of the flow rate of the wastestream and without considerations of time.
Test Procedures
The analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the current version of 40 CFR 136. Multiple editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater are currently approved for most methods, however, 40 CFR Part 136 should be checked to ascertain if a particular method is approved for a particular analyte. The approved methods may be included in the texts listed below. However, different but equivalent methods are allowable if they receive the prior written approval of the Commissioner and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
a. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 18th, 19th, or 20th Editions, 1992, 1995, or 1998, American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. 20005.
b. A.S.T.M. Standards, Parts 23, Water; Atmosphere Analysis
Page 18 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
1972 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103. c. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes June 1974, Revised, March 1983, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, 1014 Broadway, Cincinnati, OH 45202.
5. Recording of Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall maintain records of all monitoring information and monitoring activities, including:
a. The date, exact place and time of sampling or measurement;
b. The person(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed;
d. The person(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such measurements and analyses.
6. Additional Monitoring by Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. Other monitoring data not specifically required in this permit (such as internal process or internal waste stream data) which is collected by or for the permittee need not be submitted unless requested by the Commissioner.
7. Records Retention
All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit, including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recording from continuous monitoring instrumentation, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years. In cases where the original records are kept at another location, a copy of all such records shall be kept at the permitted facility. The three years shall be extended:
Page 19 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
a. automatically during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the permittee or regarding promulgated effluent guidelines applicable to the permittee; or
b. as requested by the Regional Administrator or the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
STORM WATER MONITORING AND NON-NUMERIC EFFLUENT LIMITS
Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall implement the non-numeric permit conditions in this Section of the permit for the entire site as it relates to storm water associated with industrial activity regardless which outfall the storm water is discharged from.
1. Control Measures and Effluent Limits
In the non-numeric_technology-based limits included in Part D.2-4., the term "minimize'' means reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable using control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practice.
2. Control Measures
Select, design, install, and implement control measures (including best management practices) to minimize pollutant discharges that address the selection and design considerations in Part D.3 to meet the non-numeric effluent limits in Part D.4. The selection, design, installation, and implementation of these control measures must be in accordance with good engineering practices and manufacturer's specifications. Any deviation from the manufacturer's specifications shall be documented. If the control measures are not achieving their intended effect in minimizing pollutant discharges, the control measures must be modified as in accordance with the corrective action requirements in Part I.D.6, Regulated storm water discharges from the facility include storm water run-on that commingles with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity at the facility.
3. Control Measure Selection and Design Considerations
When selecting and designing control measures consider the following:
a. preventing storm water from coming into contact with polluting materials is generally more effective, and cost-effective, than trying to remove pollutants from storm water;
Page 20 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
b. use of control measures in combination may be more effective than use of control measures in isolation for minimizing pollutants in storm water discharge;
c. assessing the type and quantity of pollutants, including their potential to impact receiving water quality, is critical to designing effective control measures that will achieve the limits in this permit;
d. minimizing impervious areas at the facility and infiltrating runoff onsite (including bioretention cells, green roofs, and pervious pavement, among other approaches), can reduce runoff and improve groundwater recharge and stream base flows in local streams, although care must be taken to avoid ground water contamination;
e. flow can be attenuated by use of open vegetated swales and natural depressions to reduce in-stream impacts of erosive flow;
f.
conservation and/or restoration of riparian buffers will help protect
streams from storm water runoff and improve water quality; and
g. use of treatment interceptors (e.g. swirl separators and sand filters) may be appropriate in some instances to minimize the discharge of pollutants.
Technology-Based Effluent Limits (BPT/BAT/BCT); Non-Numeric Effluent Limits
a. Minimize Exposure
Minimize the exposure of manufacturing, processing, and material storage areas (including loading and unloading, storage, disposal, cleaning, maintenance, and fueling operations) to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. To the extent technologically available and economically practicable and achievable, either locate industrial materials and activities inside or protect them with storm resistant coverings in order to minimize exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff (although significant enlargement of impervious surface area is not recommended). In minimizing exposure, pay particular attention to the following areas:
Loading and unloading areas: locate in roofed or covered areas where feasible; use grading, berming, or curbing around the loading area to divert run-on; locate the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems.
Page 21 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Material storage areas: locate indoors, or in roofed or covered areas where feasible; install berms/dikes around these areas; use dry cleanup methods.
Note: Industrial materials do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from affected areas will not be discharged to receiving waters.
b. Good Housekeeping
Keep clean all exposed areas that are potential sources of pollutants, using such measures as sweeping at regular intervals, store materials in appropriate containers, identify and control all on-site sources of dust to minimize stormwater contamination from the deposition of dust on areas exposed to precipitation, keep all dumpsters under cover or fit with a lid that must remain closed when not in use, and ensure that waste, garbage, and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged.
Implement a cleaning and maintenance program for all impervious areas of the facility where particulate matter, dust or debris may accumulate to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater. The cleaning and maintenance program must encompass, as appropriate, areas where material loading and unloading, storage, handling and processing occur.
Stabilize unpaved areas using vegetation or paving where there is vehicle traffic or where material loading and unloading, storage, handling and processing occurs, unless feasible.
For paved areas of the facility where particulate matter, dust or debris may accumulate, to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater, implement control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): sweeping or vacuuming at regular intervals; and washing down the area and collecting and/or treating and properly disposing of the washdown water. For unstabilized areas or for stabilized areas where sweeping, vacuuming, or washing down is not possible, to minimize the discharge of particulate matter, dust, or debris or other pollutants in stormwater, implement stormwater management devices such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): sediment traps, vegetative buffer strips, filter fabric fence, sediment filtering boom, gravel outlet protection, and other equivalent measures that effectively trap or remove sediment.
Page 22 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Fugitive Dust Emissions. Minimize fugitive dust emissions from coal handling areas to minimize the tracking of coal dust offsite that could be discharged in stormwater through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, (list not exclusive): installing specially designed tires; and washing vehicles in a designated area before they leave the site and controlling the wash water.
Delivery Vehicles. Minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site. Implement procedures to inspect delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater. Ensure the overall integrity of the body or container of the delivery vehicle and implement procedures to deal with leakage or spillage from delivery vehicles.
Fuel Oil Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from fuel oil unloading areas. Use containment curbs in unloading areas where feasible. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure that any leaks or spills are immediately contained and cleaned up, and use spill and overflow protection devices (e.g., drip pans, drip diapers, or other containment devices placed beneath fuel oil connectors to contain potential spillage during deliveries or from leaks at the connectors).
Chemical Loading and Unloading. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from chemical loading and unloading areas. Use containment curbs at chemical loading and unloading areas to contain spills, where practicable. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure leaks and spills are immediately contained and cleaned up and, where practicable, load and unload in covered areas and store chemicals indoors.
Miscellaneous Loading and Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from loading and unloading areas through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): covering the loading area; grading, curbing, or berming around the loading area to divert run-on; locating the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems; or equivalent procedures.
Page 23 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Liquid Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from above-ground liquid storage tanks through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, the following (list not exclusive): using protective guards around tanks; using containment curbs; installing spill and overflow protection; using dry cleanup methods; or equivalent measures.
Large Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from large bulk fuel storage tanks. Use containment berms (or their equivalent). Comply with applicable state and federal laws, including Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements.
Spill Reduction Measures. Minimize the potential for an oil or chemical spill, or reference the appropriate part of the SPCC plan. Visually inspect as part of the routine facility inspection the structural integrity of all above-ground tanks, pipelines, pumps, and related equipment that may be exposed to stormwater, and make any necessary repairs immediately.
Oil-Bearing Equipment in Switchyards. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from oil-bearing equipment in switchyard areas. Use level grades and gravel surfaces to retard flows and limit the spread of spills, or collect runoff in perimeter ditches.
Residue-Hauling Vehicles. Inspect all residue-hauling vehicles for proper covering over the load, adequate gate sealing, and overall integrity of the container body. Repair vehicles without load covering or adequate gate sealing, or with leaking containers or beds
Ash Loading Areas. Reduce or control the tracking of ash and residue from ash loading areas. Clear the ash building floor and immediately adjacent roadways of spillage, debris, and excess water as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater.
Areas Adjacent to Disposal Ponds or Landfills. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from areas adjacent to disposal ponds or landfills. Reduce ash residue that may be tracked on to access roads traveled by residue handling vehicles, and reduce ash residue on exit roads leading into and out of residue handling areas.
Landfills, Scrap Yards, Surface Impoundments, Open Dumps, General Refuse Sites. Minimize the potential for contamination of runoff from these areas.
Page 24 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
c. Maintenance
Maintain all control measures which are used to achieve the effluent limits required by this permit in effective operating condition. Nonstructural control measures must also be diligently maintained (e.g., spill response supplies available, personnel appropriately trained). If control measures need to be replaced or repaired, make the necessary repairs or modifications as expeditiously as practicable.
d. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
Minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective response to such spills if or when they occur. At a minimum, implement:
i.
Procedures for plainly labeling containers (e.g., "Used Oil",
"Spent Solvents", "Fertilizers and Pesticides", etc.) that could
be susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper
handling and facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur;
ii. Preventive measures such as barriers between material
storage and traffic areas, secondary containment provisions,
and procedures for material storage and handling;
iii. Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning
up leaks, spills, and other releases. Employees who may
cause, detect or respond to a spill or leak must be trained in
these procedures and have necessary spill response
equipment available. If possible, one of these individuals
should be a member of the storm water pollution prevention
team;
iv. Procedures for notification of appropriate facility personnel,
emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. State
or local requirements may necessitate reporting spills or
discharges to local emergency response, public health, or
drinking water supply agencies. Contact information must be in
locations that are readily accessible and available; and
v. A procedure for documenting all significant spills and leaks of
oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at
exposed areas, or that drained to a storm water conveyance.
e. Erosion and Sediment Controls
Through the use of structural and/or non-structural control measures stabilize, and contain runoff from, exposed areas to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants. Among other actions to meet this limit, place flow velocity dissipation devices at discharge locations and within outfall channels where
Page 25 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
necessary to reduce erosion and/or settle out pollutants. In selecting, designing, installing, and implementing appropriate control measures for erosion and sediment control, check out information from both the State and EPA websites. The following two websites are given as information sources:
http://www.in.qov/idem/stormwater/2363.htm and https://www.epa.qov/npdes/stormwater-discharqes-industrial-activities
f.
Management of Runoff
Divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the discharge.
g. Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt
Enclose or cover storage piles of salt, or piles containing salt, used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces. Implement appropriate measures (e.g., good housekeeping, diversions, containment) to minimize exposure resulting from adding to or removing materials from the pile. Piles do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from the piles is not discharged.
h. Employee Training
Train all employees who work in areas where industrial material or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of the Pollution Prevention Team.
The following personnel must understand the requirements of Part I.D. and Part I.E. of this permit and their specific responsibilities with respect to those requirements: Personnel who are responsible for the design, installation, maintenance, and/or repair of controls (including pollution prevention measures); personnel responsible for the storage and handling of chemicals and materials that could become contaminants in stormwater discharges; personnel who are responsible for conducting and documenting monitoring and inspections related to storm water; and personnel who are responsible for taking and documenting corrective actions as required in Part I.D.6.
Page 26 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Personnel must be trained in at least the following if related to the scope of their job duties (e.g., only personnel responsible for conducting inspections need to understand how to conduct inspections): an overview of what is in the SWPPP; spill response procedures, good housekeeping, maintenance requirements, and material management practices; the location of all controls on the site required by this permit, and how they are to be maintained; the proper procedures to follow with respect to the permit's pollution prevention requirements; and when and how to conduct inspections, record applicable findings, and take corrective actions.
Non-Storm water Discharges
Determine if any non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit exist. Any non-storm water discharges discovered must either be eliminated or modified into this permit.
The following non-storm water discharges are authorized and should be documented when they occur in accordance with Part I.E.2.C. of the permit:
Discharges from fire-fighting activities; Fire Hydrant flushings; Potable water, including water line flushings; Uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside storage of refrigerated gases or liquids; Irrigation drainage; Landscape watering provided all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer have been applied in accordance with the approved labeling; Pavement wash water where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous material have occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed); Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents; Uncontaminated ground water or spring water; Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; Incidental windblown mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of the facility, but not intentional discharges from cooling towers (e.g., "piped cooling tower blowdown or drains); and Vehicle wash- waters where uncontaminated water without detergents or solvents is utilized.
Page 27 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
j.
Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial
Materials
Minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials.
5. Annual Review
At least once every 12 months, submit an Annual Report to the Industrial NPDES Permit Section which includes the following: the results or a summary of the past year's routine facility inspection documentation; information copied or summarized from the corrective action documentation required (if applicable). If corrective action is not yet completed at the time of submission of this Annual Report, describe the status of any outstanding corrective action(s); and any incidents of noncompliance observed or, if there is no noncompliance, a certification signed by a responsible corporate officer, general partner or the proprietor, executive officer or ranking elected official, stating the facility is in compliance with this permit.
6. Corrective Actions - Conditions Requiring Review
a. If any of the following conditions occur, review the SWPPP to determine if and where revisions may need to be made to eliminate the condition and prevent its reoccurrence:
i.
An unauthorized release or discharge (e.g., spill, leak, or
discharge of non-stormwater not authorized by this NPDES
permit) occurs at the facility;
ii. Control measures are not stringent enough for the discharge to
meet applicable water quality standards;
iii. A required control measure was never installed, was installed
incorrectly, or is not being properly operated or maintained;
b. If construction or a change in design, operation, or maintenance at the facility significantly changes the nature of pollutants discharged in storm water from the facility, or significantly increases the quantity of pollutants discharge the permittee must review and revise the selection, design, installation, and implementation of the control measures to determine if modifications are necessary to meet the effluent limits in this permit.
7. Corrective Action Deadlines
If additional changes are necessary, a new or modified control must be installed and made operational, or a repair completed, before the next storm
Page 28 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
event if possible, and within 45 calendar days from the time of discovery. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within 45 calendar days, the reason(s) must be documented. A schedule for completing the work must also be identified, which must be done as soon as practicable after the 45day timeframe.
Where corrective actions result in changes to any of the controls or procedures documented in the SWPPP, the SWPPP must be modified accordingly within 45 calendar days of completing corrective action work.
These time intervals are not grace periods, but are schedules considered reasonable for documenting the findings and for making repairs and improvements. They are included in this permit to ensure that the conditions prompting the need for these repairs and improvements are not allowed to persist indefinitely
Corrective Action Report
The existence of any of the conditions listed in Part I D 6 must be documented within 14 days of becoming aware of such condition. The following information must be included in the documentation:
a. Identification and description of the condition triggering the need for corrective action review. For any spills or leaks, include the following information: a description of the incident including material, date/time, amount, location, and reason for spill, and any leaks, spills or other releases that resulted in discharges of pollutants to waters of U S., through stormwater or otherwise;
b. Date the condition was identified: and
c. A discussion of whether the triggering condition requires corrective action. I-or any spills or leaks, include response actions, the date/time clean-up completed, notifications made, and staff involved. Also include any measures taken to prevent the reoccurrence of such releases.
Document the corrective actions taken that occurred as a result of the conditions listed in Part I D.6. within 45 days from the time of discovery of any of those conditions Provide the dates when each corrective action was initiated and completed (or is expected to be completed). If applicable, document why it is infeasible to complete necessary installations or repairs within the 14-day timeframe and document the schedule for installing the controls and making them operational as soon as practicable after the 14-day timeframe
Page 29 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Inspections
a. Routine Facility Inspections
During normal facility operating hours conduct inspections of areas of the facility covered by the requirements in this permit, including the following:
i.
Areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to
stormwater;
ii. Areas identified in the SWPPP and those that are potential
pollutant sources;
iii. Areas where spills and leaks have occurred in the past 3 years.
iv. Discharge points; and
v. Control measures used to comply with the effluent limits
contained in this permit.
inspections must be conducted at least quarterly (i.e., once each calendar quarter), or in some instances more frequently (e.g,, monthly), as appropriate. Increased frequency may be appropriate for some types of equipment, processes and stormwater control measures, or areas of the facility with significant activities and materials exposed to stormwater.
Inspections must be performed by qualified personnel with at least one member of the stormwater pollution prevention team participating. Inspectors must consider the results of visual and analytical monitoring (if any) for the past year when planning and conducting inspections.
During the inspection examine or look out for the following:
vi. Industrial materials, residue or trash that may have or could come into contact with stormwater;
vii. Leaks or spills from industrial equipment, drums, tanks and other containers;
viii. Offsite tracking of industrial or waste materials, or sediment where vehicles enter or exit the site;
ix. Tracking or blowing of raw, final or waste materials from areas of no exposure to exposed areas; and
x. Control measures needing replacement, maintenance or repair.
During an inspection, control measures implemented to comply with effluent limits must be observed to ensure they are functioning correctly. Discharge outfalls must also be observed during this
Page 30 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
inspection. If such discharge locations are inaccessible, nearby downstream locations must be inspected.
b. Routine Facility Inspection Documentation
The findings of facility inspections must be documented and the report maintained with the SWPPP. Findings must be summarized in the annual report. Document all findings, including but not limited to, the following information:
i. The inspection date and time; ii. The name(s) and signature(s) of the inspector(s); iii. Weather information; iv. Any additional control measures needed to comply with the
permit requirements; and v. Any incidents of noncompliance observed.
Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6. of this permit.
If the discharge was visual assessed, as required in Part I.D.9.C., during the facility inspection, include the results of the assessment with the report required in Part I.D.9.a., as long as all components of both types of inspections are included in the report.
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
1. Development of Plan
Within 12 months from the effective date of this permit, the permittee is required to revise and update the current Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the permitted facility. The SWPPP does not contain effluent limitations. The SWPPP is intended to document the selection, design, and installation of control measures. As distinct from the SWPPP, the additional documentation requirements are intended to document the implementation (including inspection, maintenance, monitoring, and corrective action) of the permit requirements.
2. Contents
The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:
a. Pollution Prevention Team - The SWPPP must identify the staff members (by name or title) that comprise the facility's stormwater pollution prevention team as well as their individual responsibilities. The stormwater pollution prevention team is responsible for
Page 31 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
overseeing development of the SWPPP, any later modifications to it, and for compliance with permit Parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit. Each member of the stormwater pollution prevention team must have ready access to either an electronic or paper copy of applicable portions of this permit, the most updated copy of the SWPPP, other relevant documents or information that must be kept with the SWPPP.
Site Description - As a minimum, the plan shall contain the following:
A c tiv itie s a t the Facility. Provide a description of the nature of the industrial activities at the facility. G e n e ra l lo ca tio n m ap. Provide a general location map (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map) with enough detail to identify the location of the facility and all receiving waters for the stormwater discharges. S ite m ap. Provide a map showing:
(A) Boundaries of the property and the size of the property in acres;
(B) Location and extent of significant structures and impervious surfaces;
(C) Directions of stormwater flow (use arrows); (D) Locations of all stormwater control measures; (E) Locations of all receiving waters, including wetlands, in
the immediate vicinity of the facility. Indicate which waterbodies are listed as impaired and which are identified by the State of Indiana or EPA as Tier 2 or Tier 2.5 waters; (F) Locations of all stormwater conveyances including ditches, pipes, and swales; (G) Locations of potential pollutant sources identified; (H) Locations where significant spills or leaks identified have occurred; (I) Locations of all stormwater monitoring points; (J) Locations of stormwater inlets and outfalls, with a unique identification code for each outfall (e.g., Outfall No. 1, No. 2), indicating if you are treating one or more outfalls as "substantially identical", and an approximate outline of the areas draining to each outfall; (K) If applicable, municipal separate storm sewer systems and where the stormwater discharges to them; (L) Areas of federally-listed critical habitat for endangered or threatened species, if applicable, (M) Locations of the following activities where such activities are exposed to precipitation:
(a) fueling stations;
Page 32 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
(b) vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or cleaning areas;
(c) ioading/unloading areas; (d) locations used for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of wastes; (e) liquid storage tanks; (f) processing and storage areas; (g) immediate access roads and rail lines used or
traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste material, or by products used or created by the facility; (h) transfer areas for substances in bulk; and (i) machinery (j) locations and sources of run-on to the site from adjacent property that contains significant quantities of pollutants. (N) Document in the SWPPP the locations of any of the following activities or sources that may be exposed to precipitation or surface runoff: storage tanks, scrap yards, and general refuse areas; short- and long-term storage of general materials (including but not limited to supplies, construction materials, paint equipment, oils, fuels, used and unused solvents, cleaning materials, paint, water treatment chemicals, fertilizer, and pesticides); landfills and construction sites; and stock pile areas (e.g., coal or limestone piles).
Potential Pollutant Sources:
The SWPPP must document areas at the facility where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater or from which allowable non-stormwater discharges may be released. Industrial materials or activities include, but are not limited to: material handling equipment or activities; industrial machinery; raw materials; industrial production and processes; and intermediate products, by-products, final products, and waste products. M a te ria l h a n d lin g a ctivitie s include, but are not limited to: the storage, loading and unloading, transportation, disposal, or conveyance of any raw material, intermediate product, final product or waste product. For structures located in areas of industrial activity, be aware that the structures themselves are potential sources of pollutants. This could occur, for example, when metals such as aluminum or copper are leached from the structures as a result of acid rain.
For each area identified, the description must include:
Page 33 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
A c tiv itie s in the A rea. A list of the industrial activities exposed to stormwater (e.g., material storage; equipment fueling, maintenance, and cleaning; cutting steel beams). P ollutants. A list of the pollutant(s) or pollutant constituents (e.g., crankcase oil, zinc, sulfuric acid, and cleaning solvents) associated with each identified activity, which could be exposed to rainfall or snowmelt and could be discharged from the facility. The pollutant list must include all significant materials that have been handled, treated, stored, or disposed, and that have been exposed to stormwater in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended. S p ills a n d Leaks. The SWPPP must document where potential spills and leaks could occur that could contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges, and the corresponding outfall(s) that would be affected by such spills and leaks. The SWPPP must document all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a stormwater conveyance, in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended. N o n -S to rm w a te r D isch a rg e s - The SWPPP must document that you have evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit. Any non storm water discharges have either been eliminated or incorporated into this permit. Documentation of non-storm water discharges shall include;
A written non-storm water assessment, including the following;
(1) The date of the evaluation; (2) A description of the evaluation criteria used; (3) A list of the outfalls or onsite drainage points that were
directly observed during the evaluation; and (4) The action(s) taken, such as a list of control measures
used to eliminate unauthorized discharge(s), or documentation that a separate NPDES permit was obtained. For example, a floor drain was sealed, a sink drain was re-routed to sanitary, or an NPDES permit application was submitted for an unauthorized cooling water discharge.
Salt Storage - The location of any storage piles containing salt used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes must be documented in the SWPPP. Description of Control Measures to Meet Technology-Based Effluent Limits - The location and type of control measures you have specifically chosen and/or designed to comply with Permit
Page 34 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Part I.D. must be documented in the SWPPP. Regarding the control measures, the following must be documented as appropriate:
(a) How the selection and design considerations of control measures were addressed.
(b) How the control measures address the pollutant sources identified.
Schedules and Procedures
The following must be documented in the SWPPP:
i.
Good Housekeeping - A schedule for regular pickup and
disposal of waste materials, along with routine inspections for
leaks and conditions of drums, tanks and containers;
ii.
Maintenance - Preventative maintenance procedures, including
regular inspections, testing, maintenance and repair of all
control measures to avoid situations that may result in leaks,
spills, and other releases, and any back-up practices in place
should a runoff event occur while a control measure is off-line.
The SWPPP shall include the schedule or frequency for
maintaining all control measures used to comply with the storm
water requirements.
iii.
Spill Prevention and Response Procedures - Procedures for
preventing and responding to spills and leaks, including
notification procedures. For preventing spills, include in the
SWPPP the control measures for material handling and
storage, and the procedures for preventing spills that can
contaminate stormwater. Also specify cleanup equipment,
procedures and spill logs, as appropriate, in the event of spills.
You may reference the existence of other plans for Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) developed for
the facility under Section 311 of the CWA or BMP programs
otherwise required by an NPDES permit for the facility,
provided that you keep a copy of that other plan onsite and
make it available for review;
iv.
Erosion and Sediment Control - If you use polymers and/or
other chemical treatments as part of the controls, identify the
polymers and/or chemicals used and the purpose; and
v.
Employee Training - The elements of the employee training
plan shall include all, but not be limited to, the requirements set
forth in Permit Part.I.D,, and also the following:1
(1) The content of the training;
Page 35 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
(2) The frequency/schedule of training for employees who have duties in areas of industrial activities subject to this permit
s) A log of the dates on which specific employees received training.
e. Pertaining to Inspections
Document in the SWPPP the procedures for performing, as appropriate, the types of inspections specified by this permit, including:
i. Routine facility inspections and;
For each type of inspection performed, the SWPPP must identify:
ii. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for inspection; iii. Schedules for conducting inspections, including tentative
schedule for irregular stormwater runoff discharges; and iv. Specific items to be covered by the inspection, including
schedules for specific outfalls.
f.
General Requirements - The SWPPP must meet the following general
requirements:
i. The SWPPP shall be prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and to industry standards. The SWPPP may be developed by either a person on the staff or a third party, and it shall be certified in accordance with the signature requirements, under Part II.C.6.
ii. Retain a complete copy of the current SWPPP required by this permit at the facility in any accessible format. A complete SWPPP includes any documents incorporated by reference and all documentation supporting parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit, as well as the signed and dated certification page. Regardless of the format, the SWPPP must be immediately available to facility employees, EPA, a state or tribe, the operator of an MS4 receiving discharges from the site; and representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at the time of an onsite inspection. The current SWPPP or certain information from the current SWPPP must also be made available to the public (except any confidential business information (CBI) or restricted information, but clearly identify those portions of the SWPPP that are being withheld from public access.
iii. Where the SWPPP refers to procedures in other facility documents, such as a Spill Prevention, Control and
Page 36 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan or an Environmental Management System (EMS), copies of the relevant portions of those documents must be kept with the SWPPP.
SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent limitations specified for Copper at Outfall 001 in accordance with the following schedule:
a. The permittee shall submit a written progress report to the Compliance Data Section of the Office of Water Quality (OWQ) nine (9) months from the effective date of this permit. The progress report shall include a description of the method(s) selected for meeting the newly imposed limitation for Copper, in addition to any other relevant information. The progress report shall also include a specific time line specifying when each of the steps will be taken. The new effluent limits for Copper are deferred for the term of this compliance schedule, unless the new effluent limits can be met at an earlier date. The permittee shall notify the Compliance Data Section of OWQ as soon as the newly imposed effluent limits for Copper can be met. Upon receipt of such notification by OWQ, the final limits for Copper will become effective, but no later than thirty-six (36) months from the effective date of this permit. Monitoring and reporting of the effluent for these parameters is required during the interim period.
b. The permittee shall submit a subsequent progress report to the Compliance Data Section of OWQ no later than eighteen (18) months from the effective date of this permit. This report shall include detailed information on the steps the permittee has taken to achieve compliance with the final effluent limitations and whether the permittee is meeting the time line set out in the initial progress report.
c. The permittee shall submit a subsequent progress report to the Compliance Data Section of OWQ no later than twenty-seven (27) months from the effective date of this permit. This report shall include detailed information on the steps the permittee has taken to achieve compliance with the final effluent limitations and whether the permittee is meeting the time line set out in the initial progress report.
d. Within thirty (30) days of completion of construction, the permittee shall file with the Industrial NPDES Permits Section of OWQ a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
Page 37 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
e. The permittee shall comply with the final effluent limitations for Copper no later than thirty-six (36) months from the effective date of this permit.
2. If the permittee fails to comply with any deadline contained in the foregoing schedule, the permittee shall, within fourteen (14) days following the missed deadline, submit a written notice of noncompliance to the Compliance Data Section of the OWQ stating the cause of noncompliance, any remedial action taken or planned, and the probability of meeting the date fixed for compliance with final effluent limitations.
REOPENING CLAUSES
This permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing:
1. To comply with any applicable effluent limitation or standard issued or approved under 301 (b)(2)(C),(D) and (E), 304 (b)(2), and 307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent limitation or standard so issued or approved:
a. contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
b. controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
2. To incorporate any of the reopening clause provisions cited at 327 IAC 5-2 16.
3. This permit may be modified or alternately revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for rehearing to comply with any applicable final agency standards, regulations and requirements issued or approved under section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, if the standards, regulations and requirements so issued or approved contain different conditions than those in the permit.
4. If at any time prior to the completion of the construction of pollution control equipment installed to meet the conditions of this permit, including but not limited to dry bottom ash or FGD wastewater treatment equipment, the permittee notifies IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023, the permittee may request a permit modification to address changes to the compliance schedule .
5. If the permittee decides to close Unit 3 or proceed with the zero liquid discharge option for FGD wastewater, the permittee may request a permit modification to revise the compliance date for the FGD wastewater to no later than December 31, 2023.
Page 38 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
A. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee shall comply with all terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(1) and all other requirements of 327 IAC 5-2-8. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and IC 13 and is grounds for enforcement action or permit termination, revocation and reissuance, modification, or denial of a permit renewal application.
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 conditions of the permit.
2. Duty to Mitigate
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(3), the permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact to the environment resulting from noncompliance with this permit. During periods of noncompliance, the permittee shall conduct such accelerated or additional monitoring for the affected parameters, as appropriate or as requested by IDEM, to determine the nature and impact of the noncompliance.
3. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must obtain and submit an application for renewal of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(2). It is the permittee's responsibility to obtain and submit the application. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-3(c), the owner of the facility or operation from which a discharge of pollutants occurs is responsible for applying for and obtaining the NPDES permit, except where the facility or operation is operated by a person other than an employee of the owner in which case it is the operator's responsibility to apply for and obtain the permit. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-3-2(a)(2), the application must be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit. This deadline may be extended if:
a. permission is requested in writing before such deadline;
b. IDEM grants permission to submit the application after the deadline; and
c. the application is received no later than the permit expiration date.
Page 39 of 55 Permit No, IN0002259
Under the terms of the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, the permittee may be required to submit its application for renewal electronically in the future.
4. Permit Transfers
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(4)(D), this permit is nontransferable to any person except in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(c). This permit may be transferred to another person by the permittee, without modification or revocation and reissuance being required under 327 IAC 5-2-16(c)(1) or 16(e)(4), if the following occurs;
a. the current permittee notified the Commissioner at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date;
b. a written agreement containing a specific date of transfer of permit responsibility and coverage between the current permittee and the transferee (including acknowledgment that the existing permittee is liable for violations up to that date, and the transferee is liable for violations from that date on) is submitted to the Commissioner;
c. the transferee certifies in writing to the Commissioner their intent to operate the facility without making such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility as would significantly change the nature or quantities of pollutants discharged and thus constitute cause for permit modification under 327 IAC 5-216(d), However, the Commissioner may allow a temporary transfer of the permit without permit modification for good cause, e.g., to enable the transferee to purge and empty the facility's treatment system prior to making alterations, despite the transferee's intent to make such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility; and
d. the Commissioner, within thirty (30) days, does not notify the current permittee and the transferee of the intent to modify, revoke and reissue, or terminate the permit and to require that a new application be filed rather than agreeing to the transfer of the permit.
The Commissioner may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to identify the new permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act or state law.
5. Permit Actions
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-16(b) and 327 IAC 5-2-8(4), this permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause, including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
Page 40 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
b. Failure of the permittee to disclose fully all relevant facts or misrepresentation of any relevant facts in the application, or during the permit issuance process; or
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or a permanent reduction or elimination of any discharge controlled by the permit, e.g., plant closure, termination of discharge by connection to a POTW, a change in state law that requires the reduction or elimination of the discharge, or information indicating that the permitted discharge poses a substantial threat to human health or welfare.
Filing of either of the following items does not stay or suspend any permit condition: (1) a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or (2) submittal of information specified in Part II.A.3 of the permit including planned changes or anticipated noncompliance.
The permittee shall submit any information that the permittee knows or has reason to believe would constitute cause for modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit at the earliest time such information becomes available, such as plans for physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility that:
1. could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged; or
2. the commissioner may request to evaluate whether such cause exists.
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-1-3(a)(5), the permittee must also provide any information reasonably requested by the Commissioner.
6. Property Rights
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(6) and 327 IAC 5-2-5(b), 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 persons or private property or invasion of other private rights, any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. The issuance of the permit also does not preempt any duty to obtain any other state, or local assent required by law for the discharge or for the construction or operation of the facility from which a discharge is made.
7. Severability
In accordance with 327 IAC 1-1-3, 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 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications of the permit which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Page 41 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
8. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Section 311 of the Clean Water 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 Clean Water Act or state law.
10. Penalties for Violation of Permit Conditions
Pursuant to IC 13-30-4, a person who violates any provision of this permit, the water pollution control laws; environmental management laws; or a rule or standard adopted by the Environmental Rules Board is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per day of any violation.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-5, a person who obstructs, delays, resists, prevents, or interferes with (1) the department; or (2) the department's personnel or designated agent in the performance of an inspection or investigation performed under IC 13 14-2-2 commits a class C infraction.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1 5(k), a person who willfully or recklessly violates any NPDES permit condition or filing requirement, any applicable standards or limitations of IC 13-18-3-2.4, IC 13-18-4-5, IC 13-18-8, IC 13-18-9, IC 13-18-10, IC 13-18-12, IC 13-18-14, IC 13-18-15, or IC 13-18-16, or who knowingly makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in any NPDES form, notice, or report commits a Class C misdemeanor.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1.5(1), an offense under IC 13-30-10-1.5(k) is a Class D felony if the offense results in damage to the environment that renders the environment unfit for human or vertebrate animal life. An offense under IC 13-3010-1.5(k) is a Class C felony if the offense results in the death of another person.
11. Penalties for Tampering or Falsification
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(10), the permittee shall comply with monitoring, recording, and reporting requirements of this permit. The Clean Water Act, as well as IC 13-30-10-1, provides that any person who knowingly or intentionally (a) destroys, alters, conceals, or falsely certifies a record that is required to be maintained under the terms of a permit issued by the department; and may be used to determine the status of compliance, (b) renders inaccurate or inoperative a recording device or a monitoring device required to be maintained by a permit
Page 42 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
issued by the department, or (c) falsifies testing or monitoring data required by a permit issued by the department commits a Class B misdemeanor.
12. Toxic Pollutants
If any applicable effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant injurious to human health, and that 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 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(5). Effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants injurious to human health are effective and must be complied with, if applicable to the permittee, within the time provided in the implementing regulations, even absent permit modification.
13. Wastewater treatment plant and certified operators
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant as required by IC 13-18-11-11 and 327 IAC 5-22. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7.
327 IAC 5-22-10.5(a) provides that a certified operator may be designated as being in responsible charge of more than one (1) wastewater treatment plant, if it can be shown that he will give adequate supervision to all units involved. Adequate supervision means that sufficient time is spent at the plant on a regular basis to assure that the certified operator is knowledgeable of the actual operations and that test reports and results are representative of the actual operations conditions. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-22-3(11), "responsible charge operator" means the person responsible for the overall daily operation, supervision, or management of a wastewater facility.
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-22-10(4), the permittee shall notify IDEM when there is a change of the person serving as the certified operator in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facility. The notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days after a change in the operator.
14. Construction Permit
In accordance with IC 13-14-8-11.6, a discharger is not required to obtain a state permit for the modification or construction of a water pollution treatment or control facility if the discharger has an effective NPDES permit.
Page 43 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
If the discharger modifies their existing water pollution treatment or control facility or constructs a new water pollution treatment or control facility for the treatment or control of any new influent pollutant or increased levels of any existing pollutant, then, within thirty (30) days after commencement of operation, the discharger shall file with the Department of Environment Management a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
The notice and design summary shall be sent to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251.
15. Inspection and Entry
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), the permittee shall allow the Commissioner, or an authorized representative, (including an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Commissioner) upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a point source, regulated facility, or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept pursuant to the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment or methods (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required pursuant to this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, any discharge of pollutants or internal wastestreams for the purposes of evaluating compliance with the permit or as otherwise authorized.
16. New or Increased Discharge of Pollutants
This permit prohibits the permittee from undertaking any action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless one of the following is completed prior to the commencement of the action:
a. Information is submitted to the Commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharges will not cause a significant lowering of water quality as defined under 327 IAC 2-1.3-2(50). Upon review of this information, the Commissioner may request additional information or may determine that the proposed increase is a
Page 44 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
significant lowering of water quality and require the submittal of an antidegradation demonstration.
b. An antidegradation demonstration is submitted to and approved by the Commissioner in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 327 IAC 2-1.3 6.
MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and efficiently operate all facilities and systems (and related appurtenances) for the collection and treatment which are installed or used by the permittee and which are necessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(9).
Neither 327 IAC 5-2-8(9), nor this provision, shall be construed to require the operation of installed treatment facilities that are unnecessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit.
2. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(12):
a. Terms as defined in 327 IAC 5-2-8(12)(A):
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of a waste stream from any portion of a treatment facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which would cause 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. The permittee may allow a bypass to occur that does not cause a violation of the effluent limitations in the permit, but only if it is also for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Part M.B.2.C., e, and f of this permit.
c. Bypasses, as defined in (a) above, are prohibited, and the Commissioner may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless the following occur.
Page 45 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage, as defined above;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, 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 that occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under Part II.B.2.e; or
(4) The condition under Part II.B.2.b above is met.
d. Bypasses that result in death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans must be reported in accordance with the "Spill Response and Reporting Requirements" in 327 IAC 2-6.1, including calling 888/2337745 as soon as possible, but within two (2) hours of discovery. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the bypass are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
e. The permittee must provide the Commissioner with the following notice:
(1) If the permittee knows or should have known in advance of the need for a bypass (anticipated bypass), it shall submit prior written notice. If possible, such notice shall be provided at least ten (10) days before the date of the bypass for approval by the Commissioner.
(2) The permittee shall orally report an unanticipated bypass that exceeds any effluent limitations in the permit within 24 hours of becoming aware of the bypass noncompliance. The permittee must also provide a written report within five (5) days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the bypass event. The written report must contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; if the cause of noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the bypass event. If a complete fax or e-mail
Page 46 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
submittal is provided within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the unanticipated bypass event, then that report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirement. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.gov.
f.
The Commissioner may approve an anticipated bypass, after
considering its adverse effects, if the Commissioner determines that it
will meet the conditions listed above in Part II.B.2.C. The
Commissioner may impose any conditions determined to be
necessary to minimize any adverse effects.
Upset Conditions
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(13):
a. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable 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.
b. An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology-based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of Paragraph c of this section, are met.
c. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence, that:
(1) An upset occurred and the permittee has identified the specific cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated;
(3) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II.A.2; and
(4) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements," Part II.C.3, or 327 IAC 2-6.1, whichever is applicable. However, under 327 IAC 26.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or
Page 47 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
d. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof pursuant to 40 CFR 122.41 (n)(4).
4. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State and to be in compliance with all Indiana statutes and regulations relative to liquid and/or solid waste disposal. The discharge of pollutants in treated wastewater is allowed in compliance with the applicable effluent limitations in Part I. of this permit.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Planned Changes in Facility or Discharge
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(F), the permittee shall give notice to the Commissioner as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. In this context, permitted facility refers to a point source discharge, not a wastewater treatment facility. Notice is required only when either of the following applies:
a. The alteration or addition may meet one of the criteria for determining whether the facility is a new source as defined in 327 IAC 5-1.5.
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of, pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants that are subject neither to effluent limitations in Part I.A. nor to notification requirements in Part II.C.9. of this permit.
Following such notice, the permit may be modified to revise existing pollutant limitations and/or to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.
2. Monitoring Reports
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10) and 327 IAC 5-2-13 through 15, monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals and in the form specified in "Monthly Reporting", Part I.C.2.
Page 48 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(C), the permittee shall orally report to the Commissioner information on the following types of noncompliance within 24 hours from the time permittee becomes aware of such noncompliance. If the noncompliance meets the requirements of item b (Part II.C.3.b) or 327 IAC 2 6.1, then the report shall be made within those prescribed time frames. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge that is in noncompliance are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit;
b. Any noncompliance which may pose a significant danger to human health or the environment. Reports under this item shall be made as soon as the permittee becomes aware of the noncomplying circumstances;
c. Any upset (as defined in Part II.B.3 above) that causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation in the permit;
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the following toxic pollutants: Cadmium, Mercury, Copper
The permittee can make the oral reports by calling (317)232-8670 during regular business hours or by calling (317) 233-7745 ((888)233-7745 toll free in Indiana) during non-business hours. 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 and eliminate the noncompliance and prevent its recurrence. The Commissioner may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. Alternatively the permittee may submit a "Bypass/Overflow Report" (State Form 48373) or a ''Noncompliance 24-Hour Notification Report" (State Form 54215), whichever is appropriate, to IDEM at (317) 232-8637 or wwreports@idem.in.gov. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is sent within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the occurrence, then the fax report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirements.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
Page 49 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
4. Other Compliance/Noncompliance Reporting
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(D), the permittee shall report any instance of noncompliance not reported under the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements" in Part II.C.3, or any compliance schedules at the time the pertinent Discharge Monitoring Report is submitted. The report shall contain the information specified in Part II.C.3;
The permittee shall also give advance notice to the Commissioner of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements; and
All 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.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
5. Other Information
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(E), where the permittee becomes aware of a failure to submit any relevant facts or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report, the permittee shall promptly submit such facts or corrected information to the Commissioner.
6. Signatory Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-22 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(15):
a. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Commissioner shall be signed and certified by a person described below or by a duly authorized representative of that person:1
(1) The manager of one (1) or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities provided the manager is authorized to make management decisions that govern the operation of the regulated facility including having the explicit or implicit duty to make major capital investment recommendations, and initiating and directing other comprehensive measures to assure long term environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations; the manager can ensure that the necessary systems are established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for permit application requirements; and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or
Page 50 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
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 Federal, State, or local government body or any agency or political subdivision thereof: by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
(4) Under the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, a method will be developed for submittal of all affected reports and documents using electronic signatures that is compliant with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR). Enrollment and use of NetDMR currently provides for CROMERR-compliant report submittal.
b. 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, or a position of equivalent responsibility. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The authorization is submitted to the Commissioner.
c. Electronic Signatures. If documents described in this section are submitted electronically by or on behalf of the NPDES-regulated facility, any person providing the electronic signature for such documents shall meet all relevant requirements of this section, and shall ensure that all of the relevant requirements of 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all cases, subpart D to part 3) (Cross-Media Electronic Reporting) and 40 CFR part 127 (NPDES Electronic Reporting Requirements) are met for that submission.
d. Certification. Any person signing a document identified under Part II.C.6. shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a
Page 51 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
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."
7. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under 327 IAC 12.1, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Clean Water Act, permit applications, permits, and effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
8. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
IC 13-30 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(15) 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, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 180 days per violation, or by both.
9. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.42(a)(1), 40 CFR 122.42(a)(2), and 327 IAC 5-2-9, the permittee shall notify the Commissioner 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 pollutant identified as toxic pursuant to Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act 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 (1OOpig/l);
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 pg/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500pg/l) for 2,4dinitrophenol and 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1mg/l) for antimony;
Page 52 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
(3) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
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 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 pg/l);
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Sec. 122.21(g)(7).
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
c. That it has begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture, as an intermediate or final product or byproduct, any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application under 40 CFR 122.21(g)(9),
Page 53 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
PART III Other Requirements
A. Polychlorinated Biphenyl
There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
Many electrical transformers manufactured prior to 1978 contained PCBs. Therefore, in order to determine compliance with the PCB prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB* data for Outfall 001 with the application renewal. The permittee shall submit the data to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 2251.
Parameter Test Method______ LOP_______LOQ
PCBs*
608
0.1 ug/l
0.3 ug/l
*PCB-1242, PCB-1254, PCB-1221, PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260, and PCB-1016
B. In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates beyond the approved estimated maximum dosage rates, or changes that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of the additive contributing to Outfalls 001 and/or 004, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
C. The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I. E. of this permit.
D. The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at each outfall discharging directly to the Ohio River.
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
Page 54 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
Part IV Cooling Water Intake Structures
A. Best Technology Available (BTA) Determination
In accordance with 40 CFR 401.14, the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.
The EPA promulgated a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) regulation on August 15, 2014, that establishes standards for cooling water intake structures. 79 Fed. Reg. 48300 439 (August 15, 2014). The regulation establishes best technology available standards to reduce impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms at existing power generation and manufacturing facilities and it became effective on October 14, 2014.
For permits expiring prior to July 2018, the permittee can (1) negotiate an alternative schedule for submitting required information with the Director (IDEM) after demonstrating need, or (2) request waiver(s) for submitting required information. An alternative schedule for submission of information required under the current CWA section 316(b), or waiver(s) of submittal requirements shall be reviewed and approved by IDEM. Upon approval of such alternative schedules and /or waivers, or until the time the required information/reports are submitted and the permit is renewed or modified following public notice, the IDEM is required to make a BTA determination using Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) to comply with CWA Section 316(b) based on existing information. The BTA determination is subject to change after the required information is submitted in accordance with the federal regulations effective October 14, 2014.
The facility has requested an alternate submittal date of July 1, 2019 for the 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) and (9) thru (13) information. IDEM approves this alternate submittal date as justified in a letter to IDEM dated July 25, 2016.
Based on available information, IDEM has made a Best Technology Available (BTA) determination that the existing cooling water intake structures represent best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impact in accordance with Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326) at this time. This determination is based on Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) and will be reassessed at the next permit reissuance to ensure that the CWISs continue to meet the requirements of Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326).
B. Permit Requirements
In accordance with the recently promulgated rules at 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 125, the owner or operator of a facility that has CWIS with a Design Intake Flow (DIF) or Actual Intake Flow (AIF) >125 MGD must submit the information required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (13), including all of the associated supporting documentation and/or studies, no
Page 55 of 55 Permit No. IN0002259
later than July 14, 2018, unless an alternate schedule for submission is approved or a waiver of a particular requirement is requested and granted under 40 CFR 125.95. In addition, the permittee shall comply with requirements below:
1. In accordance with 40 CFR 125.98(b)(1), nothing in this permit authorizes take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
2. At all times properly operate and maintain the intake equipment and incorporate management practices and operational measures necessary to ensure proper operation of the CWIS.
3. Inform IDEM of any proposed changes to the CWIS or proposed changes to operations at the facility that affect the information taken into account in the current BTA evaluation.
4. There shall be no discharge of debris from intake screen washing which will settle to form objectionable deposits which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious, or which will produce colors or odors constituting a nuisance.
5. All required reports shall be submitted to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, NPDES Permits Branch.
6. The information required to be submitted at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) and (9) thru (13) shall be submitted no later than July 1, 2019. As part of the current permit renewal application, the permittee submitted information as required by 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (r)(8). This information must be resubmitted along with (r)(7) and (r)(9) through (r)(13) documents no later than July 1, 2019.
7. Submit the information required to be considered by the Director per 40 CFR 125.98 to assist IDEM with the fact sheet or statement of basis for entrainment BTA, as soon as practicable, but no later than with the application for the next permit renewal.8
8. During the next permit period, monitor the actual intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal.
ID E M
? ',r 198S :
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Fact Sheet for SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station
Draft: January 2017 Final: March 2017
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
(317) 232-8603 Toll Free (800) 451-6027
www.idem.IN.gov
Permittee:
Existing Permit Information: Facility Contact:
Facility Location:
Receiving Stream: GLI/Non-GLI: Proposed Permit Action: Date Application Received: Source Category Permit Writer:
Vectren Corporation SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station P.O. Box 209 Evansville, Indiana 47702 Permit Number: IN0002259 Expiration Date: November 30, 2016 Angela Casbon-Scheller P.O. Box 209 Evansville, Indiana 47702 3711 Darlington Road Newburgh, IN 47630 Warrick County Ohio River
Non-GLI Renew
May 27, 2016
NPDES M ajor- Industrial Jennifer Carlino (317) 232-8702 Jcarlino@idem.in.gov
I
Table o f Contents
1.0 In tro d u c tio n .........................................................................................................3 2.0 Facility d e scrip tio n .............................................................................................3
2.1 G eneral..........................................................................................................3 2.2 Outfall Locations............................................................................................5 2.3 Wastewater Treatment................................................................................. 6 2.4 Source W ater................................................................................................6 2.5 Outfall Descriptions...................................................................................... 9 2.6 Changes in Operation................................................................................ 10 2.7 Facility Storm W ater................................................................................... 10 3.0 Permit H isto ry................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Compliance history..................................................................................... 10 4.0 Receiving W a te r............................................................................................... 11 4.1 Receiving Stream Water Q uality............................................................... 12 5.0 Permit L im ita tio n s............................................................................................13 5.1 Existing Permit Limits................................................................................. 13 5.2 Technology-Based EffluentLimits.............................................................. 15 5.3 Water Quality-Based EffluentLimits........................................................... 20 5.4 Whole Effluent Toxicity............................................................................... 23 5.5 Antibacksliding...........................................................................................24 5.6 Antidegradation...........................................................................................24 5.7 Storm W ater................................................................................................ 25 5.8 Water Treatment Additives.........................................................................27 6.0 Permit Draft D iscussion.................................................................................. 28 6.1 Discharge Limitations................................................................................ 28 6.2 Monitoring Conditions andRationale......................................................... 30 6.3 Schedule of Compliance...........................................................................32 6.4 Special Conditions..................................................................................... 33 6.5 Spill Response and Reporting Requirement...........................................36 6.6 Post Public Notice Addendum.................................................................. 37
Attachment I Wasteload Allocation........................................................................ 58
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit application from SIGECO F,B. Culley Generating Station on May 27, 2016. The current five year permit was issued with an effective date of December 1, 2011 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(a). A five year permit is proposed in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(a).
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and subsequent amendments require a NPDES permit for the discharge of wastewater to surface waters. Furthermore, Indiana Code (IC) 13-15-1 -2 requires a permit to control or limit the discharge of any contaminants into state waters or into a publicly owned treatment works. This proposed permit action by IDEM complies with both federal and state requirements.
In accordance with Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Sections 124.8 and 124.56, as well as Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 327 Article 5, development of a Fact Sheet is required for NPDES permits. This document fulfills the requirements established in those regulations.
This Fact Sheet was prepared in order to document the factors considered in the development of NPDES Permit effluent limitations. The technical basis for the Fact Sheet may consist of evaluations of promulgated effluent guidelines, existing effluent quality, receiving water conditions, and wasteload allocations to meet Indiana Water Quality Standards. Decisions to award variances to Water Quality Standards or promulgated effluent guidelines are justified in the Fact Sheet where necessary.
2.0 FACILITY DESCRIPTION
2.1 General
SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station is classified under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 4911 - Electric Power Services. The facility is a coal fired steam electric generating plant with two (2) generating units which are 100 MW (Unit 2) and 270 MW (Unit 3). The Ohio River accounts for approximately 99% of the facility's intake water with well water accounting for the remainder.
Discharges from this facility are to the Ohio River. Outfall 001 discharges water from the East (internal outfall 101) and West (internal outfall 201) Ash Ponds as well as once through non-contact cooling water. Internal Outfall 301 is consists of FGD wastewater treatment plant discharge, which discharges to the East Ash Pond.
The facility has a permanent pipe line connecting the ponds, which allows the facility to pump water from one pond to the other and bypass the discharge tunnel which leads to final Outfall 001. This pipe has been utilized to dewater a pond during pond cleaning and
3
to move water from a near full pond to the other, higher capacity pond. Outfall 004 discharges treated sanitary wastewater. Effective October 1, 2015, the Unit 2 ash lines and other waters associated with the Unit 2 boiler were re-routed to the East ash pond, which discharges through Outfall 201. Fly ash is only sluiced to the East ash pond during mechanical problems with the dry fly ash system. During each of the past few years, this scenario has only occurred for a minimal number of hours. A more detailed description of the wastewaters associated with each outfall is provided in Section 2.5 below. A map showing the location of the facility has been included as Figure 1.
4
Figure 1: Facility Location
SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station 3700 Darlington Road Newburgh, IN 47630 Warrick County
2.2 O utfall L o ca tio n s
Outfall 001
Latitude: 37 54' 35.29" Longitude: -87 19'37.99
Outfall 101
Latitude: 37 54' 44.36" Longitude: -87 19'50.81
Outfall 201
Latitude: 37 54' 34.49" Longitude: -87 19' 27.59'
Outfall 301
Latitude: 37 54'31.32" Longitude: -87 19'17.10'
Outfall 004
Latitude: 37 54' 38.36" Longitude: -87 19' 35.09'
2.3 Wastewater Treatment
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant as required by IC 13-18-11 -11 and 327 IAC 5-22-5. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7.
IDEM has given the permittee a Class B industrial wastewater treatment plant classification because
2.4 Source Water
A. W ells
Wells provide water to the potable water pretreatment system. The pretreatment system provides water to the following systems:
Condensate storage Reverse Osmosis (RO) Water Treatment Filter and Water Softener Sanitary Wastewater Treatment, and Unit #3 Floor Drains
Condensate storage discharge is used for Units #2 and #3 boiler make-up water, RO and Water Treatment FilterA/Vater Softener Backwash discharge is sent to Unit #3 Floor drains.
B. Unit #1 Intake
Source water is the Ohio River. This is a House Service Water Inlet. This water combines with the House Service Water Header (also fed by the Unit 2 Intake) and provides water to the following systems:
6
Unit #2 Boiler Seal Trough and Sump Pumps, and N.C. Valve' to the Clarified River Water System which feeds the Units 2 & 3 FGD System.
*N.C. Valve = Normally Closed
C. Unit 2 intake
Source water is the Ohio River. In addition to providing House Service Water as detailed above, Unit #2 Intake House Service Water also provides water to the following systems.
Unit #2 Condenser Unit #2 Closed Cycle Cooling System Clarified River Water System which feeds the Units 2 & 3 FGD System Unit #2 Air Heater Wash Unit #2 Pyrite System Unit #2 Bottom Ash System Unit #2 Fly Ash System, and Unit #2 Boiler Seal Through and Sump Pumps
D. Unit 3 Intake
Source water is the Ohio River. The Unit #3 Intake provides water to the following systems.
Unit #3 Condenser Unit #3 Closed Cycle Cooling System A diesel fire pump Unit #3 Boiler Seal Through and Sump Pumps Unit #3 SCR & Economizer Hoppers Unit #3 Air Heater Wash Unit #3 Pyrite System Unit #3 Bottom Ash and N.C. Valve* to the Clarified River Water System which feeds the Units 2 & 3 FGD System.
' N.C. Valve = Normally Closed
A Flow Diagram has been included as Figure 2.
7
2.5 Outfall Descriptions
Outfall 001 Outfall 001 discharges to the Ohio River near mile marker 773. The average flow from the outfall is 271.5 MGD. Operations contributing to the flow include; Condenser cooling - two units (269.8 MGD) and Ash pond discharge (1.6 MGD). Discharge from the ash ponds are independently analyzed via outfalls 101 and 201. Treatment associated with Outfall 001 includes the use of chlorine and bromine.
Internal Outfall 101
Outfall 101 is an internal outfall regulating the discharge from the West ash pond (0.04 MGD). The West pond receives water from the coal pile run-off, west yard sump and Unit #1 and Unit #2 basement sumps (which includes the Unit #2 floor drains). These water sources are almost exclusively the result of rain events. The outfall seldom discharges, though when it does; it goes to the East ash pond. Any discharge from Outfall 101 would be limited to instances of high precipitation and will first discharge through Outfall 201 and ultimately through Outfall 001. It is expected that discharge from Outfall 101 directly to Outfall 001 would be a rare exception. Permit limits and monitoring requirements at Outfall 101 only apply when discharging directly to Outfall 001. The only treatment associated with Outfall 101 is sedimentation.
internal Outfall 201
Outfall 201 is an internal outfall regulating the discharge from the East ash pond (1.6MGD). In addition to the Unit #2 and Unit #3 bottom ash lines, the east ash pond receives water from the oil separation tank, east side yard sump, air heater wash, boiler seal troughs, floor drains, greensand water treatment filters regenerant and backwash, softener regenerant streams and RO rejects, discharge from Outfall 301 (FGD WWTP), and discharge from Outfall 101 (West Ash Pond. The only treatment associated with Outfall 201 is sedimentation.
Internal Outfall 301 :
Outfall 301 is an internal outfall discharging into the East ash pond. The discharge is limited to Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) discharge (0.095 MGD). The permittee has expressed that it is important to note that the wastewater treatment process is not complete at the point where water exits the treatment system and prior to entering the ash pond. Settling, with adequate retention time, is an important aspect of physical-chemical treatment system, as it allows time for the solids (pollutants of concern) to settle out the water and into the pond. The treated water is then ultimately discharged via internal Outfall 201 and then finally via Outfall 001. Treatment associated with Outfall 301 consists of chemical precipitation.
9
Outfall 004:
Outfall 004 regulates the discharge from the sanitary wastewater package plant. The average flow is 0.0046 MGD and the outfall discharges to the Ohio River. Treatment for the sanitary water includes disinfection with ultra violet light and activated sludge.
2.6 Changes in Operation
A chemical-precipitation system went into service on September 26, 2014, for the purpose of meetinq the mercury limitations at Outfall 001, which became effective on December 1, 2014.
Future changes at this facility include plans to retire Unit 2 no later than 12/31/2023. Vectren has indicated to IDEM that a final decision on retirement of Unit 2 will be made in the next twelve months. Unit 3 is proposed to continue operation as a coal fired unit. If the permittee decides to close Unit 3 or proceed with the zero liquid discharge option for FGD wastewater at Unit 3, the permittee may request a permit modification to revise the compliance date for the federal effluent guidelines for bottom ash and/or FGD wastewater. See also Section 5.2 below.
2.7 Facility Storm Water
There are no outfalls discharging storm water only on this site.
3.0 PERMIT HISTORY
3.1 Compliance history
A review of this facility's discharge monitoring data was conducted for compliance verification. This review indicates the following permit limitation violations between July 2011 and June 2016;
Outfall 001: 4 exceedances of Total Residual Oxidants and 1 exceedance of temperature.
Outfall 004: 1 violation for exceedances of E. coli.
Outfall 101: 3 violations for exceedances in Total Suspended Solids and 2 violations for exceedances in Iron.
There are no pending or current enforcement actions regarding this NPDES permit.
10
4.0 RECEIVING WATER The receiving stream for Outfalls 001 and 004 is The Ohio River. The Cb.io low flow value of the Ohio River upstream of the outfalls is 11,000 cfs and shall be capable of supporting a well-balanced warm water aquatic community and full body contact recreation in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-3. The Ohio River is also designated as a public water supply and as an industrial water supply In accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3, language in this renewed permit specifically prohibits the permittee from undertaking deliberate actions that would result in new or increased discharges of BCC's or new or increased permit limits for non-BCC's, or from allowing a new or increased discharge of a BCC from an existing or proposed industrial user, without first proving that the new or increased discharge would not result in a significant lowering of water quality, or by submission and approval of an antidegradation demonstration to the IDEM. A Site Map has been included as Figure 3.
II
Figure 3: Site Map
4.1 Receiving Stream Water Quality
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify waters, through their Section 305(b) water quality assessments, that do not or are not expected to meet applicable water quality standards with federal technology based standards alone. States are also required to develop a priority ranking for these waters taking into account the severity of the pollution and the designated uses of the waters. Once this listing and ranking of impaired waters is completed, the states are required to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for these waters in order to achieve compliance with the water quality standards. Indiana's 2014 303(d) List of Impaired Waters was developed in accordance with Indiana's Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) Listing Methodology for Waterbody Impairments and Total Maximum Daily Load Development for the 2014 Cycle. The Ohio River (Assessment-Unit INH 6_10), HUC is on the 2014 303(d) list for Mercury, E. coli, Dioxin and PCBs. A TMDL for E. Coli is in progress for the Ohio River.
12
5.0 PERMIT LIMITATIONS
Two categories of effluent limitations exist for NPDES permits: Technology-Based Effluent Limits (TBELs) and; Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits (WQBELs).
TBELs require every individual member of a discharge class or category to operate their water pollution control technologies according to industry-wide standards and accepted engineering practices. TBELs are developed by applying the National Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELGs) established by USEPA for specific industrial categories. Technology based treatment requirements under section 301 (b) of the CWA represent the minimum level of control/treatment using available technology that must be imposed in a section 402 permit (40 CFR 125.3(a)).
In the absence of ELGs, TBEL effluent limits can also be based upon Best Professional Judgment (BPJ). Compliance schedules for TBELs are not allowed, since the statutory deadlines for best practicable technology (BPT), best available technology economically achievable (BAT) and best conventional control technology (BCT) have all passed.
WQBELs are designed to be protective of the beneficial uses of the receiving water and are independent of the available treatment technology. The WQBELs for this facility are based on water quality criteria in 327 IAC 2-1-6 or under the procedures described in 327 IAC 2 1-8.2 through 327 IAC 2-1-8.7 and implementation procedures in 327 IAC 5. Limitations and/or monitoring are required for parameters identified by applications of the reasonable potential to exceed WQBEL under 327 IAC 5-2-11.1 (h)(1).
According to 40 CFR 122.44 and 327 IAC 5, NPDES permit limits are based on either TBELs, where applicable, BPJ, or WQBELs, whichever is most stringent. The decision to limit or monitor the parameters contained in this permit is based on information contained in the permittee's NPDES application. In addition, when performing a permit renewal, existing permit limits must be considered. These may be TBELs, WQBELs, or limits based on BPJ. When renewing a permit, the antibacksliding provisions identified in 327 IAC 5-210(11) are taken into consideration.
5.1 Existing Permit Limits
Outfall 001-Discharge Tunnel to the Ohio River
Parameter Flow TRO
Chlorination/Bromination Frequency Duration
Plant Capacity Factor Temperature Intake
Monthly Averaqe Report
-
-
Report
13
Daily Maximum Report 0.06
4 40
-
Report
Units MGD mg/l
Times/Day Minutes/Day % Daily Averaqe
F
Effluent Mixed River
Mercury Arsenic Cadmium Selenium Nickel Aluminum
Silver Zinc Free Cyanide Sulfate Copper Non-Metal Cleaning Iron Non-Metal Cleaning Boron Chloride Fluoride Alkalinity Sodium
-
12 Report
2.1 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Report
Report Report Report Report Report Report
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________PH__________
6.0
Report
F
Report
F
20
ng/l
Report
mg/l
4.2
uq/l
Report
mg/l
Report
mg/l
Report
mq/l
Report
uq/l
Report
mq/l
Report
mg/l
Report
mg/i
Report
mq/l
Report Report Report Report Report Report
mq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l
____maH____
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units Std. Units
Outfalls 101/201 -West/East Ash Pond Discharges
Parameter Flow TSS 0& G
Copper Iron
Monthly Average Report 30 15
-
-
Daily Maximum Report 70 20 0.2 1.0
Units MGD mq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________PH__________
6.0
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units Std. Units
Outfall 301- FGD System Discharge
Parameter Flow TSS 0& G
Ammonia (as N) Arsenic
Monthly Average Report Report Report Report Report
14
Daily Maximum Report Report Report Report Report
Units MGD mq/l mq/l mq/l uq/l
Boron Chloride Manqanese Mercury Selenium
Zinc
Report Report Report Report Report Report
Parameter pH
Daily Minimum 6.0
Outfall 004- Treated sanitary wastewater
Parameter Flow TSS
TBODs E. coli
Monthly Average Report 30 Report 125
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________PH__________
Report
Report Report Report Report Report Report
Daily Maximum 9.0
Daily Maximum Report 45 45 235
Daily Maximum Report
ug/l mq/l mq/l ng/l uq/l mq/l
Units Std. Units
Units MGD mq/l mq/l Count/100 ml
Units Std. Units
5.2 Technology-Based Effluent Limits (TBEL)
The U.S. EPA has established technology based effluent guidelines for steam electric generating facilities. The applicable technology based standards for the FB Culley Generating Station are contained in 40 CFR 423 - Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. Since this facility is classified as an "existing point source", all discharges are subject to effluent guidelines in 40 CFR 423.12, Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT) and 40 CFR 423.13, Best Available Control Technology (BAT). Revised final Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELGs) and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Industry were published in the Federal Register (FR) on November 3, 2015 and became effective on January 4, 2016.
The revised federal ELGs require dry handling for fly ash and bottom ash transport water with compliance by November 1, 2018 unless an alternate date, which is to be no later than December 31, 2023, is granted by the permitting authority. This permit prohibits discharge of fly ash or bottom ash transport water after November 1, 2018. The permittee may request an alternate compliance date beyond November 1, 2018 no later than 12months from the effective date of this permit in accordance with the Reopening Clauses in I.F of the permit.
In evaluating the need for TBELs for Cooling Tower Blowdown, Low Volume Wastes, Metal Cleaning Wastes, Coal Pile Runoff and Ash Transport Water (prior to November 1, 2018) and in accordance with the federal effluent guideline, when wastewater streams are combined for discharge and/or treatment, 40 CFR 423 requires that the quantity of each
15
pollutant attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for that waste source. Compliance with this requirement may be achieved by establishing internal monitoring locations (outfalls) prior to the regulated wastestream commingling with other wastestreams. As an alternative to establishing internal monitoring locations for determining compliance with the federal effluent guidelines, the permittee may utilize the combined wastestream formula (CWF) as described in 40 CFR 403.6(e) to calculate alternate compliance values based on the applicable portion of the ELG, to be applied to the discharge of the combined wastestreams at the final outfall(s).
IDEM has determined that there is a need to establish internal monitoring stations to determine compliance with the TBELs. With the next permit renewal application, the permittee is required to submit flow data for all regulated, non-regulated, and dilution wastestreams and the concentration of the selected parameters contributed by each of these wastestreams for use in developing alternate limitations using the combined wastestream formula (CWF).At the next permit renewal limits will be developed using either the Combined Wastestream Formula or by establishing internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423.
If at any time prior to the completion of the construction of pollution control equipment installed to meet the conditions of this permit, including but not limited to dry bottom ash or FGD wastewater treatment equipment, the permittee notifies IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023, a reopener has been added to the permit whereby the permittee may request a permit modification to address changes to the compliance schedule for bottom ash and FGD wastewater.
Requirements applicable to all wastewater streams:
1. pH Control - 40 CFR 423.12(b)(1), The pH of all discharges, except once through cooling water, shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0 s.u.(BPT)
2. Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) - 40 CFR 423.12(b)(2) and 40 CFR 423.13(a), There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid. (BPT)
Regulated wastewater streams and their applicable requirements
There are ten (10) separate wastewater streams that are regulated by 40 CFR Part 423. The wastestreams applicable to this facility are as follows:
1. Low volume wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(3) and there are no BAT guidelines.
2. Ash handling wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(4) and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(h) and (k).
3. Metal cleaning wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(e).
16
4. Coal Pile Runoff - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(9) and (10) and there are no BAT guidelines.
5. Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(11) and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(g).
6. Combustion residual leachate - There are no BPT guidelines and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(1).
Outfall 001-Discharge Tunnel to the Ohio River
Total Residual oxidants (TRO)
The monitoring requirements and effluent limitations for Total Residual Oxidants (TRO) have been retained from the previous permit and apply at any time bromine is used and may be in the discharge. Use the test methods for Total Residual Chlorine to determine Total Residual Oxidants. At present, two test methods are considered to be acceptable to IDEM, amperometric (4500-C!-D,E) and DPD colorimetric method (4500-CI-G), to determine TRO concentrations at the level of 0.06 mg/l. If another EPA test method is to be used, the method must first be approved by this Department.
Plant Capacity Factor (% of Total Capacity)
This reporting requirement has been retained from the previous permit. The permittee shall report the % Daily Average 1 X Monthly.
O utfalls 101 - W est Ash Pond
The West Ash Pond ceased receivinq bottom ash, fly ash and FGD wastewater in October 2015.
Total Suspended Solids & Oil & Grease (O&G)
The technology based effluent limitations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil & Grease (O&G) limitations are based on 40 CFR 423.12(b)(3) and 40 CFR 423.12(b)(4), and 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5). The effluent limitations for these parameters have been retained from the previous permit. The TSS limitations are 30 mg/l monthly average and 70 mg/l daily maximum and were previously developed using BPJ. The Oil & Grease limitations are 15 mg/l monthly average and 20 mg/l daily maximum.
Outfall 201 - East Ash Pond
Beginning November 1, 2018, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water for either Unit 2 or 3. Beginning December 31, 2020, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water for Unit 3. Beginning December 31,2023 there
17
shall be no discharge of bottom ash water from Unit 2. This date is based on the proposed closure date and capacity factor and considering the factors in the federal rules for establishing a compliance deadline. As noted previously, Unit 2 is scheduled for closure by no later than December 31, 2023. In addition, Unit 2 has averaged a 23.4% capacity factor over the last 5 years.
Total Suspended Solids & Oil & Grease (O&G)
The technology based effluent limitations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil & Grease (O&G) limitations are based on 40 CFR 423.12(b)(3) and 40 CFR 423.12(b)(4), and 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5). The effluent limitations for these parameters have been retained from the previous permit. The TSS limitations are 30 mg/l monthly average and 70 mg/l daily maximum and were previously developed using BPJ. The Oil & Grease limitations are 15 mg/l monthly average and 20 mg/l daily maximum.
Iron and Copper (Metal Cleaning Waste)
Iron limitations are required based upon the presence of periodic chemical and non chemical metal cleaning waste in the discharge. The metal cleaning waste Technology Based Effluent Limit (TBEL) in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and 40 CFR 423.13(e) identifies a daily maximum and monthly average limitation of 1.0 mg/l for Iron. Net limits may apply for Iron. Net limitations are to be calculated by subtracting the measured background levels of these parameters in the ash pond from the actual measured concentrations of these parameters when limitations apply. These background levels are to be calculated by monitoring the ash pond effluent concentrations of Iron and Copper over a period of time, to consist of a minimum of ten samples taken over a minimum of thirty (30) days when there is no discharge of metal cleaning wastes during a period that is a least 30 days but not to exceed 90 days preceding each discharge of metal cleaning wastes. The background levels demonstrated by this monitoring, along with supporting data are to be submitted with monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) when reporting discharge of metal cleaning wastes. A new database shall be established in the quarter preceding each subsequent discharge of metal cleaning wastes.
Copper limitations are required based upon the presence of periodic chemical and non-chemical metal cleaning waste in the discharge. The metal cleaning waste Technology Based Effluent Limit (TBEL) in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) identifies a daily maximum limitation of 1.0 mg/l for Copper. The current Daily Maximum effluent limitation for Copper is 0.2 mg/l, which is more stringent than 40 CFR 423.12 (b)(5), and has been retained from previous permits to comply with anti-backsliding requirements set forth in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11).
18
Outfall 301- FGD System Discharge
Internal Outfall 301 was established to regulate the discharge from the FGD Waste Treatment System to the Unit #3 (East) Ash Pond. Since the last permit renewal, the effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs) have been revised and finalized by EPA for steam electric power plants. The revised ELGs became effective January 4, 2016, and establish the following limitations for parameters in FGD discharge.
Parameter TSS
Arsenic Mercury Selenium Nitrate/Nitrite as N
Monthly Averaqe 30 8.0 356 12 4.4
Daily Maximum 100 11.0 788 23 17.0
Units mq/l uq/l ng/l uq/l mq/l
Parameter pH
Daily Minimum 6.0
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units s.u.
The permittee has requested an alternate compliance date for the new FGD limitations. To support the alternate compliance date, the permittee provided proposed schedules from a technology assessment report prepared by a third party engineer. Based on the information provided, IDEM proposes an effective of date of February 1, 2021 for Arsenic, Mercury, Selenium, and Nitrate/Nitrite as N. If the permittee decides to close Unit 3 or proceed with the zero liquid discharge option for FGD wastewater, the permittee may request a permit modification to revise the compliance date for the FGD wastewater to no later than December 31, 2023.
Outfall 004
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) a n d TBODs
The TBOD5 limitation has been retained from the previous permit and was originally based on the secondary treatment requirements for wastewater treatment facilities regulated in accordance with 327 IAC 5-5-3.
The TSS limitations have been retained from the previous permit and are based on the small sanitary discharge requirements in accordance with 327 IAC 5-10-5.
In accordance with the antibacksliding provisions contained in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11), these limits have been retained from the previous permit. These limitations are included to assure adequate treatment is being provided for this wastestream and meet ORSANCO and Indiana Water Quality Standards.
19
5.3 Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits
The water quality-based effluent limits were calculated using the criteria contained in Table 1 of 327 IAC 2-1-6, Minimum Surface Water Quality Standards, and the procedure contained in 327 IAC 5-2-11.1, Establishment of Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations for Dischargers not discharging to Waters within the Great Lakes System. O utfalls 001 and 004:
N arrative W ater Q uality Based Lim its
The narrative water quality contained under 327 IAC 2-1-6(a)(1) (A)-(E) have been included in this permit to ensure that the narrative water quality criteria are met.
N um eric W ater Q uality Based Lim its
The numeric water quality criteria and values contained in this permit have been calculated using the tables of water quality criteria under 327 IAC 2-1-6(b) & (c). Outfall 001
F lo w
The effluent flow is to be monitored in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-13(a)2.
qH
Discharges to waters of the state are limited to the range of 6.0-9.0 s.u., in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-6.
Cadm ium and M ercury
As part of the previous permit renewal, a Wasteload Analysis (WLA) report was completed and Cadmium and Mercury were evaluated for reasonable potential to exceed (RPE) water quality criteria. The results of the RPE analysis showed that Cadmium and Mercury had reasonable potential to exceed; therefore, water quality based effluent limitations were required and included in the permit. In accordance with the antibacksliding provisions contained in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11), these limits have been retained from the previous permit.
20
Arsenic, Nickel, Free Cyanide, Selenium , Zinc, Iron, Boron, Chloride, Fluoride, , S ilver and Sulfate,
In the previous permit, a Reasonable Potential Evaluation (RPE) was performed in conjunction with a Wasteload Allocation Analysis using monitoring data collected from February 2007 through March 2008. The evaluation concluded that the projected effluent quality (PEQ) did not exceed the projected effluent limitations (PEL) for arsenic, nickel, free cyanide, selenium, silver, sulfate, or zinc. Therefore, effluent limitations were not required. As part of this permit renewal, a Reasonable Potential Evaluation (RPE) was performed in conjunction with a Wasteload Allocation Analysis. The evaluation concluded that the projected effluent quality (PEQ) did not exceed the projected effluent limitations (PEL) for Boron, Chloride, or Fluoride.
However, EPA documents such as the "Report to Congress, Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels, Volume 1 & 2", March 1999, and related reference documents identify that certain pollutants may be present in "Utility Coal Combustion Waste" such as fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) waste. Therefore, monitoring will continue to be required for arsenic, nickel, free cyanide, selenium, silver, sulfate, zinc, Iron, Boron, Chloride, and Fluoride. The monitoring frequency for Boron, Chloride, and Fluoride has been reduced to 1 X Quarterly.
Copper
As part of this permit renewal, a Wasteload Analysis (WLA) report was completed and Copper was evaluated for reasonable potential to exceed (RPE) a water quality criterion. The results of the RPE analysis show that Copper has reasonable potential to exceed; therefore, water quality based effluent limitations are required and have been include in the permit. The WLA002215 has been included as Attachment I.
Tem perature
Intake and Effluent temperature shall be monitored and measurements recorded every hour. The highest single recorded measurement for each day shall be reported on the state monthly monitoring report for each day. The highest single recorded daily measurement shall be reported on the federal discharge monitoring report as the maximum daily temperature for that month. This requirement has been retained from the previous permit.
The discharge from Outfall 001, as determined at the edge of the mixing zone described in 327 IAC 2-1-4, shall not exceed the maximum limits in the following table more than one percent (1%) of the hours in the twelve (12) month period ending with any month. At no time shall the water temperature at such locations exceed the maximum limits in the following table by more than three degrees Fahrenheit (3F) (one and seven-tenths degrees Celsius (1.7C)).
21
Table 1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec F 50 50 60 70 80 87 89 89 87 78 70 57 C 10 10 15,6 21.1 26.7 30.6 31.7 31.7 30.7 25.6 21.1 14
The permittee will have the option of either meeting the above limits at the end of pipe, or by meeting the limits with a mixed river temperature that takes into account the mixing zone allowed by 327 IAC 2-1-6(b). The mixed river temperature is to be determined by employing the following mathematical model:
Qe(Te-Tu) TM R = Tu + ..............
3553 Where:
T mr
Tu Te Qe 3553
= mixed river temperature (F) = upstream river temperature (F) = effluent temperature (F) = effluent flow (MGD) = one-half of the Q 7.1t) low flow value of the receiving stream in MGD
Total R esidual O xidants (TRO)-
Monitoring requirements and effluent limitations for TRO have been retained from the previous permit and will apply at any time chlorine and/or bromine is used and may be in the discharge. Use the test methods for Total Residual Chlorine to determine Total Residual Oxidants. At present, two test methods are considered to be acceptable to IDEM, amperometric (4500-CI-D,E) and DPD colorimetric method (4500-CI-G), to determine TRO concentrations at the level of 0.06 mg/l. If another EPA test method is to be used, the method must first be approved by this Department.
C hlorination / B rom ination F requency
The monitoring of chlorination/bromination frequency applies only when the facility is chlorinating / brominating intermittently. The permit requires the permittee to provide a monthly report on the "times per day" the permittee is intermittently chlorinating / brominating. The permittee is limited to no more than four (4) chlorination / bromination cycles per day.
C hlorination / Brom ination Duration
The monitoring for duration of chlorination / bromination dose applies only when the facility is chlorinating / brominating intermittently. The permit requires the permittee to provide a monthly report on the number of minutes per chlorination / bromination cycle the permittee is chlorinating / brominating intermittently. The permittee is limited to no more than forty (40) minutes per chlorination / bromination cycles.
22
Brom ide
In light of questions raised during the public comment period about possible impacts on downstream public water supplies, bromide monitoring at a frequency of quarterly has been added to the permit. See also response to Sierra Club comments below.
Outfall 004
F lo w
The effluent flow is to be monitored in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-13(a)2.
qH
Discharges to waters of the state are limited to the range of 6.0-9.0 s.u., in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-6.
E. c o li
The E. coli limitations and monitoring requirements apply from April through October 31 annually. The monthly average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
The Monthly Average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean per 327 IAC 5-10-6, the concentration of E. coli shall not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) cfu or mpn per 100 milliliters as a geometric mean of the effluent samples taken in a calendar month. No samples may be excluded when calculating the monthly geometric mean.
If less than ten samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, no samples may exceed two hundred thirty-five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. However, when ten (10) or more samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, not more than ten percent (10%) of those samples may exceed two hundred thirty- five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. When calculating ten percent, the result must not be rounded up. In reporting for compliance purposes on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form, the permittee shall record the highest non-excluded value for the daily maximum.
5.4 Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing (WETT)
The permit does not contain a requirement to conduct Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing (WETT).
23
5.5 Antibacksliding
None of the limits included in this permit conflict with antibacksliding regulations found in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11), therefore, backsliding is not an issue.
5.6 Antidegradation
327 IAC 2-1.3 outlines the state's Antidegradation Standards and Implementation procedures. The Tier 1 antidegradation standard found in 327 IAC 2-1.3-3(a) applies to all surface waters of the state regardless of their existing water quality. Based on this standard, for all surface waters of the state, the existing uses and level of water quality necessary to protect those existing uses shall be maintained and protected. IDEM implements the Tier 1 antidegradation standard by requiring NPDES permits to contain effluent limits and best management practices (BMPs) for regulated pollutants that ensure the narrative and numeric water quality criteria applicable to each of the designated uses are achieved in the water and any designated uses of the downstream water are maintained and protected.
The Tier 2 antidegradation standard found in 327 IAC 2-1.3-3(b) applies to surface waters of the state where the existing quality for a parameter is better than the water quality criterion for that parameter established in 327 IAC 2-1-6 or 327 IAC 2-1.5. These surface waters are considered high quality for the parameter and this high quality shall be maintained and protected unless the commissioner finds that allowing a significant lowering of water quality is necessary and accommodates important social or economic development in the area in which the waters are located. IDEM implements the Tier 2 antidegradation standard for regulated pollutants with numeric water quality criteria quality adopted in or developed pursuant to 327 IAC 2-1-6 or 327 IAC 2-1.5 and utilizes the antidegradation implementation procedures in 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 2-1.3-6.
According to 327 IAC 2-1.3-1 (b), the antidegradation implementation procedures in 327 IAC 2-1,3-5 and 2-1.3-6 apply to a proposed new or increased loading of a regulated pollutant to surface waters of the state from a deliberate activity subject to the Clean Water Act (CWA), including a change in process or operation that will result in a significant lowering of water quality.
This permit includes new permit limitations for Copper. In accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3 1(b), the new permit limitations are not subject to the Antidegradation Implementation Procedures in 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 2-1.3-6 as the new permit limitations are not the result of a deliberate activity taken by the permittee.
The permittee is prohibited from undertaking any deliberate action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless information is submitted to the commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharge will not cause a significant lowering of water quality, or an antidegradation demonstration submitted and approved in accordance 327 IAC 2-1.3.
24
5.7 Storm Water
According to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) and 327 IAC 5-4-6(b)(1) facilities classified under Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 4991 are considered to be engaging in "industrial activity" for purposes of 40 CFR 122.26(b). Therefore, the permittee is required to have all storm water discharges associated with industrial activity permitted. Treatment for storm water discharges associated with industrial activities is required to meet, at a minimum, best available technology economically achievable/best conventional pollutant control technology (BAT/BCT) requirements. EPA has determined that non-numeric technologybased effluent limits have been determined to be equal to the best practicable technology (BPT) or BAT/BCT for storm water associated with industrial activity.
Storm water associated with industrial activity must be assessed to determine compliance with all water quality standards. The non-numeric storm water conditions and effluent limits contain the technology-based effluent limitations. Effluent limitations, as defined in the CWA, are restrictions on quantities, rates, and concentrations of constituents which are discharged. Effective implementation of these requirements should meet the applicable water quality based effluent limitations. Violation of any of these effluent limitations constitutes a violation of the permit.
Additionally, IDEM has determined that with the appropriate implementation of the required control measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) found in Part I.D. of the permit, the discharge of storm water associated with industrial activity from this facility will meet applicable water quality standards and will not cause a significant lowering of water quality. Therefore, the storm water discharge is in compliance with Antidegradation Standards and Implementation Procedures found in 327 IAC 2-1.3 and an Antidegradation Demonstration is not required.
The TBELs require the permittee to minimize exposure of raw, final, or waste materials to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. In doing so, the permittee is required, to the extent technologically available and economically achievable, to either locate industrial materials and activities inside or to protect them with storm resistant coverings. In addition, the permittee is required to: (1) use good housekeeping practices to keep exposed areas clean, (2) regularly inspect, test, maintain and repair all industrial equipment and systems to avoid situations that may result in leaks, spills, and other releases of pollutants in storm water discharges, (3) minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective response to such spills if or when they occur, (4) stabilize exposed area and contain runoff using structural and/or non structural control measures to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants, (5) divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the permitted facility discharges, (6) enclose or cover storage piles of salt or piles containing salt used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces, (7) train all employees who work in areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of your Pollution
25
Prevention Team, (8) ensure that waste, garbage and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged, and (9) minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final or waste materials.
To meet the non-numeric effluent limitations in Part I.D.4, the permit requires the facility to select control measures (including BMPs) to address the selection and design considerations in Part I.D.3.
The permittee must control its discharge as necessary to meet applicable water quality standards. It is expected that compliance with the non-numeric effluent limitations and other terms and conditions in this permit will meet this effluent limitation. However, if at any time the permittee, or IDEM, determines that the discharge causes or contributes to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards, the permittee must take corrective actions, and conduct follow-up monitoring.
"Terms and Conditions" to Provide Information in a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Distinct from the effluent limitation provisions in the permit, the permit requires the discharger to prepare a SWPPP for the permitted facility. The SWPPP is intended to document the selection, design, installation, and implementation (including inspection, maintenance, monitoring, and corrective action) of control measures being used to comply with the effluent limits set forth in Part I.D. of the permit. In general, the SWPPP must be kept up-to-date, and modified when necessary, to reflect any changes in control measures that were found to be necessary to meet the effluent limitations in the permit.
The requirement to prepare a SWPPP is not an effluent limitation, rather it documents what practices the discharger is implementing to meet the effluent limitations in Part I.D. of the permit. The SWPPP is not an effluent limitation because it does not restrict quantities, rates, and concentrations of constituents which are discharged. Instead, the requirement to develop a SWPPP is a permit "term or condition" authorized under sections 402(a)(2) and 308 of the Act. Section 402(a)(2) states, "[t]he Administrator shall prescribe conditions for [NPDES] permits to assure compliance with the requirements of paragraph (1) of this subsection, including conditions on data and information collection, reporting, and such other requirements as he deems appropriate." The SWPPP requirements set forth in this permit are terms or conditions under the CWA because the discharger is documenting information on how it intends to comply with the effluent limitations (and inspection and evaluation requirements) contained elsewhere in the permit. Thus, the requirement to develop a SWPPP and keep it up-to-date is no different than other information collection conditions, as authorized by section 402(a)(2). It should be noted that EPA has developed a guidance document, "Developing your Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan - A guide for Industrial Operators (EPA 833-B09-002), February 2009, to assist facilities in developing a SWPPP. The guidance contains worksheets, checklists, and model forms that should assist a facility in developing a SWPPP.
26
Public availability of documents
Part I.E.2.d(2) of the permit requires that the permittee retain a copy of the current SWPPP at the facility and it must be immediately available, at the time of an onsite inspection or upon request, to IDEM. Additionally, interested persons can request a copy of the SWPPP through IDEM. By requiring members of the public to request a copy of the SWPPP through IDEM, the Agency is able to provide the permittees with assurance that any Confidential Business Information contained within the permitted facility's SWPPP is not released to the public.
5.8 Water Treatment Additives
In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of any of the additives contributing to Outfall 001, the permittee shall notify the IDEM as required in Part II.C.1 of the permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives/chemicals or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates. The following is a list of water treatment additives currently approved for use at the facility:
Supplier GE Benz Inc.
WTA Corrshield NT402 Cortrol OS5607
Outfall 001 001
Ferric Chloride
001
Klaraid PC1190
001
Metclear MR2405
001
Optisperse HP 2100
001
Optisperse HP 3100
001
Polyfloc AE 1125
001
Potassium Permanganate 001
Scaletrol PDC9325
001
Sodium Bisulfite
001
Sodium Hydroxide
001
Sodium Hypochlorite
001
Spectrus 0X1201
001
Steamate NA0280
001
Purpose Corrosion Inhibitor Oxygen Scavenger/ Metal Passivator Flocculant Coagulant Flocculant Boiler Treatment Boiler Treatment Flocculant Oxidant Deposit Control Dechlorination Agent pH Adjustment Disinfectant Microbial Control Steam Condensate Treatment
27
6.0 PERMIT DRAFT DISCUSSION
6.1 D isch a rg e L im ita tio n s
The proposed final effluent limitations are based on the more stringent of the Indiana WQBELs, TBELS, or approved TMDLs and NPDES regulations as appropriate for each regulated outfall. Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of this document explain the rationale for the effluent limitations at each Outfall.
Outfall 001 -Discharge Tunnel to the Ohio River
Parameter Flow TRO
Chlorination/Bromination Frequency Duration
Plant Capacity Factor
Temperature Intake Effluent
Mixed River Mercury Arsenic Cadmium Selenium Nickel Aluminum Silver Zinc
Free Cyanide Sulfate Copper Interim Final Iron Boron Chloride Fluoride Bromide
Monthly Averaqe Report
-
-
-
Report
-
-
-
12 Report
2.1 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Report 31
Report Report Report Report Report
Daily Maximum Report 0.06
4 40
-
Report Report Report
20 Report
4.2 Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Report 63
Report Report Report Report Report
Units MGD mq/l
Times/Day Minutes/Day % Daily Avg.
F F F nq/l mq/l uq/l mg/l mq/l mq/l uq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l
ug/l uq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l mq/l
Parameter pH
Daily Minimum 6.0
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units Std. Units
28
Outfalls 101 - West Ash Pond
Parameter Flow TSS 0& G
Monthly Average Report 30 15
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________B__________
6.0
Outfall 201 - East Ash Ponds
Parameter Flow TSS 0& G
Copper Iron
Monthly Average Report 30 15
-
1.0
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________H__________
6.0
Outfall 301-FGD System Discharge
Parameter Flow TSS
Arsenic Interim Final Mercury Interim Final Selenium Interim Final Nitrate/Nitrite as N Interim Final
Monthly Average Report 30
Report 8.0
Report 356
Report 12.0
Report 4.4
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________H__________
6.0
Daily Maximum Report 70 20
Daily Maximum 9.0
Daily Maximum Report 70 20 0.2 1.0
Daily Maximum 9.0
Daily Maximum Report 100
Report 11.0
Report 788
Report 23.0
Report 17.0
Daily Maximum 9,0
Units MGD mq/l mg/l
Units Std. Units
Units MGD mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Units Std. Units
Units MGD mq/l
ug/i uq/l
ng/i nq/l
ug/i uq/l
mg/l mg/l
Units Std. Units
29
Outfall 004 -Treated sanitary wastewater
Parameter Flow TSS
TBODs E. coli
Monthly Average Report 30 Report 125
Parameter
Daily Minimum
__________PH__________
6.0
Outfall 000-Intake Structure
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Cadmium Selenium Nickel Aluminum Silver Zinc Copper Iron
Monthly Averaqe Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Daily Maximum Report 45 45 235
Daily Maximum 9.0
Daily Maximum Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Units MGD mq/l mg/l Count/100 ml
Units Std. Units
Units nq/l mq/l ug/i mg/l mq/l mq/l uq/l mq/l uq/l mq/l
6.2 M o n ito rin g C o n d itio n s and R ationale
Analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the version of 40 CFR 136 as referenced in 327 IAC 5-2-13(d)(1). Nothing has changed to warrant modifying the monitoring conditions.
Outfall 001-Discharge Tunnel to the Ohio River
Parameter
Flow TRO Chlorination/Bromination Frequency Duration Plant Capacity Factor Temperature Intake Effluent
Minimum Frequency 1 X Daily 1 X Daily
1 X Daily 1 X Daily 1 X Daily
1 X Hour 1 X Hour
30
Sample Type
Continuous Grab
Report Report Report
Grab Grab
Mixed River Mercury Arsenic Cadmium Selenium Nickel Aluminum Silver Zinc
Free Cyanide Sulfate Copper Iron Boron Chloride Fluoride Bromide
___________ Et!___________
Outfall 101 W est Ash Pond
Parameter
Flow TSS 0 &G ___________ EH___________
Outfall 201 East Ash Pond
Parameter
Flow TSS 0 &G Copper Iron pH
1 X Day 1 X Bi-Month
1 X Month 2 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 2 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly 1 X Month
Minimum Frequency
1 X Day 1 X Week 1 X Week 1 X Day
Minimum Frequency
1 X Day 1 X Week 1 X Week 1 X Day 1 X Day 1 X Day
Report Grab 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. Grab 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp 24 Hr. Comp. Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Sample Type
Continuous Grab Grab Grab
Sample Type
Continuous Grab Grab
24 Hr, Comp. 24 Hr. Comp.
Grab
31
Outfall 301-FGD System Discharge
Parameter
Flow TSS Arsenic Mercury Selenium PH Nitrate/Nitrite as N
Minimum Frequency
1 X Day 2 X Month 2 X Month 6 X Year 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month
Outfall 004-Treated sanitary discharge
Sample Type
Continuous 24 Hr. Total
Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Parameter
Flow TSS TBOD5 E. coli PH
Outfall 000-Intake Structure
Parameter
Mercury Arsenic Cadmium Selenium Nickel Aluminum Silver
Zinc Copper
Iron
6.3 S chedule o f C o m p lia n ce
Minimum Frequency 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month
Minimum Frequency 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month
Sample Type
24 Hr. Total Grab
24 Hr. Comp. Grab Grab
Sample Type Grab
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp.
The permittee requested a 36-month compliance schedule from the effective date of the permit, with status reports at 9-month increments, to allow for adequate time to 1) review and analyze potential sources of the three listed pollutants, 2) assess treatment alternatives, and 3) design and construct pollutant control equipment, if necessary. A 36month schedule of compliance schedule has been included in the final permit.
32
6.4 Special C o n d itio n s and O ther P erm it R equirem ents
6.4.1 C lean W ater A c t (CWA) S ectio n 316(a) A lte rn a tiv e Therm al E fflu ent Lim itations
It has been determined that the F. B. Culley plant no longer requires alternative thermal discharge limits as granted under 316(a) of the Clean Water Act. Please refer to Section 5.3 of this Fact Sheet for temperature limitations.
6.4.2 Clean W ater A c t S ection 316(b) C o o lin g W ater Intake S tructure(s) (CWIS)
Introduction
In accordance with 40 CFR 401.14, the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.
The EPA promulgated a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) regulation on August 15, 2014, that establishes standards for cooling water intake structures. 79 Fed. Reg. 48300 439 (August 15, 2014). The regulation establishes best technology available standards to reduce impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms at existing power generation and manufacturing facilities and it became effective on October 14, 2014,
For permits expiring prior to July 2018, the permittee can (1) negotiate an alternative schedule for submitting required information with the Director (IDEM) after demonstrating need, or (2) request waiver(s) for submitting required information. An alternative schedule for submission of information required under the current CWA section 316(b), or waiver(s) of submittal requirements shall be reviewed and approved by IDEM. Upon approval of such alternative schedules and /or waivers, or until the time the required information/reports are submitted and the permit is renewed or modified following public notice, the IDEM is required to make a BTA determination using Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) to comply with CWA Section 316(b) based on existing information. The BTA determination is subject to change after the required information is submitted in accordance with the federal regulations effective October 14, 2014.
The facility has requested an alternate submittal date of July 1, 2019 for the 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) and (9) thru (13) information. IDEM approves this alternate submittal date as justified in a letter to IDEM dated July 25, 2016.
Cooling Water Intake Structure Data (122.21 (r)(3)):
The F.B. Culley Plant cooling water intake consists of three intake structures, one for each of the three original generating units. Unit 1 retired in 2006, so only the Unit 2 and Unit 3
33
structures are utilized for bringing cooling water into the plant. Currently the plant has the ability to circulate a combined 188,300 gallons per minute (gpm) through Units 2 and 3.
Although the Unit 1 intake structure is no longer utilized for cooling water, it is, along with Unit 2, utilized as a source for house service water. The three intake structures are similar in construction with Unit 1 and Unit 2 being almost identical. In general, the structures are comprised of forebay structures, trash racks, sluice gates, traveling water screens, and circulating water pumps. It should be noted that after the initial trash rack, each intake structure is comprised of two equal sections that contain two sluice gates, two traveling water screens, and two circulating water pumps. Both sides in each intake can be opened and closed independently of the other side.
The forebay structures for each unit are also very similar. The entrance to each forebay structure has a hinged gate that acts as an initial deterrent to larger objects such as logs and other larger floating debris. Each intake structure is approximately 26 feet wide and was designed to be approximately 33 feet deep. The depth of the forebay structures changes day to day depending upon the amount of sediment and debris that settles in them. The bottom of the initial intake section for Units 1 and 2 is at elevations 326 ft mean sea level, whereas the bottom of the initial intake section for Unit 3 is 336.5 ft mean seal level.
While the forebay structures for each intake are similar, the circulating water pumps are not. The circulating water pumps for Unit 1 are no longer in service. Unit 2 contains two, 42-inch circulating water pumps with a pump capacity of 35,000 gpm each. The pumps are one stage and have a pump efficiency of 86 percent. Unit 3 contains two circulating water pumps with a pump capacity of 69,000 gpm each and each has a pump efficiency of 85 percent. Units 2 and 3 have a design circulating water rate of 427.8 cfs (276 MGD) with all four pumps operating.
The cooling water intake is in operation throughout the year. The operating time of each electric generating unit varies throughout the year and from year to year. During the last five years, FBC Unit 2 has averaged 23.4% capacity factor while FBC Unit 3 averaged 60.9%. The average station capacity factor for 2011 through 2015 was 48.5%. Both units were simultaneously off-line an average of 58 days per year (2011 ^ 56 day, 2012 = 51 days, 2013 = 33 days, 2014 = 74 days, and 2015 = 78 days). In 2015, FBC Intake #2 withdrawal from the river was 8,677 gpm averaged over all calendar hours and 51,872 gpm averaged over on- line hours. FBC Intake #3 withdrawal from the river was 87,669 gpm averaged over all calendar hours and 115,083 gpm average over on-line hours.
Conclusion
A copy of the F.B. Culley Generating Station permit renewal application was sent to U.S. Fish and Wildlife on May 5, 2016. No comments were received.
IDEM has made a Best Technology Available (BTA) determination that the existing cooling water intake structure represent best technology available to minimize adverse
34
environmental impact in accordance with Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326) at this time based on the following information :
1. Actual Intake flow is less than 5% or less than the mean annual flow of the source water body.
2. Unit #1 has been taken out of service, reducing design cooling water intake capacity by approximately 93.55 CFS.
3. Comparison of the historical (NER 1976-77) and more recent (2006-07) impingement studies demonstrates that impingement at the F.B. Culley Generating Station is low and has been reduced by approximately 93%.
Permit Conditions
In accordance with the recently promulgated rules at 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 125, the owner or operator of a facility that has CWIS with a Design Intake Flow (DIF) or Actual Intake Flow (AIF) >125 MGD must submit the information required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (13), including all of the associated supporting documentation and/or studies, no later than July 14, 2018, unless an alternate schedule for submission is approved or a waiver of a particular requirement is requested and granted under 40 CFR 125,95. In addition, the permittee shall comply with requirements below:
1. In accordance with 40 CFR 125.98(b)(1), nothing in this permit authorizes take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
2. At all times properly operate and maintain the intake equipment and incorporate management practices and operational measures necessary to ensure proper operation of the CWIS.
3. Inform IDEM of any proposed changes to the CWIS or proposed changes to operations at the facility that affect the information taken into account in the current BTA evaluation.
4. There shall be no discharge of debris from intake screen washing which will settle to form objectionable deposits which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious, or which will produce colors or odors constituting a nuisance.
5. All required reports shall be submitted to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, NPDES Permits Branch.
6. The information required to be submitted at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) and (9) thru (13) shall be submitted no later than July 1, 2019. As part of the current permit renewal application, the permittee submitted information as required by 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (r)(8). This information must be resubmitted along with (r)(7) and (r)(9) through (r)(13) documents no later than July 1, 2019.
7. Submit the information required to be considered by the Director per 40 CFR 125.98
35
to assist IDEM with the fact sheet or statement of basis for entrainment BTA, as soon as practicable, but no later than with the application for the next permit renewal.
8. During the next permit period monitor the actual intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal.
6.4.3 P olych lorinate d B iphenyl (PCB)
There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
Many electrical transformers manufactured prior to 1978 contained PCBs. Therefore, in order to determine compliance with the PCB prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB* data for Outfall 001 with the application renewal. The permittee shall submit the data to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 2251.
Parameter Test Method_______ LOP_______LOQ
PCBs*
608
0.1 ug/l
0.3 ug/l
*PCB-1242, PCB-1254, PCB-1221, PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260, and PCB-1016
6.5 S pill R esponse and R e p o rtin g R equirem ent
Reporting requirements associated with the Spill Reporting, Containment, and Response requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 are included in Part II.B.2.(d). Part II.B.3,(c), and Part II.C,3. of the NPDES permit. Spills from the permitted facility meeting the definition of a spill under 327 IAC 2-6.1 -4(15), the applicability requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 -1, and the Reportable Spills requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1-5 (other than those meeting an exclusion under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3 or the criteria outlined below) are subject to the Reporting Responsibilities of 327 IAC 2-6.1-7.
It should be noted that the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply to those discharges or exceedances that are under the jurisdiction of an applicable permit when the substance in question is covered by the permit and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur. In order for a discharge or exceedance to be under the jurisdiction of this NPDES permit, the substance in question (a) must have been discharged in the normal course of operation from an outfall listed in this permit, and (b) must have been discharged from an outfall for which the permittee has authorization to discharge that substance.
36
6.6 P ost P ublic N otice A dde nd um
The draft NPDES permit for the SIGECO F.B. Culley Generating Station Facility was made available for public comment from January 12, 2017 through February 13, 2017 as part of Public Notice No. 2017-1A-RD. During this comment period, comment letters dated February 13, 2017, from Tony Mendoza of the Sierra Club and February 28, 2017, from Angela Casbon-Scheller of Vectren Corporation, was received. The comments submitted by Mr. Mendoza and Ms Casbon-Scheller and this Office's corresponding responses are summarized below: Any changes to the permit and fact sheet are so noted below.
Comments from FB Culley:
Comment 1: Part IA. 1, Table 1 (page 2 of 55) - Strike TRC from the list of parameters, and strike the TRC-continuous parameter. The TRO test analyzes for all oxidants (both chlorine and bromine). The facility uses Sodium Hypochlorite (bleach) and a bromine product simultaneously and intermittently inthe circulating water system for the purpose of treating intake water to control biological growth.
Response 1: IDEM has removed TRC from Outfall 001 of the permit.
Comment 2: Part IA.1, Table 1(page 2 of 55) - Plant Capacity Factor is reported as a monthly average on the MMR and DMR We suggest changing "% Daily Avg." to % M o n th ly A vg. for purposes of continuity.
Response 2: The standard reporting requirement for Plant Capacity Factor is % Daily average. The monitoring frequency will be 1 x Day in the renewed permit.
Comment 3: Part IA.1,Table 1 (page 2 of 55) - We request removal of the monitoring requirement for Boron, Chloride, Fluoride, Alkalinity, and Sodium. See prior permit footnote [8]. These parameters were included inthe prior permit to determine if there was a reasonable potential to exceed WQBELs. The monitoring data during the last permit cycle indicated very bw levels that were well below levels of concern on the Waste Load Allocation worksheet. In addition, the Fact Sheet on page 21 indicates the reason for maintaining the parameters in this permit is "due to the presence of FGD landfill run off in the discharge." F. B. Culley does not have a landfill. Vectren requests that monitoring requirements for Boron, Chloride, Fluoride, Alkalinity and Sodium are removed from Outfall 001.
Response 3: IDEM has removed Alkalinity and Sodium from the monitoring requirements for Outfall 001. Based on the source and nature of the discharge, monitoring for Boron, Chloride, and Fluoride will be required in the renewed permit, but at a reduced frequency of 1 X Quarterly.
37
Comment 4: Part IA. 1, Table 1 (page 2 of 55) - W e request that a 1X Month intake water sam pling requirement for metals (Mercury, Arsenic, Cadmium, Selenium, Nickel, Aluminum, Silver Zinc, Copper and Iron) be included in this permit and on the DMR,
Response 4; IDEM has added a separate table for intake water sampling as Outfall 000. See Part I A. 6 of the permit.
Comment 5: Part I.A. 1, Footnote [5] (page 3 of 55) - The table was changed to include test methods, LOD and LOQ, for "Cyanide, Total." We suggest striking this parameter because it is not a parameter that is required to be analyzed. The facility is required to analyze for Cyanide, Free.
Response 5: IDEM has removed "Cyanide, Total." from the table.
Comment 6: Schedule of Compliance - The draft permit lists new numeric limits at Outfall 001 for Copper. Vectren requests a 36-month compliance schedule from the effective date of the permit, with status reports at 9-month increments, to allow for adequate time to 1) review and analyze potential sources of the copper, 2) assess treatment alternatives, and 3) design and construct pollutant control equipment, if necessary.
Response 6: A Schedule of Compliance for Copper at Outfall 001 has been added to the permit. Please see part 1,F of the permit.
Comment 7: Part IA. 2 (page 6 of 55) - We suggest separating Outfalls 101 and 201 into separate sections. Outfall 101 (West pond) should include discharge limits and monitoring requirements for Oil and Grease, TSS, pH, and flow since the W est pond no longer receives metal cleaning wastes. In addition, footnote 6 as modified in comment #9 below should be retained. The description of Outfall 101 as listed on page 9 of the Fact Sheet in the draft permit is accurate. This is a change from prior permit descriptions. Specifically, the West pond ceased receiving bottom ash, fly ash, and FGD wastewater either directly or indirectly in October 2015.
Outfall 201 (East pond) should retain the discharge limitations as listed in Table 1 of the draft permit with the inclusion of comments or corrections as identified in this document in comments #9, 10, and 11.
Response 7: IDEM has separated the tables for Outfalls 101 and 201
Comment 8: Part I.A.2, Table 1 (page 6 of 55) - We request that the Monthly Average for Iron be restored to which will match the language on Page 18 of the Fact Sheet, which says "iron limitations have been retained from the previous permit." This is specific to Outfall 201,
38
Response 8: The Federal Effluent Guideline established in 40 CFR 423.13(g)(3)(e) contain both Monthly average and Daily Maximum limits of 1.0 mg/l for Iron. The Monthly Average limit of 1.0 mg/l will remain in the permit.
Comment 9: Part I.A.2, footnote [6] (page 6 of 55) - This footnote needs to be clarified and we request the wording is revised to read "Monitoring at internal Outfalls 101 or 201 is only required when the outfall is discharging to the discharge tunnel which leads to Outfall 001." This footnote should be included for both outfalls, 101 and 201.
Response 9: The footnotes have been revised.
Comment 10: Part I.A.2, footnote [7] (page 6 of 55) - For Outfall 201, we request an alternate compliance date of December 31, 2020 based on the compliance schedule submitted to IDEM in November 2016 following our integrated Resource Plan public meeting. In the November 2016 document (copy attached) we outlined the IURC review and approval process as well as the engineering and construction schedule once the IURC order is received. Since we do not anticipate receiving approval from the IURC to proceed with the project until 4th quarter 2018, there is no possibility of meeting the November 1, 2018 compliance date for "no discharge of bottom ash transport water". We can, however, meet the requirement to cease discharge of fly ash transport water by November 1, 2018 and are not requesting an alternate compliance date for fly ash transport water.
Response 10: The footnote has been revised to reflect the updated compliance dates.
Comment 11: Part IA. 2 (page 6 of 55) - The footnote language pertaining to Copper and Iron Metal Cleaning net limitations, as contained in the previous permit, should be restored. This footnote applies to Outfall 201 only. We have always had net limls, so not having them would be a significant change. To restore the footnote language, and account for the background sample collection timing adjustment made during the current permit term in a letter from IDEM dated May 28, 2014, we would request that IDEM add the following footnote [8] language, "N et lim its may apply. Net lim itations are to be calculated by subtracting the measured background levels o f these param eters in the ash pond from the actual measured concentration of these parameters when lim itations apply. These background levels are to be calculated by m onitoring the ash pond effluent concentrations o f kon and Copper over a period o f time, to con sist o f a m inim um of ten sam ples taken ove r a m in im u m o f th irty (30) days w hen there is no discharge o f m etal cleaning w astes du ring a period that is at least 30 days but not to exceed 90 days preceding each discharge o f metal cleaning wastes. The background levels dem onstrated by this m onitoring, along w ith supporting data are to be subm itted
39
w ith m onthly D ischarge M onitoring R eports (DMR) when reporting discharge o f metal cleaning wastes."
Response 11: The footnote language pertaining to Iron Metal Cleaning net limitations, as contained in the previous permit, has been restored.
However, IDEM believes that a more appropriate vehicle for these limitations is the development of alternate limits using the combined wastestream formula. Therefore, footnote [9] has been added which states that "With the next permit renewal application, the permittee is required to submit flow data for all regulated, non regulated, and dilution wastestreams and the concentration of the selected parameters contributed by each of these wastestreams for use in developing alternate limitations using the combined wastestream formula (CWF). At the next permit renewal limits will be developed using either the Combined Wastestream Formula or by establishing internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423."
Comment 12: Part I.A.3, Footnote [5] (page 8 of 55) - We suggest this footnote specifically reference Part III.A and Part III.B, as opposed to referencing Part II in its entirety. The sections of Part III that should be excluded from the footnote are Storm Water Monitoring et al, and permanent markers on the stream bank, neither of which apply as this is an internal outfall.
Response 12: IDEM has revised the footnote.
Comment 13: Part I.A.4, Footnote [4] (page 10 of 55) - We suggest this footnote specifically reference Part III.A and Part III.B, as opposed to referencing Part III in its entirety. The sections of Part III that should be excluded from the footnote are Storm Water Monitoring et aI, and permanent markers on the stream bank, neither of which apply as this is an internal outfall.
Response 13: IDEM has revised the footnote.
Comment 14: Part I.D.1 (page 16 of 55) - We request removal of this section as the facility does not have a storm water discharge, thereby making a reference to technology-based limits not applicable.
Response 14: Treatment for storm water discharges associated with industrial activities is required to meet, at a minimum, best available technology economically achievable/best conventional pollutant control technology (BAT/BCT) requirements. EPA has determined that non-numeric technology-based effluent limits have been determined to be equal to the best practicable technology (BPT) or BAT/BCT for storm water associated with industrial activity. The non-numeric storm water conditions and effluent limits contain the technology-based effluent limitations. Effluent limitations, as defined in the CWA, are restrictions on quantities, rates, and concentrations of constituents which are discharged. Effective implementation of these
40
requirements should meet the applicable water quality based effluent limitations.
Comment 15: Part I.D.2 (page 16 of 55) - We request removal of the reference to non numeric effluent limits because the facility does not have a storm water outfall and therefore does not have storm water effluent. "Select, design, install, and implement control measures (including best management practices) to minimize pollutant discharges that address the selection and design considerations in Part D.3 to meet the non-numer-ic efflu ent lim its 4n Part D.1."
Response 15: The non-numeric technology-based effluent limits have been determined to be equal to the best practicable technology (BPT) or BAT/BCT for storm water associated with industrial activity. The non-numeric effluent limits are BMPs and apply to the site as a whole.
Comment 16: Part I.D.5 (page 24 of 55) - We request removal of references to visual and analytical monitoring, because the facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have a storm water discharge. "At least once every 12 months, submit an Annual Report to the industrial NPDES Permit Section which includes the following: the results or a summary of the past year's routine facility inspection documentation and quarterly visual.assessment documentation; information copied or..."
Response 16: IDEM agrees to remove the reference to quarterly visual assessment.
Comment 17: Part I.D.6.a.iv (page 24 of 55) - We request removal of this item, as it references visual assessments. The facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have a storm water discharge. "Visual assessments indicate obvious signs of storm water pollution (e g., color, odor, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids, foam);"
Response 17: IDEM agrees to remove Part I.D.6.a.iv.
Comment 18: Part I.D.7 (page 25 of 55) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 14 days is too restrictive. As a result, we are requesting to revise the corrective action deadlines to a more reasonable timeline, which will allow for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution. The facility operates under a comprehensive Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, which facilitates sound management practices. The edited paragraph from the permit is as follows: "if additional changes are necessary, a new or modified control must be installed and made operational, or a repair completed, before the
41
next storm event if possible, and within -14 45 calendar days from the time of discovery. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within -44 45 calendar days, the reason(s) must be documented. A schedule for completing the work must also be identified, which must be done as soon as practicable alter the -44 45 day timeframe but no
"Where corrective actions result in changes to any of the controls or procedures documented in the SWPPP, the SWPPP must be modified accordingly within -44 45 calendar days of completing corrective action work."
Response 18: IDEM has extended the corrective action deadline to 45 days.
Comment 19: Part I.D.8 (page 25 of 55) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 24 hours is too restrictive. As a result, we are requesting to revise the corrective action deadlines to a more reasonable timeline, which will allow for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution. The facility operates under a comprehensive Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, which facilitates sound management practices. The edited language from the permit is as follows: T h e existence of any of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6 must be documented within 24 how s 14 days of becoming aware of such condition. The following information must be included in the documentation:"
Response 19: IDEM has extended the corrective action deadline to 14 days.
Comment 20: Part I.D.8 (page 26 of 55) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 14 days is too restrictive. As a result we are requesting 45 days for the corrective action deadlines, which are reasonable for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution. The edited language from the permit is as follows: "Document the corrective actions taken that occurred as a result of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6. within -44 45 days from the time of discovery of any of those conditions. Provide the dates when each corrective action was initiated and completed (or is expected to be completed). If applicable, document why it is infeasible to complete necessary installations or repairs within the 44-45-day timeframe and document the schedule for installing the controls and making them operational as soon as practicable alter the-4 4 -45-day timeframe."
Response 20: IDEM has extended the corrective action deadline to 45 days. 42
Comment 21: Part I.D.9.a (page 26 of 55) - We request removal of the reference to completing the inspections during a period when a storm water discharge is occurring, as well as references to visual and analytical monitoring, because the facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have a storm water discharge. "Inspections must be conducted at least quarterly (i.e., once each calendar quarter), or in some instances more frequently (e.g. Monthly), as appropriate. I ncreased frequency may be appropriate for some types of equipment, processes and storm water control measures, or areas of the facility with significant activities and materials exposed to storm water. At least one-o f-the-routme inspections must be .conducted.dunng-a period when a stormwater diSGharg eHS-eGGom nfT-
"Inspections must be performed by qualified personnel with at feast one member of the storm water pollution prevention team participating, Inspect-ers must consider.the results.of visuai- and anaiytic-al.monitoring.(if any) for the past year whee-piaemeg- a-nd cenduc-ting in s p e c tio n s ."
Response 21: IDEM has removed the reference to completing the inspections during a period when a stormwater discharge is occurring, in addition to the reference to visual and analytical monitoring.
Comment 22: Part l.D.9.a (page 27 of 55) - We request removal of the paragraph that refers to an inspection during a storm water discharge. The facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have a storm water discharge. "During an inspection occurring during a stormwater discharge, control measures implemented to comply with effluent limits must be observed to ensure they are functioning correctly. Discharge outfalls must also be observed during this inspection. If such discharge locations are inaccessible, nearby downstream locations must be inspected."
Response 22: IDEM has removed this section due to the fact that Outfall 001 is under water and therefore, a visual inspection is not possible.
Comment 23: Part I.D.9.b.iv.(4) (page 28 of 55) - W e request rem oval of this item as it refers to a storm water outfall, discharge, and receiving water, which are not present atthe facility. "Observations regarding the physical condition of any around all outfalls including any flow dissipation devices, and evidence of pollutants in discharges and/or the receiving water;"
43
Response 23: IDEM has removed this section due to the fact that Outfall 001 is under water and therefore, observations of the area around the outfall are not possible.
Comment 24: Part I.D.9.b (page 28 of 55) - We request removal of the last paragraph of this section as it refers to visual assessment of a discharge, which cannot be com pleted at the facility as it does not have a storm water discharge . "If the discharge was visual assessed, as required in Part I.D.9.C., during the facility inspection, include the results of the assessment with the report required in Part I.D.9.a., as long as all components of both types of inspections are included in the report."
Response 24: IDEM has removed this paragraph.
Comment 25: Parts I.D.9.C, I.D.9.d, and I.D.9.e (pages 28-30 of 55) - We request removal of these sections in their entirety, because the facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have a storm water discharge, making the collection and assessment of a discharge sample not possible.
Response 25: IDEM has removed these sections.
Comment 26: Part I.E.2.C vi. Sampling Data (page 33 of 55) - We request removal of this section because the facility does not have a storm water outfall, and therefore does not have, nor has previously had, a storm water discharge from which to generate sampling data. "vi. Sampling Data All stormwater discharge sampling data collected at the facility during the previous permit term must be summarized in the SWPPP."
Response 26: IDEM has removed this section.
Comment 27: Part I.E.2.e.ii (page 35 of 55) - We request removal of this section because the facility does not have a storm water outfall and therefore cannot collect a storm water discharge. "ii. Quarterly visual assessment of storm water discharges."
Response 27: IDEM has removed this section.
Comment 28: Part I.E.2.f (page 35 of 55) - Pertaining to M onitoring - We request removal ofthis section because the facility does nothavea storm water outfall, and therefore cannot collect a storm water discharge sample from which to conduct analytical monitoring.
Response 28: IDEM has removed this section.
44
Comment 29: Part I.F.3 (page 36 of 55) - We suggest revising the language to add clarity. 'This permit may be modified or alternately revoked and reissued after public notice and op portun ity fo r rehearing, to comply with any applicable final agency standards, regulations ..."
Response 29: Because the compliance dates are explained in Parts I.A.3., this section has been removed.
Comment 30: Part I.F.4 (page 37 of 55) - We suggest revising the language to add clarity that the alternate applicability date for transport waters allows up to December 31, 2023. "The permittee may submit an implementation schedule and justification for an alternate applicability date for the ELG BAT limits under 423.13 (g)(1) or (g)(3) fo r FGD waste water, (h)(1)(i) for fly ash tra nspo rt water, and (k)(1)(i) fo r bottom ash transport water no later than twelve months..."
Response 30: IDEM has added the additional language. This is now under Part I.G.4
Comment 31: Part I.F.4 (page 37 of 56) - R enum ber the subparts in section 4. Subparts should be a, b,c and d, instead of 1, 2, 3 and 4. The subparts for the renum bered b should be i, ii, and iii, instead of a, b, and c.
Response 31: IDEM has made the correction.
Comment 32: Part I.F.4 (page 37 of 56) - W e suggest adding new subsection "e. A public announcem ent fo r coal u n it retirem ent no later than Decem ber 31,2023."
Response 32: This reopener was removed in it's entirely and the remaining reopeners were renumbered.
Comment 33: Part I.F.6 (page 37 of 56) - We request adding new section 6 to discuss future changes in operation for Unit 3 that occur prior to December 31, 2023, but after the "12 month from effective date" discussed in section 5. This will allow the facility to submit a request to stop construction of water pollution control equipment if the company notifies IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023. This determination could be made during the triennial integrated Resource Plan review period or as the result of any other economic driver that makes the continued operation of unit 3 untenable. Suggested language: If at any time prior to the com pletion of the construction of pollution control equipment installed to meet the conditions of this permit, including but not lim ited to dry bottom ash or FGD wastewater treatm ent equipment, the perm ittee notifies IDEM of its intent to perm anently retire U nit 3 no later than December 31, 2023, this perm it
45
may be modified to extend the alternate com pliance schedule for pollution control equipm ent to December 31, 2023.
Response 33: If at any time prior to the completion of the construction of pollution control equipment installed to meet the conditions of this permit, including but not limited to dry bottom ash or FGD wastewater treatment equipment, the permittee notifies IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023, the permittee may request a permit modification to address changes to the compliance schedule.
Comment 34: Part III.C (page 53 of 55) - We request removal of this item because the facility does not have dedicated storm water discharge and therefore monitoring and non-numeric effluent limits do not apply.
Response 34: The reference to the Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) requirements is standard for all permits that contain stormwater exposed to industrial activity in their discharge. This section will remain in the permit.
Comment 35: Part IV.B.8 (page 55 of 55) - We request that "measure" is replaced with 'approximate" to clarify how this information is determined and when it is reported, and establish that the data shall be collected for a period of one year, and not the entirely of the permit. This section should now read: "D uring the next perm it period, monitor the actual intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily fo r one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to measure ap pro xim ate intake flow. The daily intake flow inform ation shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal."
Response 35: IDEM has added the additional language.
Comment 36: Fact Sheet, Section 2.1 (page 3), Facility Description General - The design intake volume of 360 MGD appears to be a legacy value from the operation of three generating units. We suggest striking the last sentence of the first paragraph in it's entirety. The Unit 1 intake structure is only used as a source for house service water since Unit 1 is retired. The average facility intake for 2014 - 2016 is 161.7 MGD, and the average discharge for 2014 - 2016 is 161.5 MGD. "...well water accounting for the remainder. The design intake volume is 360 MGD and the design discharge volume is 360 MGD."
Response 36: IDEM has removed this sentence as requested.
Comment 37: Fact Sheet, new Section 2.5 (page 9) - Internal Outfall 201. The second sentence should be revised to read "...RO rejects, and rejects from the FGD system discharge from Outfall 301 (FGD WWTP), and discharge from Outfall 101 (West Ash Pond). 46
Response 37: This paragraph has been revised.
Comment 38: Fact Sheet, Section 5.2 (page 15) - We request revising the language to consistently reflect the current plans to close Unit 2. The second sentence of the fourth paragraph should read, "However, because the facility SIGECO has plans to close Unit 2 by December 31, 2023 announced in the December 2016 Integrated Resource Plan filed with the IURC that the preferred generation transition plan would include closure of F.B. Culley coal Unit 2, a reopener has been proposed in the permit which states that if within 12 months from the effective date of this permit the permittee doesn't notify IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 2 no later than December 31,2023, this perm it may be. . We also request adding language to discuss future changes in operation for Unit 3 that occur prior to December 31,2023, but after the "12 month from effective date" discussed in permit Part I.F.5. This will allow the facility to submit a request to stop construction of water pollution control equipment if the company notified IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023. This determination could be made during the triennial Integrated Resource Plan review period or as the result of any other economic driver that makes the continued operation of Unit 3 untenable. Suggested language:
If at any time prior to the completion of the construction of pollution control equipment installed to meet the conditions of this permit, including but not limited to dry bottom ash orFGD wastewater treatment equipment, the permittee notifies IDEM of its intent to permanently retire Unit 3 no later than December 31, 2023, this permit may be modified to extend the alternate compliance schedule for pollution control equipment to December 31, 2023.
Response 38: See Comment/Response 33,
Comment 39: Fact Sheet, Section 5.2, Outfalls 101/201 (page 18) -As reflected in comments 7 and 10; it is recommended that Outfalls 101 and 201 be separated and the Alternate Compliance dates for Unit 2 and Unit 3 be independently listed.
Response 39: IDEM has separated the two outfalls in the Fact Sheet and added the Alternate Compliance dates for each outfall individually.
Comment 40: Fact Sheet, Section 5.2, Outfalls 101/201 Iron and Copper (Metal Cleaning Waste) (page 18) - The paragraph begins by saying iron limitations have been retained from the previous permit. As such, the reference to a monthly average needs to stricken from the last sentence, so the end of the paragraph reads, "...daily maximum and monthly average limitation of 1.0 mg/L for Iron."
47
Response 40: Copper limitations are based off of 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and 40 CFR 423.13(e) which identifies a daily maximum and monthly average limitation of 1.0 mg/l for Iron. The monthly average will remain in the permit. The reference to the retention of Iron limits from the previous permit has been removed.
Comment 41: Fact Sheet, Section 5.3 WQBEL, (page 21) - We request removing the monitoring requirement for Boron, Chloride, Fluoride, Alkalinity, Sodium. See comment #3 for additional information.
Response 41: IDEM has removed the monitoring requirement for Alkalinity and Sodium. IDEM will retain monitoring requirements for Boron, Chloride and Fluoride, but will reduce the monitoring frequency to Quarterly.
Comment 42: Fact Sheet, Section 6.1, Outfall 001 (page 28) - W e request striking TRC from the list of parameters, and strike the TRC-continuous parameter. The TRO test analyzes for all oxidants (both chlorine and bromine). The facility uses Sodium Hypochlorite (bleach) and a bromine product sim ultaneously and intermittently in the circulating w ater system for the purpose of treating intake w ater to control biological growth.
Response 42: IDEM has removed TRC from the permit.
Comment 43: Fact Sheet, Section 6.1, Outfalls 101/201 (page 29) - Page 18 of the Fact Sheet states that iron limitations have been retained from the previous permit. As such, we would request that the he in the monthly average column be reverted to
Response 43: Iron imitations are based off of 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and 40 CFR 423.13(e) which identifies a daily maximum and monthly average limitation of 1.0 mg/l for Iron. The monthly average will remain in the permit. The reference to the retention of Iron limits from the previous permit has been retained.
Comment 44: Fact Sheet, Section 6.1, Outfall 004 (page 30) - The pH Daily Minimum should be corrected to 6,0 and the pH Daily Maximum should be corrected to 9.0.
Response 44: IDEM has made the correction.
Comment 45: Fact Sheet, Section 6.4.2 (page 33) - The table containing velocities of each intake at various river stages should be stricken. This information is not specifically required under the 316(b) regulation and will be updated with the "r" documents submitted in July 2019.
Response 45: IDEM has removed this table from the permit.
48
Comment 46; Fact Sheet, 6.4.2, Condition 8 (page 35)- And finally, we request that "measure" is replaced with "approximate" to clarify how this information is determined and when it is reported, and establish that the data shall be collected for a period of one year, and not the entirely of the permit. This section should now read: "During the next permit period, monitor the intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to measure approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal. "In addition, add a sentence acknowledging that 316(b) information has been submitted as part of the current permit renewal, and it is understood this must be resubmitted during the next application. "As part of the current permit renewal application the permittee submitted information as required at 40 CFR 122.21 {r){2) through {r){S) and {r){S). This information must be resubmitted along with (r){7) and (r){9) thru {r){13) documents no later than July 1, 2019."
Response 46: IDEM has added the additional language to the permit.
Comments from the Sierra Club:
IDEM must revisit, revise, and re-issue the Draft Permit for public comment before issuing it in its final form. First, as explained below, IDEM's proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines ("ELGs")i compliance deadline is not supported by any independent, well-reasoned justification as required by regulations and principles of reasoned agency decision making.
Second, neither IDEM nor Vectren has justified the proposed December 2023 compliance deadline for flue gas desulfurization ("FGD") wastewaters. Culley is already meeting the discharge limitation for at least two of the four pollutants covered by the ELGs' FGD wastewaters requirements, and can comply with limitations for the others much sooner than December 2023. Third, IDEM must consult with downstream municipal water utilities to determine if water quality based discharge limitations for bromide are needed to protect drinking water. Fourth. IDEM should remind Vectren that the re-opener process is not an invitation to delay planning to comply with the zero discharge limits for bottom ash and fly ash transport wastewaters.
I. Factual and Legal Background
The F.B. Culley generating station is located in Warrick County, Indiana, and is owned and operated by Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Co. ("Vectren"). The Culley plant comprises two units that are still in sendee, a 103-megwatt Unit 2 (built in 1966) and 265-megawatt Unit 3 (built in 1973). The Culley plant discharges wastewaters to the Ohio River pursuant to an IDEM issued National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit. Both Culley units have FGD systems to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide and other harmful air pollutants.
49
A. Clean W ater Act and Steam Electric Effluent Limitation Guidelines
The goal of the Clean Water Act ("CWA") is to eliminate all discharges of pollution into navigable waters.aTo this end, the Act's implementing regulations establish the NPDES permitting program. Under the program, no pollutant may be discharged from any "point source" without a permit, and failure to comply with such a permit constitutes a violation of the CWA..; In addition, the CWA authorizes EPA to establish national, technology-based effluent limitations guidelines for discharges from categories of sources, and requires that NPDES permits include effluent limits based on the performance achievable through the use of statutorily-prescribed levels of technology that "will result in reasonable further progress toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge of all pollutants."4
On November 3. 2015, EPA published its revised Effluent Limitations Guidelines for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category (referred to herein as the "ELGs").5 The ELGs became effective on January 4, 2016, and must be incorporated into NPDES permits for such generators issued after that date. The ELGs impose technology-based effluent limitations--reflecting decades of advances in water quality science and control technology--on discharges of several common types o f effluent (i.e., waste streams) from coal burning power plants, including fly ash and bottom ash transport waters and wastewater FGD systems. The ELGs establish a zero discharge standard for fly ash and bottom ash transport waters.6In addition, the ELGs require that the discharge of FGD wastewaters meets numeric limits for arsenic, mercury, selenium, and nitrates/nitrites.7
EPA vested authority to establish the compliance deadline for these ELGs wastestreams with state permitting agencies, such as IDEM.8Dischargers must comply with these requirements for FGD wastewaters, fly ash transport waters, and bottom ash transport waters "as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2018, but no later than December 31, 2023. " 9 The ELGs rule defines "as soon as possible" to mean "November 1, 2018, unless the peimitting authority establishes a later date, after receiving information from the discharger, which reflects a consideration of which reflects a consideration of the following factors:
(1) Time to expeditiously plan (including to raise capital), design, procure, and install equipment to comply with the requirements of this part. (2) Changes being made or planned at the plant in response to: [Certain enumerated environmental regulations addressing greenhouse gases or disposal of coal combustion residuals] (3) For FGD wastewater requirements only, an initial commissioning period for the treatment system to optimize the installed equipment. (4) Other factors as appropriate. 10
Thus, the rule established November 1, 2018 as the default compliance date, unless the permitting authority determines another date after receiving and evaluating information submitted by the discharger. In setting the compliance deadline, the permitting authority should:
[PJrovide a well-documented justification of how it determined the "as soon as possible" date in the fact sheet or administrative record for the permit. If the permitting authority determines a date later than November 1, 2018, the justification should
50
explain why allowing additional time to meet the limitations is appropriate, and why the discharger cannot meet the final effluent limitations as of November 1, 2018.11 In addressing the factors set out in the "as soon as possible" definition, at a minimum, the permitting authority should " evaluate what operational changes are expected at the plant" to meet the new limitations, "must also consider scheduling for installation of equipment," and, for FGD wastewater only, "must consider whether it is appropriate to allow more time for implementation." The "as soon as possible" date determined by the permitting authority may or may not be different for each wastestream.12
B. FGD Wastewater Handling Practices at F.B. Culley
The Culley plant discharges bottom ash and fly ash waterwaters, and also discharges FGD wastewaters. Outfall 001 discharges water from the East (internal outfall 101) and West (internal outfall 201) Ash Ponds as well as once through non-contact cooling water. Internal Outfall 301 consists of FGD wastewater treatment plant discharge, which discharges to the East Ash Pond. The ash pond discharge amounts to 1. 6 million gallons per day. 13 A chemicalprecipitation system went into serv ice on September 26, 2014, for the purpose of meeting the mercury limitations at Outfall 001, which became effective on December 1,2014.u
II. IDEM's Proposed ELGs Deadline Impermissibly Fails to Reflect IDEM's Independent Judgment of How Quickly F.B. Culley Can Comply
In setting the compliance deadline for ELGs requirements, IDEM's Draft Permit and Fact Sheet impermissibly fail to contain any independent analysis of what date is "as soon as possible" for the F.B. Culley plant. The Draft Permit itself contains no analysis at all but simply sets the date of compliance at December 31, 2023,is the last possible date allowed under the regulations. The Fact Sheet simply states:
The permittee has requested an alternate compliance date for the new FGD limitations. To support the alternate compliance date, the permittee provided proposed schedules from a technology assessment report prepared by a third party engineer. The alternate compliance schedules state that the permittee will make a final determination on which technology to pursue for FGD waste water within a year of effective date of the permit. Based on the information provided, IDEM proposes an effective of December 31, 2023 for Arsenic, Mercury, Selenium, and TDS.16
IDEM appears to have simply accepted these proposed schedules that Vectren submitted for two options to comply with the ELGs' FGD discharge requirements. Option 1 titled "Physical/Chemical/Biological Treatment & Discharge" assumes that work would begin on March 1, 2017 and could be completed by February 2021.17 Option 2 titled "Spray Dryer Evaporation--Zero Liquid Discharge" assumes that work would begin in July 2019 and could then be completed by October 2023.18 The paragraph referenced above from the Fact Sheet simply recites information that Vectren provided the agency and does not amount to IDEM's independent substantive review set out in a "well-documented justification" that is called for by the regulations and reasoned agency decision-making. IDEM does not appear to have considered, as required by the rule, whether compliance for the four FGD wastewater pollutants covered by the ELGs rule could be achieved on different timelines. In purporting to determine
51
the "as soon as possible" date, IDEM does not appear to have "evaluate[d] . . . operational changes" proposed, the "schedule] for installation of equipment," or any of the other factors in this definition. 19 Instead. IDEM appears to have accepted Vectren's representations without any analysis at all. IDEM must, at a minimum, revise the Fact Sheet to include a transparent, reproducible, and defensible description o f how the agency itself reached its conclusions.
What constitutes a well-reasoned justification for extending the ELGs' compliance date beyond the default date of November 2018 depends to some extent on the facts of a given permit, but in every case, IDEM must at least address several over-arching considerations. First, as noted, the "well-documented justification" must address each o f the factors set out in the "as soon as possible" definition or explain why the factors do not apply to a particular permit decision.20 Second, IDEM must include a separate analysis for each ELGs wastestream discharged or explain why a separate analysis for each wastestream is not needed for a particular permit. Third, importantly, IDEM must address whether it is reasonable for an entity to wait to plan to comply till its existing NPDES permit is up for renewal. The final ELGs rule was signed and made public in September 2015 and yet Vectren's justification assumes that compliance project work would begin in March 2017 (Option 1) or July 2019 (Option 2), effectively granting itself a multi-years extension. This is contrary to EPA's intent in the preamble to the rule, in which it stated that "[rjegardless of when a plant's NPDES permit is ready for renewal, the plant should immediately begin evaluating how it intends to comply with the requirements of the final ELGs. " 21 In light of this clear directive by EPA, IDEM must evaluate the "as soon as possible" compliance date for different F.B. Culley wastestreams based on the date that the ELG rule was signed and made public.
In the context of this Draft Permit for F.B. Culley and the comments submitted here, a "well-reasoned justification" for extending the ELGs' compliance date beyond the default date of November 2018 for F.B. Culley, must include:
1. IDEM must acknowledge that Vectren could have begun and likely did in fact begin work on ELGs compliance well before March 2017 (FGD Option 1) or July 2019 (FGD Option 2) and should explain why such work can be disregarded for its proposed schedule of compliance.22 2. IDEM must acknowledge that Vectren is already meeting the ELGs' limits for FGD wastewater for mercury and arsenic, and should therefore explain why an extension beyond Nov. 2018 is warranted to comply with the discharge limitations for those pollutants. 3. IDEM must acknowledge that Vectren's proposed schedule for FGD Option 1 shows that compliance could be achieved by February 2021 (even assuming every aspect of the schedule is reasonable), and should explain why the compliance date should not be set on or before February 2021. IDEM should consider relying on FGD Option 1 to set the "as soon as possible" date and could, if necessary, provide a re-opener provision if Vectren were later to select a zero discharge system (Option 2).
Given that the default ELGs' compliance date is November 1, 2018 and that the rule's clear intention is to achieve compliance "as soon as possible," any request for an extension beyond the default compliance date must be rigorously vetted by IDEM and even then any
52
extension must be as close as possible to the default date. IDEM's analysis here entirely fails to grapple with Vectren's purported need to require over six years to comply with the ELGs' FGD wastewater discharge limits. For IDEM to meet its duties, a much more rigorous analysis is required.
III. Vectren Has Not Justified a December 2023 Compliance Date for FGD wastewaters.
The Draft Permit allows until December 31,2023 for Gulley to meet the FGD wastewater discharge limitations required by the ELGs. This determination appears to be solely based on two proposed schedules submitted by Vectren to IDEM. Vectren's Option 1 is titled "Physical/Chemical/Biological Treatment & Discharge" and assumes that, if work began in March 2017--a year and a half after the ELGs were finalized--compliance could be achieved by February 2021. Vectren's Option 2 is titled "Spray Dryer Evaporation-Zero Liquid Discharge" and assumes that work would begin in July 2019-- nearly four years after the ELGs were finalized--and would then be completed in October 2023. Both o f these proposed schedules fail to comply with the ELGs' basic directive that compliance work should have begun when the regulations became final. In addition, there are other glaring flaws in IDEM's decision to set the compliance deadline for FGD wastewaters at December 2023.
First, Culley is already meeting the discharge limitations for mercury and arsenic and therefore IDEM should set the compliance deadline for those pollutants at the default compliance deadline of November 2018. Table 1 shows the ELGs discharge limitations for FGD wastewaters for arsenic and mercury.
Table 1 Effluent Limitation Guideline for FGD Wastewater Discharged at
Existing Steam Electric Power Plants, 40 C.F.R 423.13(g}(l}(i),
Pollutant
Daily Maximum
Monthly Average
Arsenic Mercury
0,011 Mg L 7S8.000 ppt
0,008 Mg L 856.000 ppt
As shown in Table 2, recent discharge monitoring reports for F.B. Culley show that the levels of arsenic and mercury in Culley's wastewater are both below the ELG limits:
53
Table 2
F.B. CuilevN Discharge of Arseni_c__a_n_d__M___e_r_c_urv___________ ^ _____________________
* >_______________________________S _____________________________ ________________________________________ i _
Reported Arsenic From Reported Mercury From
Date
Outfall 001 (Mg L)
Outfall 301 (ppt)
(Average. Daily Max) (Average. Daily Max)
2015.01
0,00307. 0.00307
54200. 54200
2015.02 2015.03 2015.04 2015.05 2015,06 2015,07 2015,08 2015.09 2015.10 2015.11 2015.12 2016, 01 2016.02 2016.03 2016.04
0.00106. 0.00106 0.00224. 0.00224 0.00238. 0.0023S 0.00137. 0.00137
.0005. <0.001 0,00118. 0.001 IS 0.00119. 0.00119 0.0012. 0,0012 0.00175.0.00175 0.00149. 0.00149 0.00133. 0.00133 0.00361. 0.00361 0,002. 0.002 0.00217. 0.00217 0.00136. 0.00136
30700. 30700 No data 47800. 47800 No data 50200.50200 No data 34200. 34200 No data 34900. 34900 No data 13400. 13400 10000.10000 28600. 28600 No data 12700. 12700
Source: Exhibit 3 attached here, which compiles discharge monitoring data from January 2015 through April 2016 as reported in Vectren's NPDES application. 23 This data shows that the ELGs' limits for mercury and arsenic can be complied with at F.B. Culley without the need for any new treatment technology.
Second, after scrutinizing the individual elements of the proposed, and perhaps requesting additional information from Vectren, IDEM should set the deadline for compliance for the remaining FGD pollutants based on an adjustment to Vectren's Option 1 proposed schedule, which acknowledges that compliance could be achieved by February 2021, even under Vectren's assumptions. IDEM should adjust the start date for Option 1 to account for the fact that Vectren is not permitted to grant itself an extension to start work on compliance to March 2017. IDEM should also scrutinize the individual elements of the proposed schedule. After making those adjustments, Vectren should set the deadline to comply with the FGD discharge limits for the remaining FGD pollutants based on this physical/chemical/biological treatment system, with compliance being required no later than February 2021.
54
IV. IDEM Must Notify and Consult Municipalities Downstream to Determine If WaterQuality Based Effluent Limitations for F.B. Culley's Bromide Discharge are Necessary to Protect Drinking Water Quality'.
FGD wastewater often contains significant quantities of bromide and other dissolved solids. In the preamble to the ELGs rulemaking, EPA observed that depending "on site-specific conditions and applicable state water quality standards, it may be appropriate for permitting authorities to establish water quality-based effluent limitations on bromide, especially where steam electric power plants are located upstream from drinking water intakes."24The bromide ion can form brominated, carcinogenic disinfection by-products (DBPs) when drinking water plants treat the incoming source water using certain disinfection processes including chlorination and ozonation.25 EPA has established maximum concentration levels for only a few classes of the hundreds of DBPs that can be found in public drinking w'ater. In its role as regulator of public water systems, IDEM is well aware of the serious health risks posed by DBPs and various federal and state regulations that apply.26 These serious potential public-health problems from coal plant discharges are further explained in the report of Dr. Jeanne M VanBriesen, Ph.D., P.E, which was submitted in the ELGs rulemaking.2 ?
Although there are currently no water quality criteria for bromide, discharges of bromides must be restricted, on a water quality basis, where narrative water quality standards require the protection of drinking water. EPA suggests the following steps to make use of these narrative w'ater quality standards. First, EPA has instructed permitting authorities, here IDEM, to notify downstream drinking water treatment plants of the bromide discharge.28 When it notifies downstream entities, IDEM should include as much information as possible on the nature and quantity of the bromide discharge from the F.B. Culley plant. As reflected in Table 3, recognizing that our search w'as not intended to be comprehensive, there are many municipalities downstream of the F.B. Culley plant that take drinking water from the Ohio River.
Table A* Downstream Cities and Towns With Drinking Water Obtained from Ohio River
State
Municipality Source Confirming D rinking Water is Obtained from Ohio River
Approximate Distance Downstream o f Culley
f>:
Newburgh
Indiana American Water. "2015
Annual Water Quality Repost."
accessed 2 2 201T
Evansville Water and Sewer Utility.
IV
V
illv
"2015 A nnual thinking Water
Quality Report." accessed 2 2 2017.
http: www evausvillegov.org module s skowdociuneiit.aspx"documentid=2
1533
5 miles 19 miles
55
Henderson W ater Utility. "Drinking
KY
Henderson
Water Quality Report for 2016."
accessed 2 2 2017,
http: W a w .hkywater.org :ccr north.pd f
31 miles
Telephone call with Mt, Vernon
IN
Mount Vernon W aterw orks Department. February
5. 201".
KY
Uniontown
Telephone call with Union County
W ater District.
February 3. 201"
56 miles 68 miles
Second, after consulting with these and any other affected municipal drinking water utilities, EPA "recommends that the permitting authority collaborate with drinking water utilities and their regulators to determine what concentration of bromides at the [public water] intake is needed to ensure that levels of bromate and DPBs do not exceed applicable MCLs.'U) With this information, IDEM must then determine the level of bromide that may be discharged without causing an exceedance of the maximum permissible level that will protect drinking water quality downstream in the Ohio River.
Based on the Draft Permit and Fact Sheet, it does not appear that IDEM has undertaken any such consultation regarding the bromide discharge from the F.B. Culley plant. IDEM should consult with downstream municipal drinking water utilities before issuing the final F.B. Culley NPDES pennit, and, if necessary to protect water quality, the final permit should include discharge limits for bromides.
V. The Re-Opener Process Must Not Be Used to Further Delay Culley Unit 3's Compliance With the Bottom and Fly Ash Zero Discharge Requirements.
Vectren has stated that it intends to retrofit Culley Unit 3 to comply with the zero discharge limitations for bottom ash and fly ash transport wastewaters.?o This Draft Permit simply sets the zero discharge compliance date at November 2018 and invites Vectren to file a re-opener application to justify a later date,.u though IDEM acknowdedges that such an application is a near-certainty if Vectren intends to continue to operate Unit 3.32 In this permit action, IDEM should remind Vectren of its duty to diligently prepare to comply with the ELGs. IDEM should remind Vectren that, if it wishes to continue to operate Unit 3 as a coal-burning unit, Vectren must be diligently planning now to eliminate discharge of bottom ash and fly ash transport waters. Proposed schedules for bottom ash conversion for Unit 3, for example, must not assume that work begins only when such re-opener application is filed.
56
IDEM Response to Sierra Club com m ents:
ELG Compliance Dates:
IDEM has independently considered the factors outlined in the federal ELGs. Specifically, IDEM has reviewed the proposed schedule and supporting documentation from F.B. Culley submitted during the Comment Period on the Draft Permit,
IDEM has revised the Draft Permit with regard to the ELG compliance dates as a result of information submitted by Vectren and an independent review by IDEM.
Compliance for fly ash transport water zero discharge of pollutants will be required by no later than November 1, 2018 for both Units 2 and 3.
Compliance for bottom ash transport water zero discharge of pollutants will be required by no later than December 31, 2020 for Unit 3, This is based, among other factors, on the IURC review and approval process as well as the engineering and design schedule needed to complete this upgrade.
Compliance for bottom ash transport water zero discharge of pollutants will be required by no later than December 31, 2023 for Unit 2. This date is based on the proposed closure date and capacity factor and considering the factors in the rule for establishing a compliance deadline. As noted previously, Unit 2 is scheduled for closure by no later than December 31, 2023 and will thus be zero discharge at that time. In addition, Unit 2 has averaged a 23.4% capacity factor over the last 5 years.
With regard to FGD ELG schedule, IDEM will require compliance with the FGD ELGs by no later than February 1, 2021 for Units 2 and 3. If Vectren decides to close Unit 3 or proceed with zero discharge option the ELG Rule allows compliance with zero discharge by December 31, 2023, Permit language will be included in the NPDES Permit to reflect this option.
Re-Opener Process:
The reopener language in the Draft Permit has been deleted to reflect the above noted decisions on ELG compliance dates. A new reopener has been included to allow Vectren to apply for a NPDES Permit Modification if they decide to no longer operate Unit 3 (in addition to no longer operating Unit 2). The reopener would allow Vectren to apply for a Permit Modification to revise the compliance dates for zero discharge of bottom ash transport water pollutants as well as the compliance date for the FGD wastewater to no later than December 31, 2023.
Notification to Municipalities Downstream to Determine if Water Quality Based Effluent Limitations for F.B. Cullev's Bromide Discharge are Necessary to Protect Drinking Water Quality
The nearest downstream public water supply with a surface water intake is the community of Evansville which is 19 miles downstream. Evansville has not reported issues with Bromide at their intake. ORSANCO monitors for bromide in the Ohio River at Newburgh (RM 776) which is downstream of Culley and upstream of Evansville. The bromide concentrations measured by ORSANCO are, on average, less than 0.06 mg/L. This level of Bromide is well below concentrations that might be of concern at Evansville. Quarterly bromide monitoring has been added to the F.B. Culley permit to better characterize the discharge levels of bromide.
57
ATTACHMENT I Waste Load Allocation
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
INDIANAPOLIS
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To:
From: Subject:
"
Date: December 21,2016
Jennifer Carlino Industria! NPDES Permits Section
Miranda Hancock Industrial NPDES Permits Section
Thru: Nicole Gardner. Chief industrial Pei-raUs Section John L.lhott / ') Permits Branch
Wasiekiad Allocation Report for the Vcclren F,B Culley Generating Station,
Warrick Counrv tlN(MXC259, WLA002215)
*
"
A reasonable potential analysis for a number of pollutants of concern was clone for the renewal of the NPDES permit for Vcetren EB, Calley Generating Station in Warrick County The analyses were done for the Outfall 001tdischarging to the Ohio Riven The Q 7J0 of the Ohio River upstream of the outfit!! 001 is 11,000 efs. The Ohio River is designated for full-body contact recreation and shall he capable of supporting a well-balanced, warm water aquatic community. The Ohio River is also designated as a public water supply and as an industrial water supply. The average effluent flow used in the analysis is 252 MOD (Outfall 001).
The Ohio River near the Town of Newburgh tAssessment Unit
is on the 20M 303(d)
list for PCBs, Dioxin and Mercury in the water column, and for Exalt. A TMDL for the Ohio
River in 8 Digit HUC (05140201) has not been done, EPA is currently conducting a bacteria
TMDL for the Ohio River,
The reasonable potential analysis for Outfall 001 for the pollutants of .vneent o included in Tables 1 and 2. Die results of the analysis show that the discharge ha- ,i n-.iv viable potential to exceed a water quality criterion tor Copfier and Mercury, Therefore, water quality-based effluent limitations (WQBELs t arc required for these parameters. The WQBELs arc included in Table 3,
The documentation of the wastelo&d allocation analysis is included as an attachment to this document.
58
Results of Reasonable Potential Statistical Procedure For Yectren F. B. Culley in Warrick County Outfall 001 to Ohio River (IN0002259, WXA002215)
Param eter
Copper Mercury Nickel Selenium Boron Chloride Fluoride Sulfate
Month y Average Comparison
Monthly Monthly
Average Average
PEQ
PEL-
(ingl) PEQ > PEL?
Daily Maximum Comparison
Daily
Daily
Maximum Maximum
PEQ (mg/1)
FEE(rng/l)
PEQ > PEL?
Reasonable
Potential to Exceed?
Source of PEL
(Indiana or ORSANCO)
0.069
1031
Yes
0.093
0.063
Yes
0.000020 0.000012
Yes
0.000020 0.000020
No
0.040
0.099
No
0.040
0.24
No
0.0044
0.029
No
0.0044
0.057
No
i.S
37
No
2.6
82
No
48
580
No
67
1.200
No
0.43
6.6
No
0.59
13
No
90
1.600
No
130
3.900
No
Yes
ORSANCO
Yes
Indiana
No
Indiana
No
ORSANCO
No
Indiana
No
Indiana
No
Indiana
No
ORSANCO
* Based oil an effluent flow of 252 mad.
Baestnber 21. 2016
59
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PUBLIC NOTICE NO: 2 0 1 7 - 3 E - F DATE OF NOTICE: MARCH 28. 2017
The Office of Water Quality issues the following NPDES FINAL PERMIT.
MAJOR - RENEWAL
S1GECO F.B. CULLEY GENERATING STATION, Permit No. IN0002259, WARRICK COUNTY, 3711 Darlington Rd. Newburgh, IN. This major industrial facility discharges 252 million gallons daily of storm water, sanitary, process &. non-process wastewater into the Ohio River. Permit Manager: Jennifer Carlino, 317/232-8702, JCarlino@idem.in.gov._______________________________________________________________________
Notice of Right to Adm inistrative Review TPermitsI
If you wish to challenge this Permit, you must file a Petition for Administrative Review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA), and serve a copy of the Petition upon IDEM. The requirements for filing a Petition for Administrative Review are found in 1C 4-21.5-3-7, IC 13-15-6-1 and 315 IAC 1-3-2. A summary of the requirements of these laws is provided below.
A Petition for Administrative Review must be filed with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within fifteen (15) days of the issuance of this notice (eighteen (18) days if you received this notice by U.S. Mail), and a copy must be served upon IDEM. Addresses are:
Director Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North Room 501 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North Room 1301 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
The Petition must contain the following information:
1. The name, address and telephone number of each petitioner. 2. A description of each petitioner's interest in the Permit. 3. A statement of facts demonstrating that each petitioner is:
a. a person to whom the order is directed; b. aggrieved or adversely affected by the Permit; or c. entitled to administrative review under any law. 4. The reasons for the request for administrative review. 5. The particular legal issues proposed for review. 6. The alleged environmental concerns or technical deficiencies of the Permit. 7. The Permit terms and conditions that the petitioner believes would be appropriate and would comply with the law. 8. The identity of any persons represented by the petitioner. 9. The identity of the person against whom administrative review is sought. 10. A copy of the Permit that is the basis of the petition. 11. A statement identifying petitioner's attorney or other representative, if any.
Failure to meet the requirements of the law with respect to a Petition for Administrative Review may result in a waiver of your right to seek administrative review of the Permit. Examples are:
1. Failure to file a Petition by the applicable deadline; 2. Failure to serve a copy of the Petition upon IDEM when it is filed; or 3. Failure to include the information required by law.
If you seek to have a Permit stayed during the Administrative Review, you may need to file a Petition for a Stay of Effectiveness. The specific requirements for such a Petition can be found in 315 IAC 1-3-2 and 315 IAC 1-3-2.1. Pursuant to IC 4-21.5-3-17, OEA will provide all parties with Notice of any pre-hearing conferences, preliminary hearings, hearings, stays, or orders disposing of the review of this action. If you are entitled to Notice under IC 4-21.5-3-5(b) and would like to obtain notices of any pre-hearing conferences, preliminary hearings, hearings, stays, or orders disposing of the review of this action without intervening in the proceeding you must submit a written request to OEA at the address above. If you have procedural or scheduling questions regarding your Petition for Administrative Review you may contact the Office of Environmental Adjudication at (317) 232-8591 or see OEA's website at http://www.in.gov/oea.
IDEM
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment.
100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN46204
(800)451-6027 (317)232-8603 www.idem.IN.gov
Eric J. Holcomb Governor
Bruno Pigott Commissioner
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
February 28, 2017
Mr. Wayne Games, VP of Power Supply SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station P.O. Box 209 Evansville, Indiana 47702
Dear Mr. Games:
Re: Final Permit No. IN0052191 SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station Mt. Vernon, IN - Posey County
Your application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for authorization to discharge into the waters of the State of Indiana has been processed in accordance with Section 402 and 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, etseq.), and IC 13-15, IDEM's permitting authority. All discharges from this facility shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
One condition of your permit requires periodic reporting of several effluent parameters. You are required to submit both federal discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and state Monthly Monitoring Reports (MMRs) on a routine basis. The MMR form can be found on IDEM's web site at http://www.in.gov/idem/cleanwater/2396.htm.
Once you are on this page, select the "IDEM Forms" page and locate the "Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR) for Industrial Discharge Permits-30530" under the Wastewater Facilities heading. We recommend selecting the "XLS" version because it will complete all of the calculations when you enter the data.
All NPDES permit holders are required to submit their monitoring data to IDEM using NetDMR. Please contact Rose McDaniel at (317) 233-2653 or Helen Demmings at (317) 232-8815 if you would like more information on NetDMR. Information is also available on our website at http://IN.qov/idem/cleanwater/2422.htm.
Another condition, which needs to be clearly understood, concerns violation of the effluent limitations in the permit. Exceeding the limitations constitutes a violation of the permit and may subject the permittee to criminal or civil penalties. (See Part II A.2.)
An Equal Opportunity Employer
o
AState that Works
Recycled Paper
It is therefore urged that your office and treatment operator understand this part of the permit.
The draft NPDES permit for the SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station was made available for public comment from December 29, 2016 through January 30, 2017 as part of Public Notice No. 2016-12C-RD. During this comment period, a comment letter dated January 27, 2017, from Angie Casbon-Scheller with Vectren Corporation, was received. Also, a letter dated January 30, 2017 from Tony Mendoza with Sierra Club. The Post Public Notice Addendum is located at the end of the Fact Sheet.
It should also be noted that any appeal must be filed under procedures outlined in IC 13-15-6, IC 4-21.5, and the enclosed Public Notice. The appeal must be initiated by filing a petition for administrative review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within fifteen (15) days of the emailing of an electronic copy of this letter or within eighteen (18) days of the mailing of this letter by filing at the following addresses:
Director Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North Room 501 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North Room 1301 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
If you have any questions concerning the permit, please contact Nicole Gardner at 317/232-8707 or ngardner@idem.in.gov. Questions concerning appeal procedures should be directed to the Office of Environmental Adjudication, at 317/232-8591.
Sincerely,
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Enclosures
cc: U.S. EPA, Region V Vanderburgh County Health Department Lisa Messinger, Vectren Angela Casbon-Scheller, Vectren
Page 1 of 57 Permit No. SN0052191
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the `'Act"), and IDEM's authority under IC 13-15,
VECTREN CORPORATION SIGECO A.B. Brown GENERATING STATION is authorized to discharge from the steam electric generating facility that is located at 8511 Welborn Road, Mt. Vernon, Indiana, to receiving waters identified as the Ohio River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, ill and IV hereof. This permit may be revoked for the nonpayment of applicable fees in accordance with IC 13-18-20.
Effective Date: April 1,2017______________ Expiration Date: March 31. 2022___________ In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information and forms as are required by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management no later than 180 days prior to the date of expiration. Issued February 28, 2017, for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Paul Novak, Chief Permits Branch Office of Water Quality
Page 2 of 57 Permit No. N0052191
PARTI
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
1. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 001 [3][8][9]. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry in the unnamed tributary to the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
Flow[11]
Report
Report
Oil & Grease[14]-
-
TSS[14]
-
-
Aluminum [1] -
-
Arsenic [1,5] -
-
Boron
-
-
Cadmium [1] -
-
T. Chromium [1]-
-
Zinc [1]
-
-
Copper [1, 16]
Interim
-
_
Final
-
-
Iron [1, 13]
Metal Cleaning [14,15]
Non-Metal Cleaning
-
Free Cyanide [5, 6]
-
Nickel [1]
-
-
Mercury [1, 5, 7]
-
Selenium [1, 5, 16]
Interim
-
_
Final
-
-
Silver [1]
-
-
Sulfate
-
-
Chlorination [11, 13]
Frequency -
_
Dose Duration-
-
Duration/Day-
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS f41
Outfall 001
Units MGD -
Table 1
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
10
15
30
70
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
Units -
mg/i mg/i mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Frequency
Tvoe i
1 X Day
24 Hr. Toti
1X Week
Grab
1X Week
Grab
1 X Month 24 Hr. Comp.
1 X Month 24 Hr. Comp.
2 X Month
Grab
1 X Month 24 Hr. Comp.
2 X Month 24 Hr. Comp.
2 X Month 24 Hr. Comp.
0.033
0.067
-
0.028
0.056
mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp
_
Report
1.0
-
Report
Report
-
Report
Report
-
Report
Report
-
12
20
mg/l 1 X Day
24 Hr. Comp.
mg/l 2 X Month 24 Hr. Comp
mg/l 1 X Month
Grab
mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
ng/l 1 X Bi-Monthly Grab
_
Report
Report
-
0.13
0.26
-
Report
Report
-
Report
Report
mg/l 1 X Month mg/l 1 X Month ug/i 1 X Month mg/l 1 X Month
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr, Comp
_
_
-
-
-
-
4
Times/day 1 XDay
Report
40
Minutes/Dose 1 X Day
Report
120
Minutes/Day 1 X Day
Report
Page 3 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Averaae
Maximum
TRC
Intermittent [5, 12] -
-
Temperature
Chloride [16]
Interim
-
-
Final
-
-
Fluoride
-
-
Alkalinity
-
-
Sodium
-
"
Units
-
-
"
Table 1 (continued)
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
Report
0.2 Report
Report 580 Report Report Report
Report 1200 Report Report Report
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Units Freauencv
Type
mg/l 1 X Day F 1 X Month
Grab Grab
mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month mg/l 2 X Month
Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Tvoe
1 X Month
Grab
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[2] The water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL) for TRC is less than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) as specified in footnote [5]. Compliance with this permit will be demonstrated if the effluent concentrations measured are less than the LOQ.
If the measured concentration of chlorine is greater than the water quality based effluent limitations and above the respective LOD specified in the table below in any three (3) consecutive analyses, or any five (5) out of nine (9) analyses, then the discharger shall re-examine the chlorination/de-chlorination procedures.
Case-Specific LOD/LOQ
The permittee may determine a case-specific LOD or LOQ using the analytical method specified above, or any other test method which is approved by the Commissioner prior to use. The LOD shall be derived by the procedure specified for method detection limits contained in 40 CFR Part 136, Appendix B, and the LOQ shall be set equal to 3.18 times the LOD. Other methods may be used if first approved by the Commissioner.
[3] Beginning November 1, 2018 there shall be no discharge of fly ash or bottom ash transport water. The permittee may request an alternate compliance date beyond November 1,2018 no later than 12-months from the effective date of this permit in accordance with the Reopening Clause in I.F. IDEM will evaluate the information
Page 4 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
submitted and make a determination to extend the compliance date beyond November 1, 2018.
[4] See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
[5] The following EPA test methods and/or Standard Methods and associated LODs and LOQs are to be used in the analysis of the effluent samples. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM.
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Arsenic Arsenic Selenium Selenium Selenium Cyanide, Free Cyanide, Free Silver Silver Chlorine
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B 200.9 200.8 3113B or3114B 200.8 200.9 4500-CN-G 1677 3113B or 272.2 200.8 (Rev. 5.4
4500-CI-D,E or 4500-CI-G
LOD 0.2 ng/l 1 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.4 ug/l 2 ug/l 2.1 ug/l 0.6 ug/l 5 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.2 ug/l 0.001 ug/l 0.02 mg/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l 3.2 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 1.3 ug/l 6.4 ug/l 6.7 ug/l 1.9 ug/l 16 ug/I 1.6 ug/l 0.64 ug/l 1.0 ug/l 0.06 mg/l
[6] Sample preservation procedures and maximum allowable holding times for total cyanide, or available (free) cyanide are prescribed in Table II of 40 CFR Part 136. Note the footnotes specific to cyanide. Preservation and holding time information in Table II takes precedence over information in specific methods or elsewhere.
[7] Mercury monitoring shall be conducted bi-monthly in the months of February, April, June, August, October, and December of each year for the term of the permit using EPA Test Method 1631, Revision E. Alternative methods may be used if first approved by IDEM.
[8] The discharge is limited to Cooling Tower Blowdown, Coal Pile Runoff, Metal Cleaning Waste, Low Volume Waste, and storm water.
[9] See Part III of the permit for additional requirements.
[10] The weekly volume of discharged water will be collected using a flow meter totalizer and the weekly flow volume will be used to calculate the daily average which will be reported to IDEM.1
[11] Chlorination reporting requirements for frequency, duration and duration/day apply when the facility is chlorinating.
Page 5 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
[12] During intermittent treatment, compliance monitoring samples will be collected 1 X Day, 15 minutes after initial injection of treatment chemicals. This will result in one sample collected during intermittent treatment conducted during the work week (Monday - Friday).
[13] See Permit Part I F. for a Reopener Clause related to these parameters.
[14] These limitations and monitoring requirements apply only during discharge of metal cleaning wastes.
[15] Net limits may apply. Net limitations are to be calculated by subtracting the measured background levels of these parameters in the ash pond from the actual measured concentration of these parameters when limitations apply. These background levels are to be calculated by monitoring the ash pond effluent concentrations of Iron and Copper over a period of time, to consist of a minimum of ten samples taken over a minimum of thirty (30) days when there is no discharge of metal cleaning wastes during a period that is at least 30 days but not to exceed 90 days preceding each discharge of metal cleaning wastes. The background levels demonstrated by this monitoring, along with supporting data are to be submitted with monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) when reporting discharge of metal cleaning wastes.16
[16] The permittee has a 3 year schedule of compliance as outlined in Part I.G. in which to meet the final effluent limitations for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium.
Page 6 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
2. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 004[3][7][9]. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry in the unnamed tributary to the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS i41
Outfall 0041
Table 1
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Parameter Average
Maximum
Flow
Report
Report
Oil & Grease[2] -
-
TSS[2]
-
-
Cadmium[1] -
-
Copper[1][2] -
-
lron[1][2]
-
-
Selenium[1,5] -
-
Nickel[1]
-
-
Aluminum[1] -
-
Silver[1,5]
-
-
Free Cyanide[5,6]-
-
Zinc[1]
-
-
Arsenic[1,5] -
-
T. Chromium[1] -
-
Mercury[1,5] "
-
Units MGD -
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
-
-
10
15
30
70
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
-
Report
Parameter pH
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
6.0
9.0
Table 2
Units s.u.
Units
-
mg/i mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
pg'i mg/l ng/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 XDay
24 Hr. Total
1 X Day
Grab
1 XDay
Grab
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
24 Hr. Con
[8]
24 Hr. Com,..
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
Grab
[8]
24 Hr. Comp,
[8]
24 Hr. Comp.
[83
24 Hr. Comp.
[8]
Grab
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Tvoe
1 X Day
Grab
[1] The permittee shall measure and report the identified metal in total recoverable form.
[2] See Permit Part I.F. for a Reopener Clause related to these parameters.
[3] Beginning November 1, 2018 there shall be no discharge of fly ash or bottom ash transport water. The permittee may request an alternate compliance date beyond November 1,2018 no later than 12-months from the effective date of this permit in accordance with the Reopening Clause in I.F. IDEM will evaluate the information
Page 7 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
submitted and make a determination to extend the compliance date beyond November 1, 2018.
See Part I.B. of the permit for the Narrative Water Quality Standards.
Parameter Mercury Arsenic Arsenic Arsenic Selenium Selenium Selenium Cyanide, Free Cyanide, Free Silver Silver
Test Method 1631, Revision E 3113B 200.9 200.8 3113B or3114B 200.8 200.9 4500-CN-G 1677 3113B or 272.2 200.8 (Rev. 5.4
LOD 0.2 ng/l 1 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.4 ug/l 2 ug/l 2.1 ug/l 0.6 ug/l 5 ug/l 0.5 ug/l 0.2 ug/l 0.001 ug/l
LOQ 0.5 ng/l 3.2 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 1.3 ug/l 6.4 ug/l 6.7 ug/l 1.9 ug/l 16 ug/l 1.6 ug/l 0.64 ug/l 1.0 ug/l
Sample preservation procedures and maximum allowable holding times for total cyanide, or available (free) cyanide are prescribed in Table II of 40 CFR Part 136. Note the footnotes specific to cyanide. Preservation and holding time information in Table II takes precedence over information in specific methods or elsewhere.
See Part III of the permit for additional requirements.
Daily when the ash pond is discharging to Outfall 004.
Outfall 004 is the emergency overflow from the Ash Pond. The discharge is limited to Coal Pile Runoff, Metal Cleaning Waste, Low Volume Waste, and storm water.
Parameter Flow tbod5 E. coli [2] TSS[5]
Page 8 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
3. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfalls 103 and 203. The discharge is limited to sanitary wastewater from the plant processing and coal handling processing areas respectively. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge from each outfall but prior to mixing with any other wastestreams. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Internal Outfalls 103, 203
Table 1
Quantity or Loading
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Report
Report
-
_
-
-
-
-
Units MGD
.
-
Quality or Concentration
Monthly
Daily
Averaae
Maximum
Units
-
Report 125[3] Report
-
45 235[4] Report
-
mg/l <;fu/100 ml
mg/l
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Month 24 Hr. Total
2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp.
2 X Month
Grab
2 X Month
Grab
Parameter TRC [1]
Quality or Concentration
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Maximum
0.5
-
Table 2
Units mg/!
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample
Freauencv
Type
1 X Month
Grab
[1] The effluent shall be disinfected on a continuous basis year-round. The chlorine residual shall be maintained at a concentration of not less than 0.5 mg/l as measured at the effluent end of the chlorine contact tank for the term of the permit. The daily minimum chlorine residual value shall be reported.
[2] The E. coli limitations and monitoring requirements apply from April 1 through October 31 annually. The monthly average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
IDEM has specified the following methods as allowable for the detection and enumeration of Escherichia coli (E. coli):1
1. Coliscan MF Method 2. EPA Method 1603 Modified m-TEC agar 3. mColi Blue-24. 4. Colilert MPN Method
Page 9 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
[3] The monthly average E. coli value shall be calculated as a geometric mean. Per 327 IAC 5-10-6, the concentration of E. coli shall not exceed one hundred twenty- five (125) cfu or mpn per 100 milliliters as a geometric mean of the effluent samples taken in a calendar month. No samples may be excluded when calculating the monthly geometric mean.
[4] If less than ten samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, no samples may exceed two hundred thirty-five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. However, when ten (10) or more samples are taken and analyzed for E. coli in a calendar month, not more than ten percent (10%) of those samples may exceed two hundred thirty-five (235) cfu or mpn as a daily maximum. When calculating ten percent, the result must not be rounded up. In reporting for compliance purposes on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form, the permittee shall record the highest non-excluded value for the daily maximum.
[5] See Permit Part I.F. for a Reopener Clause related to this parameter.
Page 10 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
4. The permittee is authorized to discharge from the outfall listed below in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfalls 005S and 006S. The discharge is limited to storm water. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into unnamed tributaries to the Ohio River. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS [1,2,3]
Outfalls 005S and 006S
Parameter Flow pH O&G CBODs COD TSS T. Phosphorus Ammonia (as N) Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Aluminum [4] Zinc [4]
Quality or Concentration Monitoring
Daily
Measurement
Maximum
Units
Freauencv 151
Report
MGD
Annually
Report
s.u.
Annually
Report
mg/I
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Report
mg/l
Annually
Requirements Sample Type Estimate Total Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
[1] All samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches and at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. For each sample taken, the permittee shall record the duration and total rainfall of the storm event, the number of days between beginning of the storm measured and the end of the previous measurable rain event, and the outside temperature at the time of sampling. A grab sample shall be taken during the first thirty (30) minutes of the discharge (or as soon thereafter as practicable).
[2] The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) requirements can be found in Parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit.
[3] See Part I.B. of the permit for additional requirements.
[4] The permittee shall measure and report these parameters as total recoverable.
[5] Monitoring shall occur annually between April 1s! and August 31st.
Page 11 of 57 Permit No. INQ052191
B. NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
At all times the discharge from any and all point sources specified within this permit shall not cause receiving waters:
1. including the mixing zone, to contain substances, materials, floating debris, oil, scum, or other pollutants:
a. which will settle to form putrescent, or otherwise objectionable deposits;
b. which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
c. which produce color, visible oil sheen, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance;
d. which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans;
e. which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants or algae to such a degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated uses.
2. outside the mixing zone, to contain substances in concentrations which on the basis of available scientific data are believed to be sufficient to injure, be chronically toxic to, or be carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic to humans, animals, aquatic life, or plants.
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING
1. Representative Sampling
Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge flow and shall be taken at times which reflect the full range and concentration of effluent parameters normally expected to be present. Samples shall not be taken at times to avoid showing elevated levels of any parameters.
2. Monthly Reporting
The permittee shall submit monitoring reports to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) containing results obtained during the previous month and shall be submitted no later than the 28th day of the month following each completed monitoring period. The first report shall be submitted by the 28th day of the month following the month in which the
Page 12 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
permit becomes effective. These reports shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and the Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). All reports shall be submitted electronically by using the NetDMR application, upon registration, receipt of the NetDMR Subscriber Agreement, and IDEM approval of the proposed NetDMR Signatory. The NetDMR website (for initial registration and monthly DMR/MMR submittal) is: https://netdmr.epa.gov/netdmr/public/home.htm. The Regional Administrator may request the permittee to submit monitoring reports to the Environmental Protection Agency if it is deemed necessary to assure compliance with the permit.
a. Calculations that require averaging of measurements of daily values (both concentrations and mass) shall use an arithmetic mean, except the monthly average for E. coli shall be calculated as a geometric mean.
b. Daily effluent values (both mass and concentration) that are less than the LOQ that are used to determine the monthly average effluent level shall be accommodated in calculation of the average using statistical methods that have been approved by the Commissioner.
c. Effluent concentrations less than the LOD shall be reported on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms as < (less than) the value of the LOD. For example, if a substance is not detected at a concentration of 0.1 pg/l, report the value as <0.1 pg/l.
d. Effluent concentrations greater than or equal to the LOD and less than the LOQ that are reported on a DMR shall be reported as the actual value and annotated on the DMR to indicate that the value is not quantifiable.
e. Mass discharge values which are calculated from concentrations reported as less than the value of the limit of detection shall be reported as less than the corresponding mass discharge value.
f. Mass discharge values that are calculated from effluent concentrations greater than the limit of detection shall be reported as the calculated value.
Definitions
a. ``Monthly Average" means the total mass or flow-weighted concentration of all daily discharges during a calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled or measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such calendar month.
Page 13 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
The monthly average discharge limitation is the highest allowable average monthly discharge for any calendar month.
b. "Daily Discharge" means the total mass of a pollutant discharged during the calendar day or, in the case of a pollutant limited in terms other than mass pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-11 (e), the average concentration or other measurement of the pollutant specified over the calendar day or any twenty-four hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day for the purposes of sampling.
c. "Daily Maximum" means the maximum allowable daily discharge for any calendar day.
d. A "24-hour composite sample" means a sample consisting of at least 3 individual flow-proportioned samples of wastewater, taken by the grab sample method or by an automatic sampler, which are taken at approximately equally spaced time intervals for the duration of the discharge within a 24-hour period and which are combined prior to analysis. A flow-proportioned composite sample may be obtained by:
(1) recording the discharge flow rate at the time each individual sample is taken,
(2) adding together the discharge flow rates recorded from each individuals sampling time to formulate the "total flow" value,
(3) the discharge flow rate of each individual sampling time is divided by the total flow value to determine its percentage of the total flow value,
(4) then multiply the volume of the total composite sample by each individual sample's percentage to determine the volume of that individual sample which will be included in the total composite sample.
e. "Concentration" means the weight of any given material present in a unit volume of liquid. Unless otherwise indicated in this permit, concentration values shall be expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/l).
f. The "Regional Administrator" is defined as the Region 5 Administrator, U.S. ERA, located at 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
g. The "Commissioner" is defined as the Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, which is located at the
Page 14 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
following address: 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204.
h. "Limit of Detection" or "LOD" means the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero (0) for a particular analytical method and sample matrix.
i. "Limit of Quantitation" or "LOQ" means a measurement of the concentration of a contaminant obtained by using a specified laboratory procedure calibrated at a specified concentration above the method detection level. It is considered the lowest concentration at which a particular contaminant can be quantitatively measured using a specified laboratory procedure for monitoring of the contaminant. This term is also sometimes called limit of quantification or quantification level.
j.
"Method Detection Level" or "MDL" means the minimum concentration
of an analyte (substance) that can be measured and reported with a
ninety-nine percent (99%) confidence that the analyte concentration is
greater than zero (0) as determined by procedure set forth in 40 CFR
136, Appendix B. The method detection level or MDL is equivalent to
the LOD.
k. "Grab Sample" means a sample which is taken from a wastestream on a one-time basis without consideration of the flow rate of the wastestream and without considerations of time.
Test Procedures
The analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the current version of 40 CFR 136. Multiple editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater are currently approved for most methods, however, 40 CFR Part 136 should be checked to ascertain if a particular method is approved for a particular analyte. The approved methods may be included in the texts listed below. However, different but equivalent methods are allowable if they receive the prior written approval of the Commissioner and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
a. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 18th, 19th, or 20th Editions, 1992, 1995, or 1998, American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. 20005.
b. A.S.T.M. Standards. Parts 23, Water: Atmosphere Analysis 1972 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
Page 15 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
c. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes June 1974, Revised, March 1983, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, 1014 Broadway, Cincinnati, OH 45202.
5. Recording of Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall maintain records of ail monitoring information and monitoring activities, including:
a. The date, exact place and time of sampling or measurement;
b. The person(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed;
d. The person(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such measurements and analyses.
6. Additional Monitoring bv Permittee
If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and Monthly Monitoring Report (MMR). Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. Other monitoring data not specifically required in this permit (such as internal process or internal waste stream data) which is collected by or for the permittee need not be submitted unless requested by the Commissioner.
7. Records Retention
All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit, including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recording from continuous monitoring instrumentation, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years. In cases where the original records are kept at another location, a copy of all such records shall be kept at the permitted facility. The three years shall be extended;
Page 16 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
a. automatically during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the permittee or regarding promulgated effluent guidelines applicable to the permittee; or
b. as requested by the Regional Administrator or the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
STORM WATER MONITORING AND NON-NUMERIC EFFLUENT LIMITS
Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall implement the non-numeric permit conditions in this Section of the permit for the entire site as it relates to storm water associated with industrial activity regardless which outfall the storm water is discharged from.
1. Control Measures and Effluent Limits
In the technology-based limits included in Part D.2-4., the term "minimize" means reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable using control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practice.
2. Control Measures
Select, design, install, and implement control measures (including best management practices) to minimize pollutant discharges that address the selection and design considerations in Part D.3 to meet the non-numeric effluent limits in Part D.4. The selection, design, installation, and implementation of these control measures must be in accordance with good engineering practices and manufacturer's specifications. Any deviation from the manufacturer's specifications shall be documented. If the control measures are not achieving their intended effect in minimizing pollutant discharges, the control measures must be modified as in accordance with the corrective action requirements in Part I.D.6. Regulated storm water discharges from the facility include storm water run-on that commingles with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity at the facility.
3. Control Measure Selection and Design Considerations
When selecting and designing control measures consider the following:
a. preventing storm water from coming into contact with polluting materials is generally more effective, and cost-effective, than trying to remove pollutants from storm water;
Page 17 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
b. use of control measures in combination may be more effective than use of control measures in isolation for minimizing pollutants in storm water discharge;
c. assessing the type and quantity of pollutants, including their potential to impact receiving water quality, is critical to designing effective control measures that will achieve the limits in this permit;
d. minimizing impervious areas at the facility and infiltrating runoff onsite (including bioretention cells, green roofs, and pervious pavement, among other approaches), can reduce runoff and improve groundwater recharge and stream base flows in local streams, although care must be taken to avoid ground water contamination;
e. flow can be attenuated by use of open vegetated swales and natural depressions to reduce in-stream impacts of erosive flow;
f. conservation and/or restoration of riparian buffers will help protect streams from storm water runoff and improve water quality; and
g. use of treatment interceptors (e.g. swirl separators and sand filters) may be appropriate in some instances to minimize the discharge of pollutants.
Technology-Based Effluent Limits (BPT/BAT/BCT): Non-Numeric Effluent Limits
a. Minimize Exposure
Minimize the exposure of manufacturing, processing, and material storage areas (including loading and unloading, storage, disposal, cleaning, maintenance, and fueling operations) to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. To the extent technologically available and economically practicable and achievable, either locate industrial materials and activities inside or protect them with storm resistant coverings in order to minimize exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff (although significant enlargement of impervious surface area is not recommended). In minimizing exposure, pay particular attention to the following areas:
Loading and unloading areas: locate in roofed or covered areas where feasible; use grading, berming, or curbing around the loading area to divert run-on; locate the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems.
Page 18 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Material storage areas: locate indoors, or in roofed or covered areas where feasible; install berms/dikes around these areas; use dry cleanup methods.
Note: Industrial materials do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from affected areas will not be discharged to receiving waters.
b. Good Housekeeping
Keep clean all exposed areas that are potential sources of pollutants, using such measures as sweeping at regular intervals, store materials in appropriate containers, identify and control all on-site sources of dust to minimize stormwater contamination from the deposition of dust on areas exposed to precipitation, keep all dumpsters under cover or fit with a lid that must remain closed when not in use, and ensure that waste, garbage, and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged.
Implement a cleaning and maintenance program for all impervious areas of the facility where particulate matter, dust or debris may accumulate to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater. The cleaning and maintenance program must encompass, as appropriate, areas where material loading and unloading, storage, handling and processing occur.
Stabilize unpaved areas using vegetation or paving where there is vehicle traffic or where material loading and unloading, storage, handling and processing occurs, unless feasible.
For paved areas of the facility where particulate matter, dust or debris may accumulate, to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater, implement control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): sweeping or vacuuming at regular intervals; and washing down the area and collecting and/or treating and properly disposing of the washdown water. For unstabilized areas or for stabilized areas where sweeping, vacuuming, or washing down is not possible, to minimize the discharge of particulate matter, dust, or debris or other pollutants in stormwater, implement stormwater management devices such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): sediment traps, vegetative buffer strips, filter fabric fence, sediment filtering boom, gravel outlet protection, and other equivalent measures that effectively trap or remove sediment.
Page 19 of 57 Permit No. IN052191
Fugitive Dust Emissions. Minimize fugitive dust emissions from coal handling areas to minimize the tracking of coal dust offsite that could be discharged in stormwater through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, (list not exclusive): installing specially designed tires; and washing vehicles in a designated area before they leave the site and controlling the wash water.
Delivery Vehicles. Minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site. Implement procedures to inspect delivery vehicles arriving at the plant site as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater. Ensure the overall integrity of the body or container of the delivery vehicle and implement procedures to deal with leakage or spillage from delivery vehicles.
Fuel Oil Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from fuel oil unloading areas. Use containment curbs in unloading areas where feasible. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure that any leaks or spills are immediately contained and cleaned up, and use spill and overflow protection devices (e.g., drip pans, drip diapers, or other containment devices placed beneath fuel oil connectors to contain potential spillage during deliveries or from leaks at the connectors).
Chemical Loading and Unloading. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from chemical loading and unloading areas. Use containment curbs at chemical loading and unloading areas to contain spills, where practicable. In addition, ensure personnel familiar with spill prevention and response procedures are available to respond expeditiously in the event of a leak or spill during deliveries. Ensure leaks and spills are immediately contained and cleaned up and, where practicable, load and unload in covered areas and store chemicals indoors.
Miscellaneous Loading and Unloading Areas. Minimize contamination of precipitation or surface runoff from loading and unloading areas through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible (list not exclusive): covering the loading area; grading, curbing, or berming around the loading area to divert run-on; locating the loading and unloading equipment and vehicles so that leaks are contained in existing containment and flow diversion systems; or equivalent procedures.
Page 20 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Liquid Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from above-ground liquid storage tanks through implementation of control measures such as the following, where determined to be feasible, the following (list not exclusive): using protective guards around tanks; using containment curbs; installing spill and overflow protection; using dry cleanup methods; or equivalent measures.
Large Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from large bulk fuel storage tanks. Use containment berms (or their equivalent). Comply with applicable state and federal laws, including Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements.
Spill Reduction Measures. Minimize the potential for an oil or chemical spill, or reference the appropriate part of the SPCC plan. Visually inspect as part of the routine facility inspection the structural integrity of all above-ground tanks, pipelines, pumps, and related equipment that may be exposed to stormwater, and make any necessary repairs immediately.
Oil-Bearing Equipment in Switchyards. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from oil-bearing equipment in switchyard areas. Use level grades and gravel surfaces to retard flows and limit the spread of spills, or collect runoff in perimeter ditches.
Residue-Hauling Vehicles. Inspect all residue-hauling vehicles for proper covering over the load, adequate gate sealing, and overall integrity of the container body. Repair vehicles without load covering or adequate gate sealing, or with leaking containers or beds
Ash Loading Areas. Reduce or control the tracking of ash and residue from ash loading areas. Clear the ash building floor and immediately adjacent roadways of spillage, debris, and excess water as necessary to minimize discharges of pollutants in stormwater.
Areas Adjacent to Disposal Ponds or Landfills. Minimize contamination of surface runoff from areas adjacent to disposal ponds or landfills. Reduce ash residue that may be tracked on to access roads traveled by residue handling vehicles, and reduce ash residue on exit roads leading into and out of residue handling areas.
Landfills, Scrap Yards, Surface Impoundments, Open Dumps, General Refuse Sites. Minimize the potential for contamination of runoff from these areas.
Page 21 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
c. Maintenance
Maintain all control measures which are used to achieve the effluent limits required by this permit in effective operating condition. Nonstructural control measures must also be diligently maintained (e.g., spill response supplies available, personnel appropriately trained). If control measures need to be replaced or repaired, make the necessary repairs or modifications as expeditiously as practicable.
d. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
Minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective response to such spills if or when they occur. At a minimum, implement:
i. Procedures for plainly labeling containers (e.g., "Used Oil", "Spent Solvents", "Fertilizers and Pesticides", etc.) that could be susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper handling and facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur;
ii. Preventive measures such as barriers between material storage and traffic areas, secondary containment provisions, and procedures for materia! storage and handling;
iii. Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning up leaks, spills, and other releases. Employees who may cause, detect or respond to a spill or leak must be trained in these procedures and have necessary spill response equipment available. If possible, one of these individuals should be a member of the storm water pollution prevention team;
iv. Procedures for notification of appropriate facility personnel, emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. State or local requirements may necessitate reporting spills or discharges to local emergency response, public health, or drinking water supply agencies. Contact information must be in locations that are readily accessible and available; and
v. A procedure for documenting all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a storm water conveyance.
e. Erosion and Sediment Controls
Through the use of structural and/or non-structural control measures stabilize, and contain runoff from, exposed areas to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants. Among other actions to meet this limit, place flow velocity dissipation devices at discharge locations and within outfall channels where
Page 22 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
necessary to reduce erosion and/or settle out pollutants. In selecting, designing, installing, and implementing appropriate control measures for erosion and sediment control, check out information from both the State and EPA websites. The following two websites are given as information sources:
http://www.in.qov/idem/stormwater/2363.htm and http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/Stormwater-PollutionPrevention-Plans-for-Construction-Activities.cfm
f. Management of Runoff
Divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the discharge.
g. Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt
Enclose or cover storage piles of salt, or piles containing salt, used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces. Implement appropriate measures (e.g., good housekeeping, diversions, containment) to minimize exposure resulting from adding to or removing materials from the pile. Piles do not need to be enclosed or covered if storm water runoff from the piles is not discharged.
h. Employee Training
Train all employees who work in areas where industrial material or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of the Pollution Prevention Team.
The following personnel must understand the requirements of Part I.D. and Part I.E. of this permit and their specific responsibilities with respect to those requirements: Personnel who are responsible for the design, installation, maintenance, and/or repair of controls (including pollution prevention measures); personnel responsible for the storage and handling of chemicals and materials that could become contaminants in stormwater discharges; personnel who are responsible for conducting and documenting monitoring and inspections related to storm water; and personnel who are responsible for taking and documenting corrective actions as required in Part
I.D .6.
Page 23 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Personnel must be trained in at least the following if related to the scope of their job duties (e.g., only personnel responsible for conducting inspections need to understand how to conduct inspections): an overview of what is in the SWPPP; spill response procedures, good housekeeping, maintenance requirements, and material management practices; the location of all controls on the site required by this permit, and how they are to be maintained; the proper procedures to follow with respect to the permit's pollution prevention requirements; and when and how to conduct inspections, record applicable findings, and take corrective actions.
Non-Storm water Discharges
Determine if any non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit exist. Any non-storm water discharges discovered must either be eliminated or modified into this permit.
The following non-storm water discharges are authorized and should be documented when they occur in accordance with Part I.E.2.C. of the permit:
Discharges from fire-fighting activities; Fire Hydrant flushings; Potable water, including water line flushings; Uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside storage of refrigerated gases or liquids; Irrigation drainage; Landscape watering provided all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer have been applied in accordance with the approved labeling; Pavement wash water where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous material have occurred {unless all spilled material has been removed); Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents; Uncontaminated ground water or spring water; Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; Incidental windblown mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of the facility, but not intentional discharges from cooling towers (e.g., "piped cooling tower blowdown or drains);and Vehicle wash- waters where uncontaminated water without detergents or solvents is utilized.
Page 24 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
j. Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial Materials
Minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials.
5. Annual Review
At least once every 12 months, submit an Annual Report to the Industrial NPDES Permit Section which includes the following: the results or a summary of the past year's routine facility inspection documentation and quarterly visual assessment documentation; information copied or summarized from the corrective action documentation required (if applicable). If corrective action is not yet completed at the time of submission of this Annual Report, describe the status of any outstanding corrective action(s); and any incidents of noncompliance observed or, if there is no noncompliance, a certification signed by a responsible corporate officer, general partner or the proprietor, executive officer or ranking elected official, stating the facility is in compliance with this permit.
6. Corrective Actions - Conditions Requiring Review
a. If any of the following conditions occur, review the SWPPP to determine if and where revisions may need to be made to eliminate the condition and prevent its reoccurrence:
i. An unauthorized release or discharge (e.g., spill, leak, or discharge of non-stormwater not authorized by this NPDES permit) occurs at the facility;
ii. Control measures are not stringent enough for the discharge to meet applicable water quality standards;
iii. A required control measure was never installed, was installed incorrectly, or is not being properly operated or maintained;
iv. Visual assessments indicate obvious signs of stormwater pollution (e.g., color, odor, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids, foam); or
b. If construction or a change in design, operation, or maintenance at the facility significantly changes the nature of pollutants discharged in storm water from the facility, or significantly increases the quantity of pollutants discharge the permittee must review and revise the selection, design, installation, and implementation of the control measures to determine if modifications are necessary to meet the effluent limits in this permit.
Page 25 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
7. Corrective Action Deadlines
If additional changes are necessary, a new or modified control must be installed and made operational, or a repair completed, before the next storm event if possible, and within 45 calendar days from the time of discovery. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within 45 calendar days, the reason(s) must be documented. A schedule for completing the work must also be identified, which must be done as soon as practicable after the 45 day timeframe.
Where corrective actions result in changes to any of the controls or procedures documented in the SWPPP, the SWPPP must be modified accordingly within 14 calendar days of completing corrective action work.
These time intervals are not grace periods, but are schedules considered reasonable for documenting the findings and for making repairs and improvements, They are included in this permit to ensure that the conditions prompting the need for these repairs and improvements are not allowed to persist indefinitely.
8- Corrective Action Report
The existence of any of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6 must be documented within 14 days of becoming aware of such condition. The following information must be included in the documentation:
a. Identification and description of the condition triggering the need for corrective action review. For any spills or leaks, include the following information: a description of the incident including material, date/time, amount, location, and reason for spill, and any leaks, spills or other releases that resulted in discharges of pollutants to waters of U.S., through stormwater or otherwise;
b. Date the condition was identified; and
c. A discussion of whether the triggering condition requires corrective action. For any spills or leaks, include response actions, the date/time clean-up completed, notifications made, and staff involved. Also include any measures taken to prevent the reoccurrence of such releases.
Document the corrective actions taken that occurred as a result of the conditions listed in Part I.D.6. within 45 days from the time of discovery of any of those conditions. Provide the dates when each corrective action was initiated and completed (or is expected to be completed). If applicable, document why it is infeasible to complete necessary installations or repairs
Page 26 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
within the 45-day timeframe and document the schedule for installing the controls and making them operational as soon as practicable after the 45-day timeframe.
Inspections
a. Routine Facility Inspections
During normal facility operating hours conduct inspections of areas of the facility covered by the requirements in this permit, including the following:
i. Areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater;
ii. Areas identified in the SWPPP and those that are potential pollutant sources;
ii. Areas where spills and leaks have occurred in the past 3 years. iv. Discharge points; and v. Control measures used to comply with the effluent limits
contained in this permit.
Inspections must be conducted at least quarterly (i.e., once each calendar quarter), or in some instances more frequently (e.g., monthly), as appropriate. Increased frequency may be appropriate for some types of equipment, processes and stormwater control measures, or areas of the facility with significant activities and materials exposed to stormwater. At least one of the routine inspections must be conducted during a period when a stormwater discharge is occurring.
Inspections must be performed by qualified personnel with at least one member of the stormwater pollution prevention team participating. Inspectors must consider the results of visual and analytical monitoring (if any) for the past year when planning and conducting inspections.
During the inspection examine or look out for the following:
vi. Industrial materials, residue or trash that may have or could come into contact with stormwater;
vii. Leaks or spills from industrial equipment, drums, tanks and other containers;
viii. Offsite tracking of industrial or waste materials, or sediment where vehicles enter or exit the site;
ix. Tracking or blowing of raw, final or waste materials from areas of no exposure to exposed areas; and
Page 27 of 57 Permit No. 1N0052191
x. Control measures needing replacement, maintenance or repair.
During an inspection occurring during a stormwater discharge, control measures implemented to comply with effluent limits must be observed to ensure they are functioning correctly. Discharge outfalls must also be observed during this inspection. If such discharge locations are inaccessible, nearby downstream locations must be inspected.
As part of conducting the routine facility inspections at least quarterly, address all potential sources of pollutants, including (if applicable) air pollution control equipment (e.g., baghouses, electrostatic precipitators, scrubbers, and cyclones), for any signs of degradation (e.g., leaks, corrosion, or improper operation) that could limit their efficiency and lead to excessive emissions. Consider monitoring air flow at inlets and outlets (or use equivalent measures) to check for leaks (e.g., particulate deposition) or blockage in ducts.
Also inspect all process and material handling equipment (e.g., conveyors, cranes, and vehicles) for leaks, drips, or the potential loss of material; and material storage areas (e.g., piles, bins, or hoppers for storing coke, coal, scrap, or slag, as well as chemicals stored in tanks and drums) for signs of material losses due to wind or stormwater runoff.
Routine Facility Inspection Documentation
The findings of facility inspections must be documented and the report maintained with the SWPPP. Findings must be summarized in the annual report. Document all findings, including but not limited to, the following information:
i. The inspection date and time; ii. The name(s) and signature(s) of the inspector(s); in. Weather information; iv. All observations relating to the implementation of control
measures at the facility, including: (1) A description of any discharges occurring at the time of
the inspection; (2) Any previously unidentified discharges and/or pollutants
from the site; (3) Any evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering
the drainage system; (4) Observations regarding the physical condition of and
around all outfalls including any flow dissipation devices,
Page 28 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
and evidence of pollutants in discharges and/or the receiving water; (5) Any control measures needing maintenance, repairs, or replacement; v. Any additional control measures needed to comply with the permit requirements; and vi. Any incidents of noncompliance observed.
Any corrective action required as a result of a routine facility inspection must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6. of this permit.
If the discharge was visual assessed, as required in Part I.D.9.C., during the facility inspection, include the results of the assessment with the report required in Part i.D.9.a., as long as all components of both types of inspections are included in the report.
Quarterly Visual Assessment Procedures
Once each quarter for the entire permit term, collect a stormwater sample from each outfall and conduct a visual assessment of each of these samples. These samples are not required to be collected consistent with 40 CFR Part 136 procedures but should be collected in such a manner that the samples are representative of the stormwater discharge. Guidance on monitoring is available at:
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/EPA-Multi-SectorGeneral-Permit-MSGP.cfm
The visual assessment must be made:
i. Of a sample in a clean, clear glass, or plastic container, and examined in a well-lit area;
ii. On samples collected within the first 30 minutes of an actual discharge from a storm event. If it is not possible to collect the sample within the first 30 minutes of discharge, the sample must be collected as soon as practicable after the first 30 minutes and document why it was not possible to take samples within the first 30 minutes. In the case of snowmelt, samples must be taken during a period with a measurable discharge from the site; and
iii. For storm events, on discharges that occur at least 72 hours (3 days) from the previous discharge. The 72-hour (3-day) storm interval does not apply if you document that less than a 72-hour (3-day) interval is representative for local storm events during the sampling period.
Page 29 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Visually inspect or observe the sample for the following water quality characteristics:
iv. Color; v. Odor; vi. Clarity (diminished); vii. Floating solids; viii. Settled solids; ix. Suspended solids; x. Foam; xi. Oil sheen; and xii. Other obvious indicators of stormwater pollution.
Whenever the visual assessment shows obvious signs of stormwater pollution, initiate the corrective action procedures in Part I.D.6.
d. Quarterly Visual Assessment Documentation
Results of visual assessments must be documented and the documentation maintained onsite with the SWPPP. Documentation of the visual assessment must include, but is not be limited to:
i. Sample location(s); ii. Sample collection date and time, and visual assessment date
and time for each sample; iii. Personnel collecting the sample and performing visual
assessment, and their signatures; iv. Nature of the discharge (i.e., runoff or snowmelt); v. Results of observations of the stormwater discharge; vi. Probable sources of any observed stormwater contamination;
and vii. If applicable, why it was not possible to take samples within the
first 30 minutes.
Any corrective action required as a result of a quarterly visual assessment must be performed consistent with Part I.D.6. of this permit.
e. Exceptions to Quarterly Visual Assessments
i. Adverse Weather Conditions: When adverse weather conditions prevent the collection of samples during the quarter, documentation of the rationale for no visual assessment for the quarter must be included with the SWPPP records. Adverse conditions are those that are dangerous or create inaccessibility for personnel, such as local flooding, high winds,
Page 30 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
or electrical storms, or situations that otherwise make sampling impractical, such as extended frozen conditions, drought, inadequate rainfall quantities, and rain events that occur too close in succession to achieve a minimum of 72 hours from the previous discharge.
ii. Snow: In areas subject to snow, at least one quarterly visual assessment must capture snowmelt discharge, taking into account the exception described above for climates with irregular stormwater runoff.
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
1. Development of Plan
Within 12 months from the effective date of this permit, the permittee is required to revise and update the current Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the permitted facility. The SWPPP does not contain effluent limitations. The SWPPP is intended to document the selection, design, and installation of control measures. As distinct from the SWPPP, the additional documentation requirements are intended to document the implementation (including inspection, maintenance, monitoring, and corrective action) of the permit requirements.
2. Contents
The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:
a. Pollution Prevention Team - The SWPPP must identify the staff members (by name or title) that comprise the facility's stormwater pollution prevention team as well as their individual responsibilities. The stormwater pollution prevention team is responsible for overseeing development of the SWPPP, any later modifications to it, and for compliance with permit Parts I.D. and l.E. of this permit. Each member of the stormwater pollution prevention team must have ready access to either an electronic or paper copy of applicable portions of this permit, the most updated copy of the SWPPP, other relevant documents or information that must be kept with the SWPPP.
b. Site Description - As a minimum, the plan shall contain the following:
i. Activities at the Facility. Provide a description of the nature of the industrial activities at the facility.
ii. G eneral location map. Provide a general location map (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map) with enough detail to
Page 31 of 57 Permit No. IN0Q52191
identify the location of the facility and all receiving waters for the stormwater discharges.
Site map. Provide a map showing:
(A) Boundaries of the property and the size of the property in acres;
(B) Location and extent of significant structures and impervious surfaces;
(C) Directions of stormwater flow (use arrows); (D) Locations of all stormwater control measures; (E) Locations of all receiving waters, including wetlands, in
the immediate vicinity of the facility. Indicate which waterbodies are listed as impaired and which are identified by the State of Indiana or EPA as Tier 2 or Tier 2.5 waters; (F) Locations of all stormwater conveyances including ditches, pipes, and swales; (G) Locations of potential pollutant sources identified; (H) Locations where significant spills or leaks identified have occurred; (I) Locations of all stormwater monitoring points; (J) Locations of stormwater inlets and outfalls, with a unique identification code for each outfall (e.g., Outfall No. 1, No. 2), indicating if you are treating one or more outfalls as "substantially identical", and an approximate outline of the areas draining to each outfall; (K) If applicable, municipal separate storm sewer systems and where the stormwater discharges to them; (L) Areas of federally-listed critical habitat for endangered or threatened species, if applicable. (M) Locations of the following activities where such activities are exposed to precipitation:
(a) fueling stations; (b) vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or
cleaning areas; (c) loading/unloading areas; (d) locations used for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of wastes; (e) liquid storage tanks; (f) processing and storage areas; (g) immediate access roads and rail lines used or
traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste material, or by products used or created by the facility; (h) transfer areas for substances in bulk; and
Page 32 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
(i) machinery (j) locations and sources of run-on to the site from
adjacent property that contains significant quantities of pollutants. (N) Document in the SWPPP the locations of any of the following activities or sources that may be exposed to precipitation or surface runoff: storage tanks, scrap yards, and general refuse areas; short- and long-term storage of general materials (including but not limited to supplies, construction materials, paint equipment, oils, fuels, used and unused solvents, cleaning materials, paint, water treatment chemicals, fertilizer, and pesticides); landfills and construction sites; and stock pile areas (e.g., coal or limestone piles).
Potential Pollutant Sources:
The SWPPP must document areas at the facility where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater or from which allowable non-stormwater discharges may be released. Industrial materials or activities include, but are not limited to: material handling equipment or activities; industrial machinery; raw materials; industrial production and processes; and intermediate products, by-products, final products, and waste products. M aterial handling activities include, but are not limited to: the storage, loading and unloading, transportation, disposal, or conveyance of any raw material, intermediate product, final product or waste product. For structures located in areas of industrial activity, be aware that the structures themselves are potential sources of pollutants. This could occur, for example, when metals such as aluminum or copper are leached from the structures as a result of acid rain.
For each area identified, the description must include:
i. Activities in the Area. A list of the industrial activities exposed to stormwater (e.g., material storage; equipment fueling, maintenance, and cleaning; cutting steel beams).
ii. Pollutants. A list of the pollutant(s) or pollutant constituents (e.g., crankcase oil, zinc, sulfuric acid, and cleaning solvents) associated with each identified activity, which could be exposed to rainfall or snowmelt and could be discharged from the facility. The pollutant list must include all significant materials that have been handled, treated, stored, or disposed, and that have been exposed to stormwater in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended.
Page 33 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
iii. Spills and Leaks. The SWPPP must document where potential spills and leaks could occur that could contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges, and the corresponding outfail(s) that would be affected by such spills and leaks. The SWPPP must document all significant spills and leaks of oil or toxic or hazardous pollutants that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a stormwater conveyance, in the three years prior to the date the SWPPP is prepared or amended.
iv. N on-Storm w a ter D ischarges - The SWPPP must document that you have evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges not authorized by an NPDES permit. Any non storm water discharges have either been eliminated or incorporated into this permit. Documentation of non-storm water discharges shall include:
A written non-storm water assessment, including the following:
(1) The date of the evaluation; (2) A description of the evaluation criteria used; (3) A list of the outfalls or onsite drainage points that were
directly observed during the evaluation; and (4) The action(s) taken, such as a list of control measures
used to eliminate unauthorized discharge(s), or documentation that a separate NPDES permit was obtained. For example, a floor drain was sealed, a sink drain was re-routed to sanitary, or an NPDES permit application was submitted for an unauthorized cooling water discharge.
v. Salt Storage - The location of any storage piles containing salt used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes must be documented in the SWPPP.
vi. Sampling Data - All stormwater discharge sampling data collected at the facility during the previous permit term must be summarized in the SWPPP.
vii. Description of Control Measures to Meet Technology-Based Effluent Limits - The location and type of control measures you have specifically chosen and/or designed to comply with Permit Part I.D. must be documented in the SWPPP. Regarding the control measures, the following must be documented as appropriate:
(a) How the selection and design considerations of control measures were addressed.
(b) How the control measures address the pollutant sources identified.
Page 34 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Schedules and Procedures
The following must be documented in the SWPPP:
i.
Good Housekeeping - A schedule for regular pickup and
disposal of waste materials, along with routine inspections for
leaks and conditions of drums, tanks and containers;
ii.
Maintenance - Preventative maintenance procedures, including
regular inspections, testing, maintenance and repair of all
control measures to avoid situations that may result in leaks,
spills, and other releases, and any back-up practices in place
should a runoff event occur while a control measure is off-line.
The SWPPP shall include the schedule or frequency for
maintaining all control measures used to comply with the storm
water requirements.
iii.
Spill Prevention and Response Procedures - Procedures for
preventing and responding to spills and leaks, including
notification procedures. For preventing spills, include in the
SWPPP the control measures for material handling and
storage, and the procedures for preventing spills that can
contaminate stormwater. Also specify cleanup equipment,
procedures and spill logs, as appropriate, in the event of spills.
You may reference the existence of other plans for Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) developed for
the facility under Section 311 of the CWA or BMP programs
otherwise required by an NPDES permit for the facility,
provided that you keep a copy of that other plan onsite and
make it available for review;
iv.
Erosion and Sediment Control - If you use polymers and/or
other chemical treatments as part of the controls, identify the
polymers and/or chemicals used and the purpose; and
v.
Employee Training - The elements of the employee training
plan shall include all, but not be limited to, the requirements set
forth in Permit Part.I.D., and also the following:1
(1) The content of the training; (2) The frequency/schedule of training for employees who have
duties in areas of industrial activities subject to this permit; (3) A log of the dates on which specific employees received
training.
e. Pertaining to Inspections
Document in the SWPPP the procedures for performing, as appropriate, the types of inspections specified by this permit, including:
Page 35 of 57 Permit No. 1N0052191
L Routine facility inspections and; ii. Quarterly visual assessment of stormwater discharges.
For each type of inspection performed, the SWPPP must identify:
iii. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for inspection; iv. Schedules for conducting inspections, including tentative
schedule for irregular stormwater runoff discharges; and v. Specific items to be covered by the inspection, including
schedules for specific outfalls.
f. Pertaining to Monitoring
Document in the SWPPP the procedures for conducting the five types of analytical monitoring specified by this permit, where applicable to the facility, including Benchmark monitoring;
For each type of monitoring, the SWPPP must document:
i. Locations where samples are collected, including any determination that two or more outfalls are substantially identical;
ii. Parameters for sampling and the frequency of sampling for each parameter;
iii. Schedules for monitoring at the facility, including schedule for alternate monitoring periods for climates with irregular stormwater runoff;
iv. Any numeric control values (effluent limitations guidelines, TMDL-related requirements, or other requirements) applicable to discharges from each outfall; and
v. Procedures (e.g., responsible staff, logistics, laboratory to be used) for gathering storm event data.
g. General Requirements - The SWPPP must meet the following general requirements:
i. The SWPPP shall be prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and to industry standards. The SWPPP may be developed by either a person on the staff or a third party, and it shall be certified in accordance with the signature requirements, underPart II.C.6.
ii. Retain a complete copy of the current SWPPP required by this permit at the facility in any accessible format. A complete SWPPP includes any documents incorporated by reference and all documentation supporting parts I.D. and I.E. of this permit, as well as the signed and dated certification page. Regardless of the
Page 36 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
format, the SWPPP must be immediately available to facility employees, EPA, a state or tribe, the operator of an MS4 receiving discharges from the site; and representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at the time of an onsite inspection. The current SWPPP or certain information from the current SWPPP must also be made available to the public (except any confidential business information (CBI) or restricted information, but clearly identify those portions of the SWPPP that are being withheld from public access. iii. Where the SWPPP refers to procedures in other facility documents, such as a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan or an Environmental Management System (EMS), copies of the relevant portions of those documents must be kept with the SWPPP.
REOPENING CLAUSES
This permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing:
1. to comply with any applicable effluent limitation or standard issued or approved under 301 (b)(2)(C),(D) and (E), 304 (b)(2), and 307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent limitation or standard so issued or approved:
a. contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
b. controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
2. to incorporate any of the reopening clause provisions cited at 327 IAC 5-2 16.
3. This permit may be modified or alternately revoked and reissued after public notice and opportunity for rehearing, to comply with any applicable final agency standards, regulations and requirements issued or approved under section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, if the standards, regulations and requirements so issued or approved contain different conditions than those in the permit.
4. The permittee may submit an implementation schedule and justification for an alternate applicability date for the ELG BAT limits under 423.13(h)(1)(i) and 423.13(k)(1)(i) for fly ash and bottom ash transport waters no later than twelve months from the effective date of the permit. The justification shall consider the following factors:
Page 37 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
a. Time to expeditiously plan (including to raise capital), design, procure, and install equipment to comply with the requirements of this part;
b. Changes being made or planned at the plant in response to: i. New source performance standards for greenhouse gases from new fossil fuel-fired electric generating units, under sections 111, 301, 302, and 307(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411,7601,7602, 7607(d)(1)(C); ii. Emission guidelines for greenhouse gases from existing fossil fuelfired electric generating units, under sections 111,301,302, and 307(d) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411,7601, 7602, 7607(d); or iii. Regulations that address the disposal of coal combustion residuals as solid waste, under sections 1006(b), 1008(a), 2002(a), 3001, 4004, and 4005(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1970, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, 42 U.S.C. 6906(b), 6907(a), 6912(a), 6944, and 6945(a);
c. For FGD wastewater requirements only, an initial commissioning period for the treatment system to optimize the installed equipment; and
d. Other factors as appropriate such as consideration of grid reliability issues, the timing and progress of 316(b) compliance, the timing and progress of 316(a) compliance, and any other relevant factor that may affect a permittee's ability to implement the necessary facility retrofits.
The permittee shall comply with the ELG BAT limits by the dates specified in the permit unless IDEM approves and incorporates a later date through modification of the permit.
e. A public announcement for coal unit retirement no later than December 31,2023.
5. to include a case-specific Limit of Detection (LOD) and/or Limit of Quantitation (LOQ). The permittee must demonstrate that such action is warranted in accordance with the procedures specified under Appendix B, 40 CFR Part 136, using the most sensitive analytical methods approved by EPA under 40 CFR Part 136, or approved by the Commissioner.
6. If within 12 months from the effective date of this permit the permittee doesn't notify IDEM of its intent to permanently retire the coal units at the facility pursuant to subsection l.4.e of this permit, this permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing to require either: a) the permittee submit proposed alternate
Page 38 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
limitations developed using the combined wastestream formula (CWF) for the parameters of low volume waste and cooling tower blowdown; or b) the permittee must establish internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423, which requires that in the event that waste streams from various sources are combined for treatment or discharge, the quantity of each pollutant or pollutant property controlled attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for that waste source.
SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent limitations specified for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium at Outfall 001 in accordance with the following schedule:
a. The permittee shall submit a written progress report to the Compliance Data Section of the Office of Water Quality (OWQ) nine (9) months from the effective date of this permit. The progress report shall include a description of the method(s) selected for meeting the newly imposed limitations for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium, in addition to any other relevant information. The progress report shall also include a specific time line specifying when each of the steps will be taken. The new effluent limits for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium are deferred for the term of this compliance schedule, unless the new effluent limits can be met at an earlier date. The permittee shall notify the Compliance Data Section of OWQ as soon as the newly imposed effluent limits for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium can be met. Upon receipt of such notification by OWQ, the final limits for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium will become effective, but no later than thirtysix (36) months from the effective date of this permit. Monitoring and reporting of the effluent for these parameters is required during the interim period.
b. The permittee shall submit a subsequent progress report to the Compliance Data Section of OWQ no later than eighteen (18) months from the effective date of this permit. This report shall include detailed information on the steps the permittee has taken to achieve compliance with the final effluent limitations and whether the permittee is meeting the time line set out in the initial progress report.
c. The permittee shall submit a subsequent progress report to the Compliance Data Section of OWQ no later than twenty-seven (27) months from the effective date of this permit. This report shall include detailed information on the steps the permittee has taken to achieve compliance with the final effluent limitations and whether the permittee is meeting the time line set out in the initial progress report.
Page 39 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
d. Within thirty (30) days of completion of construction, the permittee shall file with the Industrial NPDES Permits Section of OWQ a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
e. The permittee shall comply with the final effluent limitations for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium no later than thirty-six (36) months from the effective date of this permit.
If the permittee fails to comply with any deadline contained in the foregoing schedule, the permittee shall, within fourteen (14) days following the missed deadline, submit a written notice of noncompliance to the Compliance Data Section of the OWQ stating the cause of noncompliance, any remedial action taken or planned, and the probability of meeting the date fixed for compliance with final effluent limitations.
Page 40 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
A. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee shall comply with all terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(1) and all other requirements of 327 IAC 5-2-8. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and IC 13 and is grounds for enforcement action or permit termination, revocation and reissuance, modification, or denial of a permit renewal application.
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 conditions of the permit.
.
2. Duty to Mitigate
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(3), the permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact to the environment resulting from noncompliance with this permit. During periods of noncompliance, the permittee shall conduct such accelerated or additional monitoring for the affected parameters, as appropriate or as requested by IDEM, to determine the nature and impact of the noncompliance.
3. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must obtain and submit an application for renewal of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(2). It is the permittee's responsibility to obtain and submit the application. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-3(c), the owner of the facility or operation from which a discharge of pollutants occurs is responsible for applying for and obtaining the NPDES permit, except where the facility or operation is operated by a person other than an employee of the owner in which case it is the operator's responsibility to apply for and obtain the permit. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-3-2(a)(2), the application must be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit. This deadline may be extended if:
a. permission is requested in writing before such deadline;
b. IDEM grants permission to submit the application after the deadline; and
c. the application is received no later than the permit expiration date.
Page 41 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Under the terms of the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule, the permittee may be required to submit its application for renewal electronically in the future.
4. Permit Transfers
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(4)(D), this permit is nontransferable to any person except in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(c), This permit may be transferred to another person by the permittee, without modification or revocation and reissuance being required under 327 IAC 5-2-16(c)(1) or 16(e)(4), if the following occurs:
a. the current permittee notified the Commissioner at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date;
b. a written agreement containing a specific date of transfer of permit responsibility and coverage between the current permittee and the transferee (including acknowledgment that the existing permittee is liable for violations up to that date, and the transferee is liable for violations from that date on) is submitted to the Commissioner;
c. the transferee certifies in writing to the Commissioner their intent to operate the facility without making such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility as would significantly change the nature or quantities of pollutants discharged and thus constitute cause for permit modification under 327 IAC 5-216(d). However, the Commissioner may allow a temporary transfer of the permit without permit modification for good cause, e.g., to enable the transferee to purge and empty the facility's treatment system prior to making alterations, despite the transferee's intent to make such material and substantial alterations or additions to the facility; and
d. the Commissioner, within thirty (30) days, does not notify the current permittee and the transferee of the intent to modify, revoke and reissue, or terminate the permit and to require that a new application be filed rather than agreeing to the transfer of the permit.
The Commissioner may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to identify the new permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act or state law.
5. Permit Actions
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-16(b) and 327 IAC 5-2-8(4), this permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause, including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
Page 42 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
b. Failure of the permittee to disclose fully all relevant facts or misrepresentation of any relevant facts in the application, or during the permit issuance process; or
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or a permanent reduction or elimination of any discharge controlled by the permit, e.g., plant closure, termination of discharge by connection to a POTW, a change in state law that requires the reduction or elimination of the discharge, or information indicating that the permitted discharge poses a substantial threat to human health or welfare.
Filing of either of the following items does not stay or suspend any permit condition: (1) a request by the permittee fora permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or (2) submittal of information specified in Part II.A.3 of the permit including planned changes or anticipated noncompliance.
The permittee shall submit any information that the permittee knows or has reason to believe would constitute cause for modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit at the eadiest time such information becomes available, such as plans for physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility that:
1. could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged; or
2. the commissioner may request to evaluate whether such cause exists.
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-1-3{a)(5), the permittee must also provide any information reasonably requested by the Commissioner.
6. Property Rights
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(6) and 327 IAC 5-2-5(b), 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 persons or private property or invasion of other private rights, any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. The issuance of the permit also does not preempt any duty to obtain any other state, or local assent required by law for the discharge or for the construction or operation of the facility from which a discharge is made.
7. Severability
In accordance with 327 IAC 1-1-3, 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 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications of the permit which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Page 43 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
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 Clean Water Act or state law.
Penalties for Violation of Permit Conditions
Pursuant to IC 13-30-4, a person who violates any provision of this permit, the water pollution control laws; environmental management laws; or a rule or standard adopted by the Environmental Rules Board is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per day of any violation.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-5, a person who obstructs, delays, resists, prevents, or interferes with (1) the department; or (2) the department's personnel or designated agent in the performance of an inspection or investigation performed under IC 13 14-2-2 commits a class C infraction.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1,5(k), a person who willfully or recklessly violates any NPDES permit condition or filing requirement, any applicable standards or limitations of IC 13-18-3-2.4, IC 13-18-4-5, IC 13-18-8, IC 13-18-9, IC 13-18-10, IC 13-18-12, IC 13-18-14, IC 13-18-15, or IC 13-18-16, orwho knowingly makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in any NPDES form, notice, or report commits a Class C misdemeanor.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-10-1.5(1), an offense under IC 13-30-10-1,5(k) is a Class D felony if the offense results in damage to the environment that renders the environment unfit for human or vertebrate animal life. An offense under IC 13-3010-1.5(k) is a Class C felony if the offense results in the death of another person.
Penalties for Tampering or Falsification
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(10), the permittee shall comply with monitoring, recording, and reporting requirements of this permit. The Clean Water Act, as well as IC 13-30-10-1, provides that any person who knowingly or intentionally (a) destroys, alters, conceals, or falsely certifies a record that is required to be maintained under the terms of a permit issued by the department; and may be used to determine the status of compliance, (b) renders inaccurate or inoperative a recording device or a monitoring device required to be maintained by a permit
Page 44 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
issued by the department, or (c) falsifies testing or monitoring data required by a permit issued by the department commits a Class B misdemeanor.
12. Toxic Pollutants
If any applicable effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant injurious to human health, and that 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 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(5), Effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants injurious to human health are effective and must be complied with, if applicable to the permittee, within the time provided in the implementing regulations, even absent permit modification.
13. Wastewater treatment plant and certified operators
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant as required by IC 13-18-11-11 and 327 IAC 5-22. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7.
327 IAC 5-22-10.5(a) provides that a certified operator may be designated as being in responsible charge of more than one (1) wastewater treatment plant, if it can be shown that he will give adequate supervision to all units involved. Adequate supervision means that sufficient time is spent at the plant on a regular basis to assure that the certified operator is knowledgeable of the actual operations and that test reports and results are representative of the actual operations conditions. In accordance with 327 IAC 5-22-3(11), "responsible charge operator" means the person responsible for the overall daily operation, supervision, or management of a wastewater facility.
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-22-10(4), the permittee shall notify IDEM when there is a change of the person serving as the certified operator in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facility. The notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days after a change in the operator.
14. Construction Permit
In accordance with IC 13-14-8-11.6, a discharger is not required to obtain a state permit for the modification or construction of a water pollution treatment or control facility if the discharger has an effective NPDES permit.
Page 45 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
If the discharger modifies their existing water pollution treatment or control facility or constructs a new water pollution treatment or control facility for the treatment or control of any new influent pollutant or increased levels of any existing pollutant, then, within thirty (30) days after commencement of operation, the discharger shall file with the Department of Environment Management a notice of installation for the additional pollutant control equipment and a design summary of any modifications.
The notice and design summary shall be sent to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251.
15. Inspection and Entry
In accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), the permittee shall allow the Commissioner, or an authorized representative, (including an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Commissioner) upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a point source, regulated facility, or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept pursuant to the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment or methods (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required pursuant to this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, any discharge of pollutants or internal wastestreams for the purposes of evaluating compliance with the permit or as otherwise authorized.
16. New or Increased Discharge of Pollutants
This permit prohibits the permittee from undertaking any action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless one of the following is completed prior to the commencement of the action:
a. Information is submitted to the Commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharges will not cause a significant lowering of water quality as defined under 327 IAC 2-1.3-2(50). Upon review of this information, the Commissioner may request additional information or may determine that the proposed increase is a
Page 46 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
significant lowering of water quality and require the submittal of an antidegradation demonstration.
b. An antidegradation demonstration is submitted to and approved by the Commissioner in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 327 IAC 2-1.3 6.
MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and efficiently operate all facilities and systems (and related appurtenances) for the collection and treatment which are installed or used by the permittee and which are necessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-8(9).
Neither 327 IAC 5-2-8(9), nor this provision, shall be construed to require the operation of installed treatment facilities that are unnecessary for achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit.
2. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(12):
a. Terms as defined in 327 IAC 5-2-8(12)(A):
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of a waste stream from any portion of a treatment facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which would cause 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. The permittee may allow a bypass to occur that does not cause a violation of the effluent limitations in the permit, but only if it is also for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Part II.B.2.C., e, and f of this permit.
c. Bypasses, as defined in (a) above, are prohibited, and the Commissioner may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless the following occur:
Page 47 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage, as defined above;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, 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 that occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under Part II.B.2.e; or
(4) The condition under Part !I.B.2.b above is met.
d. Bypasses that result in death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans must be reported in accordance with the "Spill Response and Reporting Requirements" in 327 IAC 2-6.1, including calling 888/2337745 as soon as possible, but within two (2) hours of discovery. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the bypass are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
e. The permittee must provide the Commissioner with the following notice:
(1) If the permittee knows or should have known in advance of the need for a bypass (anticipated bypass), it shall submit prior written notice. If possible, such notice shall be provided at least ten (10) days before the date of the bypass for approval by the Commissioner.
(2) The permittee shall orally report an unanticipated bypass that exceeds any effluent limitations in the permit within 24 hours of becoming aware of the bypass noncompliance. The permittee must also provide a written report within five (5) days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the bypass event. The written report must contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; if the cause of noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the bypass event. If a complete fax or e-mail
Page 48 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
submittal is provided within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the unanticipated bypass event, then that report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirement. E-mails should be sent to wwreports@idem.in.gov.
f. The Commissioner may approve an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the Commissioner determines that it will meet the conditions listed above in Part II.B.2.C. The Commissioner may impose any conditions determined to be necessary to minimize any adverse effects.
Upset Conditions
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(13):
a. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable 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.
b. An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology-based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of Paragraph c of this section, are met.
c. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence, that:
(1) An upset occurred and the permittee has identified the specific cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated;
(3) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II.A.2; and
(4) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements," Part II.C.3, or 327 IAC 2-6.1, whichever is applicable. However, under 327 IAC 26.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or
Page 49 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
d. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof pursuant to 40 CFR 122.41(n)(4).
4. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State and to be in compliance with all Indiana statutes and regulations relative to liquid and/or solid waste disposal. The discharge of pollutants in treated wastewater is allowed in compliance with the applicable effluent limitations in Part I. of this permit.
C. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Planned Changes in Facility or Discharge
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11 )(F), the permittee shall give notice to the Commissioner as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. In this context, permitted facility refers to a point source discharge, not a wastewater treatment facility. Notice is required only when either of the following applies:
a. The alteration or addition may meet one of the criteria for determining whether the facility is a new source as defined in 327 IAC 5-1.5.
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature of, or increase the quantity of, pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants that are subject neither to effluent limitations in Part I.A. nor to notification requirements in Part II.C.9. of this permit.
Following such notice, the permit may be modified to revise existing pollutant limitations and/or to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.
2. Monitoring Reports
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(10) and 327 IAC 5-2-13 through 15, monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals and in the form specified in "Monthly Reporting", Part I.C.2.
Page 50 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(C), the permittee shall orally report to the Commissioner information on the following types of noncompliance within 24 hours from the time permittee becomes aware of such noncompliance. If the noncompliance meets the requirements of item b (Part II.C.3.b) or 327 IAC 2 6.1, then the report shall be made within those prescribed time frames. However, under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3(1), when the constituents of the discharge that is in noncompliance are regulated by this permit, and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur, the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply.
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit;
b. Any noncompliance which may pose a significant danger to human health or the environment. Reports under this item shall be made as soon as the permittee becomes aware of the noncomplying circumstances;
c. Any upset (as defined in Part II.B.3 above) that causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation in the permit;
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the following toxic pollutants: Copper, Mercury, Selenium
The permittee can make the oral reports by calling (317)232-8670 during regular business hours or by calling (317) 233-7745 ((888)233-7745 toll free in Indiana) during non-business hours. 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 and eliminate the noncompliance and prevent its recurrence. The Commissioner may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. Alternatively the permittee may submit a "Bypass/Overflow Report" (State Form 48373) or a "Noncompliance 24-Hour Notification Report" (State Form 54215), whichever is appropriate, to IDEM at (317) 232-8637 orwwreports@idem.in.gov. If a complete fax or e-mail submittal is sent within 24 hours of the time that the permittee became aware of the occurrence, then the fax report will satisfy both the oral and written reporting requirements.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
Page 51 of 57 Permit No. IN052191
4. Other Compliance/Noncompliance Reporting
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(D), the permittee shall report any instance of noncompliance not reported under the "Twenty-Four Hour Reporting Requirements" in Part II.C.3, or any compliance schedules at the time the pertinent Discharge Monitoring Report is submitted. The report shall contain the information specified in Part II.C.3;
The permittee shall also give advance notice to the Commissioner of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements; and
All 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.
Upon its effectiveness, the proposed Federal E-Reporting Rule will require these reports to be submitted electronically.
5. Other Information
Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(11)(E), where the permittee becomes aware of a failure to submit any relevant facts or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report, the permittee shall promptly submit such facts or corrected information to the Commissioner.
6. Signatory Requirements
a. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Commissioner shall be signed and certified by a person described below or by a duly authorized representative of that person:1
(1) The manager of one (1) or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities provided the manager is authorized to make management decisions that govern the operation of the regulated facility including having the explicit or implicit duty to make major capital investment recommendations, and initiating and directing other comprehensive measures to assure long term environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations; the manager can ensure that the necessary systems are established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for permit application requirements; and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate procedures.
Page 52 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively; or
(3) For a Federal, State, or local governmental body or any agency or political subdivision thereof: by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
b. A person is 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, or position of equivalent responsibility. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The authorization is submitted to the Commissioner.
c. Electronic Signatures. If documents described in this section are submitted electronically by or on behalf of the NPDES-regulated facility, any person providing the electronic signature for such documents shall meet all relevant requirements of this section, and shall ensure that all of the relevant requirements of 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all cases, subpart D to part 3) (Cross-Media Electronic Reporting) and 40 CFR part 127 (NPDES Electronic Reporting Requirements) are met for that submission.
d. Certification. Any person signing a document identified under Part II.C.9., shall make the following certification;
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my 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 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."
Page 53 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
7. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under 327 IAC 12.1, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Clean Water Act, permit applications, permits, and effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
8. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
IC 13-30 and 327 IAC 5-2-8(15) 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, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 180 days per violation, or by both.
9. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.42(a)(1), 40 CFR 122.42(a)(2), and 327 IAC 5-2-9, the permittee shall notify the Commissioner 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 pollutant identified as toxic pursuant to Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act 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 (100pg/l);
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 pg/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500pg/l) for 2,4dinitrophenol and 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenoI; and one milligram per liter (1mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment
Page 54 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
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 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 pg/l);
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
(3) Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Sec. 122.21(g)(7).
(4) A notification level established by the Commissioner on a caseby-case basis, either at his own initiative or upon a petition by the permittee. This notification level may exceed the level specified in subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) but may not exceed the level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements applicable to the permittee under the CWA (see 327 IAC 5-5-2).
c. That it has begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture, as an intermediate or final product or byproduct, any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application under 40 CFR 122.21(g)(9).
PART III Other Requirements
Page 55 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
A. Polychlorinated Biphenyl
There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
Many electrical transformers manufactured prior to 1978 contained PCBs. Therefore, in order to determine compliance with the PCB prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB* data for Outfall 001 with the application renewal. The permittee shall submit the data to the Office of Water Quality, Industrial NPDES Permits Section, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 2251.
Parameter Test Method______ LOP______ LOQ
PCBs*
608
0.1 ug/l 0.3 ug/l
*PCB-1242, PCB-1254, PCB-1221, PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260, and PCB-1016
B. The permittee shall post a permanent marker on the stream bank at each outfall discharging directly to the Ohio River.
The marker shall consist at a minimum of the name of the establishment to which the permit was issued, the permit number, and the outfall number. The information shall be printed in letters not less than two inches in height.
The marker shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet and shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ground.
C. In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives including dosage rates beyond the approved estimated maximum dosage rates, or changes that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of the additive contributing to the Outfalls, the permittee shall notify the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as required in Part II.C.1 of this permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates.
D. The Storm Water Monitoring and Non Numeric Effluent Limits and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) requirements can be found in Part I.D. and I. E. of this permit.
Page 56 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
Part IV Cooling Water Intake Structures
A. Best Technology Available (BTA) Determination
In accordance with 40 CFR 401.14, the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.
The EPA promulgated a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) regulation on August 15, 2014, that establishes standards for cooling water intake structures. 79 Fed. Reg. 48300 439 (August 15, 2014). The regulation establishes best technology available standards to reduce impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms at existing power generation and manufacturing facilities and it became effective on October 14, 2014.
For permits expiring prior to 45 months from the effective date (before July 2018), the permittee can (1) negotiate an alternative schedule for submitting required information with the Director (IDEM) after demonstrating need, or (2) request waiver(s) for submitting required information. An alternative schedule for submission of information required under the current CWA section 316(b), orwaiver(s) of submittal requirements shall be approved by IDEM. Upon approval of such alternative schedules and /or waivers, or until the time the required information/reports are submitted and the permit is renewed or modified following public notice, the IDEM is required to make a BTA determination using Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) to comply with CWA Section 316(b) based on existing information. The BTA determination is subject to change after the required information is submitted in accordance with the federal regulations effective October 14, 2014.
Based on available information, IDEM has made a Best Technology Available (BTA) determination that the existing cooling water intake structures represent best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impact in accordance with Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326) at this time. This determination is based on Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) and will be reassessed at the next permit reissuance to ensure that the CWISs continue to meet the requirements of Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326).
B. Permit Requirements
In accordance with the recently promulgated rules at 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 125, the owner or operator of a facility that has CWIS with a Design Intake Flow (DIF) 2 MGD and an Actual Intake Flow (AIF) < 125 MGD must submit the information required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (6) and (8), including all of the associated supporting documentation and/or studies. Studies defined at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) are also required when applicable. In addition, the permittee shall comply with requirements below:
Page 57 of 57 Permit No. IN0052191
1. in accordance with 40 CFR 125.98(b)(1), nothing in this permit authorizes take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
2. At all times properly operate and maintain the intake equipment and incorporate management practices and operational measures necessary to ensure proper operation of the CWIS..
3. Inform IDEM of any proposed changes to the CWIS or proposed changes to operations at the facility that affect the information taken into account in the current BTA evaluation.
4. There shall be no discharge of debris from intake screen washing which will settle to form objectionable deposits which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious, or which will produce colors or odors constituting a nuisance.
5. All required reports shall be submitted to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, NPDES Permits Branch.
6. Submit the information required to be considered by the Director per 40 CFR 125.98 to assist IDEM with the fact sheet or statement of basis for entrainment BTA, as soon as practicable, but no later than with the application for the next permit renewal.
7. During the next permit period, monitor the intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal.
ID EM
Permittee:
Existing Permit Information: Facility Contact: Facility Location:
Receiving Stream: GLI/Non-GLl: Proposed Permit Action: Date Application Received: Source Category
Permit Writer:
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Fact Sheet For
Vectren Corporation SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station
Draft; December 2016 Final: February 2017
Indiana Department of Environmental Management 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 (317) 232-8603 Toll Free (800) 451-6027 www.idem.IN.gov
Vectren Corporation SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station P.O. Box 209 Evansville, Indiana 47702 Permit Number: IN0052191
Expiration Date; September 30, 2016 Angela Casbon-Scheller, Manager-Utility Environmental Compliance acscheller(.vectren.com (812) 491-4787
SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station 8511 Welbom Road Mt. Vernon, Indiana 47620 Posey County Outfall 001: Ohio River Outfall 004: unnamed tributary to the Ohio River
Non-GLI
Permit Renewal
March 31, 2016
NPDES Major: Non-Contact Cooling Water, Cooling Tower Blowdown; Low Volume Wastewater; Ash Handling Wastewater, Metal Cleaning Wastewater, Coal Pile Runoff, Treated Sanitary Wastewater
Miranda Hancock mihancoc(a>dem.in.aov (3171 234-8129
Nicole Gardner naardner(idem.in.aov (317) 232-8707
Table of C ontents
1.0 Introduction................................................................................. 3
2.0 Facility description.......................
3
2.1 General............................................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Outfall Locations.............................................................................................................................. 6
2.3 Wastewater Treatment..................................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Changes in Operation............................................. .......................................................................11
3.0 Permit History........................................................................... 11
3.1 Compliance history.........................................................................................................................11
4.0 Receiving Water......................................
12
4.1 Receiving Stream Water Quality....................................................................................................12
5.0 Permit Limitations..................................................................... 12
5.1 Existing Permit Limits...................................................................................
13
5.2 Technology-Based Effluent Limits (TBEL).................................................................................. 15
5.3 Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits............................................................................................20
5.4 Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing (WETT).....................................................................................22
5.5 Antibacksliding............................................................................................................................. 22
5.6 Antidegradation.............................................................................................................................. 22
5.7 Storm Water............................
23
5.8 Water Treatment Additives............................................................................................................ 25
6.0 P e rm it D ra ft D is c u s s io n .................................................................... 26
6.1 Discharge Limitations................................................................................................................... 26
6.2 Monitoring Conditions and Rationale...........................................................................................28
6.3 Schedule of Compliance............................................................................................................... 28
6.4 Special Conditions and Other Permit Requirements.....................................................................29
6.4.1 Clean Water Act Section 316(b) Cooling Water Intake Structure(s) (CWIS)...........................29
6.4.2 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) ................................................................................................ 31
6.5 Spill Response and Reporting Requirement.................................................................................31
6.6 Permit Processing/Public Comment.............................................................................................. 32
6.7 Post Public Notice Addendum...................................................................................................... 32
2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit application from Vectren Corporation SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station on March 31, 2016. The current five year permit was issued with an effective date of October 1,2009 in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-6(a).
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and subsequent amendments require a NPDES permit for the discharge of wastewater to surface waters. Furthermore, Indiana Code (IC) 13-15-1-2 requires a permit to control or limit the discharge of any contaminants into state waters or into a publicly owned treatment works. This proposed permit action by IDEM complies with both federal and state requirements.
In accordance with Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Sections 124.8 and 124.56, as well as Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 327 Article 5, development of a Fact Sheet is required for NPDES permits. This document fulfills the requirements established in those regulations.
This Fact Sheet was prepared in order to document the factors considered in the development of NPDES Permit effluent limitations. The technical basis for the Fact Sheet may consist of evaluations of promulgated effluent guidelines, existing effluent quality, receiving water conditions, and wasteload allocations to meet Indiana Water Quality Standards, Decisions to award variances to Water Quality Standards or promulgated effluent guidelines are justified in the Fact Sheet where necessary.
2.0 FACILITY DESCRIPTION
2,1 General
Vectren Corporation SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station is classified under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 4911 - Electric Services. The facility is a coal fired steam electric generating plant with two (2) 265 MW generating units, and two (2) natural gas turbines, 85 MW and 90 MW. The gas turbines are used during peak load periods and the operating of these units does not contribute to the wastewater discharge. The Ohio River accounts for approximately 95% of the facility's intake water with well water accounting for remainder. The design intake volume is 9.11 MGD. Average daily intake for 2015 was 5.97 MGD while average discharge volume for 2015 was 1.53 MGD, Extensive recycling of the ash pond water accounts for the difference between intake and discharge volumes.
A map showing the location of the facility has been included as Figure 1 and Figure 2.
3
Figure 1: Facility Location Topography Map 4
SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station 8511 Welbom Road Mt. Vernon, Indiana 47620 Posey County
5
2.2 Outfall Locations
Outfall Latitude Longitude Receiving Water
Flow Summary
Avg. Flow (MGD)
001 37.90159 87.723744
Ohio River
Please refer to section 2.3 below for a detailed description 1.53*
and simplified flow diagram.
unnamed tributary to 004 37.90243 87.713433 the Ohio River
103 203
005S
006S
37.90591 87.717019 internal outfall to 001
37.90527 87.713114 internal outfall to 001
unnamed tributary to
37.90882 87.723044 the Ohio River
unnamed tributary to
37.90377 87.722328 the Ohio River
j
*Flows are variable
;
2.3 W astew ater Treatm ent
emergency overflow from the ash pond
treated sanitary wastewater treated sanitary wastewater
Storm water from northern part of plant storm water from central & southwestern part of plant
0.0033* 0,001* 1,303*
1.84* :
The permittee shall have the wastewater treatment facilities under the responsible charge of an operator certified by the Commissioner in a classification corresponding to the classification of the wastewater treatment plant(s) as required by 1C 13-18-11-11 and 327 IAC 5-22-5. In order to operate a wastewater treatment plant the operator shall have qualifications as established in 327 IAC 5-22-7. The permittee has a wastewater treatment system that has been given a Class B industrial wastewater treatment plant classification.
The following describes the discharges and wastewater treatment systems at the A.B. Brown Generating Station. A Simplified Flow Diagram has been included as Figure 3 below and a Full Flow Diagram has been included as Figure 4 below.
Outfall 001
Outfall 001 discharges to the Ohio River near river mile 817. The average flow from the outfall is 1.53 MGD for the September 2014 - February 2016 time period. Outfall 001 consists of the discharge water from cooling tower blow down, floor and equipment drains, low volume plant waste water, FGD landfill runoff water (restricted type III), FGD scrubber area sumps, treatment system # 1 , fly ash transport, bottom ash transport, ash pond, treatment system #2 , periodic metal cleaning wastes, treated sanitary wastewater, coal pile run-off and south side run off pond emergency overflow. Of the discharge waters listed, most do not discharge discretely to the 001 pipe. The direct discharges into the outfall 001 pipe are the cooling tower blowdown, the lined
6
settling pond for treatment system #2 and the ash pond storm water bypass line (which is only utilized during heavy precipitation). A simplified schematic has been included as Figure 3 below which identifies how each wastewater stream intermingles or directly discharges to the outfall 001 pipe.
Cooling Tower Blow Down: Non-contact cooling water is withdrawn primarily from the Ohio River, with make-up water being drawn from the onsite Ranney Radial Collection Well. Non-contact cooling water is treated with scale and corrosion inhibiting water treatment additives and a polymer is added prior to being blown down to a series of three (3) cooling tower blow down settling basins. The third basin in the series discharges to the Ohio River via Outfall 001.
Floor and Equipment Drains: Floor and equipment drain discharge combines with fuel oil storage area drains and passes through a primary and secondary oil / water separator. The Oil / Water separator consists of a primary tank / baffle chamber and a secondary concrete holding chamber. This discharge point from this system is from the underflow of the secondary treatment so that any residual oils stay on the surface of the holding chamber. Discharge then discharges to the Ohio River via Outfall 001.
FGD Landfill Run Off: The FGD Landfill Surge Basin discharges to the FGD Landfill Settling Basin (Capital Pond). As of July 2014, the landfill run-off is injected with C02 (treatment code 2-L) prior to being pumped to the FGD scrubber sumps. The waters in the FGD scrubber sumps are then pumped to Physical-Chemical Treatment System #1 (described below).
FGD Scrubbers: There is not a direct slurry discharge from the FGD scrubbers. The water removed from the filter cake during the belt filter vacuum process recycles to the thickener tank. This particular scrubbing process is unique to the A.B. Brown plant. The 1.2 MGD flow from the FGD scrubbers noted on the water flow diagram is the wash water used to spray off the belt filter and the filter cake truck loading bays from both scrubbers. This wash water drains to the scrubber sumps and is then pumped to Physical-Chemical Treatment System #1 (described next). The ash pond is the source water and it recirculates back to the ash pond after passing through the FGD system scrubber pump and Physical-Chemical Treatment System #1. As stated in the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category; Final Rule with a Januar/ 4, 2016 effective date, "Wastewater generated from cleaning the FGD scrubber, cleaning FGD solids separation equipment, cleaning FGD solids dewatering equipment, or that is collected in floor drains in the FGD process area is not considered FGD wastewater." [40 CFR 423.11 (n)] As a result of this statement provided by EPA, the wash waters collected in the scrubber sumps for the truck loading areas and belt filter wash are not considered FGD wastewater.
Treatment System #1: This physical-chemical treatment system was constructed for meeting the mercury effluent limit as listed in the 2011 NPDES permit renewal. The system treats water from the landfill capital pond and scrubber belt filter wash / sumps in a set of mixing tanks which add coagulant, pH adjustment, organosulfide, and a polymer/flocculant prior to the wastewater entering the ash pond. The mixing tanks are located along the edge of the ash pond and discharge into the pond for settling.
7
Fly Ash: As of November 2009, A.B. Brown Generating Station fly ash is sent for recycling to a cement kiln via a barge load out system at the river. The Hydroveyor system used to move the dry fly ash to the load out facility requires a vacuum which is created by the flow of water within the ash lines. Ash pond water recirculates within the ash lines to form the vacuum. During times of high river levels that restrict barge traffic or during kiln outages the fly ash is conveyed to the ash pond through the fly ash sluice lines. For the last three years, the two generating units have operated an average of 81% of the possible days and wet sluiced 25% of fly ash generated or roughly 20,000 tons per year.
Bottom Ash: Bottom Ash accounts for 15-20% of ash generated. For the last three years, the facility has averaged 21,000 tons of bottom ash generation per year. All bottom ash is wet sluiced to the ash pond.
Ash Pond Wastewater: Ash pond wastewater is discharged as needed to control the pond level. The ash pond receives discharges from rainfall and run off, bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, coal pile run off / south side run off pond, chemistry lab and battery room floor drains, landfill / Capital Pond water, and waters associated with the dual alkali FGD scrubber sump which consists of waters used to wash down the belt filters and truck loading bays. A storm water bypass line has been installed for the purpose of routing ash pond waters directly to the new settling pond during periods of exceptionally high rainfall. The storm water bypass line will aid the facility in limiting discharges via the principal spillway (Outfall 004) by routing it through the primary permitted outfall (Outfall 001). Influent flow to the Ash Pond is approximately 9.7 MGD. Ash pond wastewater not discharged through treatment system #2 or the storm water bypass line is lost to evaporation, recirculated to the FGD System, and used for wash down source water. Ash pond water recycled to internal systems or recycled within the ash pond is approximately 7.9 MGD.
Treatment System #2: This physical-chemical treatment system treats water from the ash pond with a duplicate set of tanks using the same chemicals as the aforementioned (treatment system # 1 ) set of tanks and take the water to a new, lined settling pond near the cooling towers. Water from the new pond enters the discharge pipe near the cooling tower blow down line for eventual flow to Outfall 001. The new settling pond allows for a more steady flow rate from the ash pond discharge which is heavily influenced by precipitation.
Periodic Metal Cleaning Waste: Chemical metal cleanings occur on each unit once every 6-7 years. The last chemical metal cleaning on Unit 1 occurred during early April 2015. The last chemical metal cleaning on Unit 2 occurred during mid-October 2014.
Coal Pile / South Side Run Off Pond: The boiler water pretreatment system, reverse osmosis reject, water treatment filter & softener backwash, boiler blow down, precipitator & ash pit area floor drains, air heater wash, the hopper seal & ash hopper overflow, and occasional discharges of the lime storage tank are discharged to the Coal Pile Run Off / South Side Run Off Pond. Rainfall and run off, coal trestle dust suppression, coal handling French drain, coal handling and sanitary waste from the coal handling area (Internal Outfall 203), and the East Ditch Drain (which contains yard drainage and wash down), discharge to the Coal Pile Run O ff/ South Side Run-Off Pond. The south side run-off pond discharges continuously to the ash pond. In emergency situations, the south side run-off pond can also be discharged directly to the Ohio
8
River via Outfall 001. This may occur for a few hours each year. The last occurrence was April 2014. The South Side Run-Off Pond level is monitored via the plant electronic data system. Figure 3: Simplified Flow Diagram
Outfall 004 - Emergency Overflow Discharge Outfall 004 is designated as an emergency overflow from the ash pond to an unnamed tributary to the Ohio River. The ash pond is described in detail in the Outfall 001 description. During periods of excessive precipitation, when discharges to Outfall 001 are not able to maintain an acceptable water level in the ash pond, water may discharge from the ash pond via Outfall 004. Internal Outfall 103 - Sanitary Wastewater Internal Outfall 103 is an internal outfall regulating the discharge from the sanitary wastewater treatment plant. Treatment consists of activated sludge biological treatment and disinfection with
9
chlorine tablets. Following treatment, the outfall combines with other plant wastes and discharges to the Ohio River through Outfall 001. The average flow is less than 3,300 gallons per day (0.0033 MGD). Treatment for the sanitary water includes: - disinfection with chlorine tablets (2-F) - activated sludge (3-A) Internal Outfall 203 - Sanitary Wastewater Internal Outfall 203 is an internal outfall regulating the discharge from the sanitary wastewater treatment plant serving the coal handling offices and SIMI building. Treatment consists of activated sludge biological treatment and disinfection with chlorine tablets. Following treatment, the outfall discharges to the coal pile run-off /south side run-off pond which pumps to the ash pond. The average flow is less than 1,000 gallons per day (0.001 MGD). The south side run-off pond discharges continuously to the coal ash pond. Treatment for the sanitary water includes: - disinfection with chlorine tablets (2-F) - activated sludge (3-A) Outfall 005S - Storm Water North Collection Area Storm water from the northern part of the plant which includes the area surrounding the landfill, cooling tower blow down basins, and plant entrance road are discharged through this outfall. The outfall discharges to an unnamed tributary to the Ohio River. Outfall 006S - Storm Water Central and Southwest Collection Area Storm water from the central and southwestern part of the plant which includes the cooling towers, substation, rail road, coal truck delivery road, and open areas are discharged through this outfall. The outfall discharges to an unnamed tributary to the Ohio River.
10
Figure 4: Flow Diagram (click diagram to open full view)
VECTREN POEH S U l W 11. BROWN TOW KM STATIO N
EVANSVILLE, INDIANA
iX<t M H PRji
2.4 Changes in O peration
On July 2, 2014 this facility completed installation of the chemical-precipitations treatment systems that were constructed for the purpose of meeting the mercury limitations promulgated by the August 6 , 2010 Wasteload Allocation Report.
Future changes at this facility include plans to retire Units 1 and 2 no later than 12/31/2023. Vectren has indicated to IDEM that a final decision on retirement will be made in the next twelve months. This permit renewal requires Vectren to notify IDEM of their final decision on retirement within twelve months of the effective date of this permit renewal. At that time, a proposed modification of the permit is expected that would address compliance issues with the federal effluent guidelines applicable to this facility. See Section 5.2 below.
3.0 PERMIT HISTORY
3.1 C om pliance h isto ry
There are no pending or current enforcement actions regarding this NPDES permit. A review of this facility's discharge monitoring data was conducted for compliance verification. This review indicates the following permit limitation violations between July, 2011 and June, 2016:
ll
Outfall 001: 4 exceedances of pH, 1 exceedance of Iron, 2 exceedances ofTRO. Outfall 004: 4 exceedances of pH, 1 exceedance ofTSS.
4.0 RECEIVING W ATER
The receiving stream for Outfall 001 is the Ohio River. The Q710 low flow value of the Ohio River is 12,900 cfs and shall be capable of supporting a well-balanced warm water aquatic community and full body contact recreation in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-3.The Ohio River is also designated as a public water supply and as an industrial water supply.
The receiving stream for Outfalls 004, 005S, and 006S is an unnamed tributary to the Ohio River. The Q?,io low flow value of the unnamed tributary to the Ohio River is 0.0 cfs and shall be capable of supporting a well-balanced warm water aquatic community and full body contact recreation in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-3.
In accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3, language in this renewed permit specifically prohibits the permittee from undertaking deliberate actions that would result in new or increased discharges of BCC's or new or increased permit limits for non-BCC's, or from allowing a new or increased discharge of a BCC from an existing or proposed industrial user, without first proving that the new or increased discharge would not result in a significant lowering of water quality, or by submission and approval of an antidegradation demonstration to the IDEM.
4.1 R eceiving Stream W ater Q uality
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify waters, through their Section 305(b) water quality assessments, that do not or are not expected to meet applicable water quality standards with federal technology based standards alone. States are also required to develop a priority ranking for these waters taking into account the severity of the pollution and the designated uses of the waters. Once this listing and ranking of impaired waters is completed, the states are required to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for these waters in order to achieve compliance with the water quality standards. Indiana's 2014 303(d) List of Impaired Waters was developed in accordance with Indiana's Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) Listing Methodology for Waterbody Impairments and Total Maximum Daily Load Development for the 2014 Cycle.
The Ohio River (Assessment-Unit INH8_05) is on the 2014 303(d) list for E. Coli, Mercury, and PCBs in fish tissue. A TMDL for E. Coli is in progress for the Ohio River.
5.0 PERMIT LIMITATIONS
Two categories of effluent limitations exist for NPDES permits: Technology-Based Effluent Limits (TBELs) and Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits (WQBELs).
TBELs require every individual member of a discharge class or category to operate their water pollution control technologies according to industry-wide standards and accepted engineering practices. TBELs are developed by applying the National Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELGs)
12
established by USEPA for specific industrial categories. Technology based treatment requirements under section 301(b) of the CWA represent the minimum level of control/treatment using available technology that must be imposed in a section 402 permit (40 CFR 125.3(a)).
In the absence of ELGs, TBEL effluent limits can also be based upon Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) under 40 CFR 122.43, 122.44, 125.3, and Section 402(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
WQBELs are designed to be protective of the beneficial uses of the receiving water and are independent of the available treatment technology. The WQBELs for this facility are based on water quality criteria in 327 IAC 2-1-6 or under the procedures described in 327 IAC 2-1-8.2 through 327 IAC 2-1-8.7 and implementation procedures in 327 IAC 5. Limitations and/or monitoring are required for parameters identified by applications of the reasonable potential to exceed WQBEL under 327 IAC 5-2-11.1 (h)(1).
According to 40 CFR 122.44 and 327 IAC 5, NPDES permit limits are based on either TBELs, where applicable, BPJ, or WQBELs, whichever is most stringent. The decision to limit or monitor the parameters contained in this permit is based on information contained in the permittee's NPDES application. In addition, when performing a permit renewal, existing permit limits must be considered. These may be TBELs, WQBELs, or limits based on BPJ. When renewing a permit, the antibacksliding provisions identified in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11) are taken into consideration.
5.1 E xisting Perm it Lim its
Outfall 001:
Parameter
Flow Oil and Grease
(O & G) TSS
Aluminum Arsenic Boron Cadmium T. Chromium Zinc
Metal Cleaning Non-Metal Cleaning
Metal Cleaning on-Metai cleaning Free Cyanide Nickel
Monthly Average Report
10
Daily Maximum
Report 15
Units
MGD mg/l
30 Report Report Report Report Report Report
70 Report Report Report Report Report Report
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
0.033 I
0.067
mg/l
Report
Report
mg/l
--
Report Report Report
1.0
mg/l
Report
mg/l
Report
mg/l
Report
mg/l
13
Mercury Selenium Silver Sulfate TRC/TRO-Intermittent
12
Report Report
Report --
Frequency Duration Duration/Day Temperature
Chloride Fluoride Alkalinity Sodium
-- -- --
Report Report Report Report Report
Parameter _ _ eh______
Outfall 004:
Daily Minimum
6.0
Parameter
Flow Oil and Grease TSS Cadmium Copper Selenium Nickel Aluminum Silver Free Cyanide Zinc Arsenic T. Chromium Mercury
Monthly Average Report
10
30
--
--
-- --
-- -- --
--
-- -- --
Parameter pH
Daily Minimum
6.0
Outfalls 103 and 203:
Parameter
Flow TBODg
Monthly Average Report Report
20
Report Report Report
0.2
4 40
120
Report Report Report Report Report
Daily Maximum 9.0
ng/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Times/Day Minutes/Dose Minutes/Day F mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Units Std Units
Daily Maximum
Units
Report 15 70
Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
MGD mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Mg/l mg/l mg/l
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units Std Units
Daily Maximum
Units
Report 45
MGD mg/l
14
E. coli
125
235
cfu/100 ml
Parameter PH___
O CD
O CD
Daily Minimum | Daily Maximum
Units Std Units
Outfall 005S and 006S:
Parameter Flow
pH Oil & Grease
CBOD5 COD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen Total Phosphorus TSS
Daily Maximum Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Units MGD s.u. mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/i mg/i mg/l
J M I __________
5.2 Technology-B ased E fflu ent Lim its (TBEL)
The U.S. EPA has established technology based effluent guidelines for steam electric generating facilities. The applicable technology based standards for the A.B. Brown Generating Station are contained in 40 CFR 423 - Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. Since this facility is classified as an "existing point source", all discharges are subject to effluent guidelines in 40 CFR 423.12, Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT) and 40 CFR 423.13, Best Available Control Technology (BAT). Revised final Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELGs) and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Industry were published in the Federal Register (FR) on November 3, 2015 and became effective on January 4, 2016.
The revised federal ELGs require dry handling for fly ash and bottom ash transport water with compliance by November 1,2018 unless an alternate date, which is to be no later than December 31,2023, is granted by the permitting authority. This permit prohibits discharge of fly ash or bottom ash transport water after November 1,2018. The permittee may request an alternate compliance date beyond November 1,2018 no later than 12-months from the effective date of this permit in accordance with the Reopening Clauses in I.F of the permit. IDEM will evaluate the information submitted and make a determination at that time whether to extend the compliance date beyond November 1,2018.
In evaluating the need for TBELs for Cooling Tower Blowdown, Low Volume Wastes, Metal Cleaning Wastes, Coal Pile Runoff and Ash Transport Water (prior to November 1,2018) and in accordance with the federal effluent guideline, when wastewater streams are combined for discharge and/or treatment, 40 CFR 423 requires that the quantity of each pollutant attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for that waste source. Compliance with this requirement may be achieved by establishing internal monitoring locations (outfalls) prior to the regulated wastestream commingling with other wastestreams. As an alternative to establishing internal monitoring locations for determining compliance with the
15
federal effluent guidelines, the permittee may utilize the combined wastestream formula (CWF) as described in 40 CFR 403.6(e) to calculate alternate compliance values based on the applicable portion of the ELG, to be applied to the discharge of the combined wastestreams at the final outfall(s).
IDEM has determined that there is a need to establish internal monitoring stations to determine compliance with the TBELs. However, because SIGECO has announced in the December 2016 Integrated Resource Plan filed with the IURC that the preferred generation transition plan would include closure of the A.B.Brown coal units by December 31,2023, a reopener has been proposed in the permit which states that if within 12 months from the effective date of this permit the permittee doesn't notify IDEM of its intent to permanently retire the facility no later than December 31, 2023, this permit may be modified, or alternately, revoked and reissued, after public notice and opportunity for hearing to require either: a) the permittee submit proposed alternate limitations developed using the combined wastestream formula (CWF) for the parameters specified; or b) the permittee must establish internal outfalls for determining compliance with 40 CFR 423, which requires that in the event that waste streams from various sources are combined for treatment or discharge, the quantity of each pollutant or pollutant property controlled attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for that waste source.
Requirements applicable to all wastewater streams:
1. pH Control - 4 0 CFR 423.12(b)(1), the pH of all discharges, except once through cooling water, shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0 s.u. (BPT).
2. Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) - 40 CFR 423.12(b)(2) and 40 CFR 423.13(a), There shall be no discharge of Polychlorinated biphenyl compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid BPT).
Regulated wastewater streams and their applicable definitions and requirements:
There are several separate wastewater streams that are regulated by 40 CFR Part 423. The wastestreams applicable to this facility are as follows:
1. Cooling tower blowdown - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(7) and (8), and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(d). As defined in 40 CFR 423.110, blowdown means the minimum discharge of recirculating water for the purpose of discharging materials contained in the water, the further buildup of which would cause concentrations in amounts exceeding limits established by best engineering practices.
2. Low volume wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(3), and there are not BAT guidelines. The term low volume waste sources means, taken collectively as if from one source, wastewater from all sources except those for which specific limitations or standards are otherwise established in this part. Low volume waste sources include, but are not limited to, the following: Wastewater from ion exchange water treatment systems, water treatment evaporator blowdown, laboratory and sampling streams, boiler blowdown, floor drains, cooling tower basin cleaning wastes, recirculation house service water systems, and wet scrubber air pollution control systems whose
16
primary purpose is particulate removal. Sanitary wastes, air condition wastes, and wastewater from carbon capture or sequestrations systems are not included in this definition. 3. Ash handling wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(4), and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13. The definitions can be found in 40 CFR 423.11 (e) and (f) - The term fly ash means the ash that is carried out of the furnace by the gas stream and collected mechanical precipitators, electrostatic precipitators, and/or fabric filters. Economizer ash is included when it is collect with fly ash; and the term bottom ash means that ash that drops out of the furnace gas stream in the furnace and in the economizer sections. Economizer ash is included when it is collect with bottom ash. 4. Metal cleaning wastewater - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) [non-chemical] and the BAT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.13(e) [chemical]. Metal Cleaning Waste as defined by 40 CFR 423.11 (d) means any wastewater resulting from cleaning [with or without chemical cleaning compounds] any metal process equipment including, but not limited to, boiler tube cleaning, boiler fireside cleaning, and air preheater cleaning. 5. Coal Pile Runoff - The BPT guidelines are contained in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(9) and (10), and there are no BAT guidelines. Coal pile run-off as defined in 40 CFR 423.11 (m) means the rainfall runoff from or through and coal storage pile.
17
Technology Based Effluent Limitations Table Effluent Guidelines from 40 CFR 423
!Wastestream [3]
pH fs.u.)
Once th ro u g h non-contact
co oling w ater:
... e . o / s . o
C o o lin g to w e r b lo w d o w n :
6.0 /fi.O
L ow v o lu m e w a stew a ter:
5.0 ! 9.0
Ash handling w a s te w a te r tl]: 5 0 / 9 0
M e ta l c le a n in g w a stew a ter:
6.0 / SO
C h e m ica l M e ta! c le a n in g w aste 5.0 / 5.0
C oal P ile R unoff:
6 .0 / 5.0
FGD W astew ater
6.0 >s.o
G asificatio n
C o m b u stio n R esidual Leachate
F lu e Gas M e rc u ry C o n tro l [2]
Re. Chlorine (mcj/0 [4]
Max.
tss
(mg/i)..
MiML/Ayg.
O&G
.. (mg/1)
Max/Avo,
|1} There shall be rvo discharge c f pollutants tn fly ash or bottom ash transport water. Dischargers must meet ih e discharge limitation by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning N o u e m b .............................................................
2] There shall be no discharge of pollutants in Rue gas mercury control wastewater Discharger must meet the discharge imitation in this paragraph by a date determined by trie permitting authority that ts as soon as possible beginning November 1. 2018, but no
iiaterthan December 311.2023'.
_ _
..........................................................................................................................
..........................
.....................
....
_
....................................
...................
....
i(3] When wastewater streams are combined fo r discharge ano/or treatment 40 CFR 423 requires mat the quantity o f each pollutant or pollutant pi operry controlled attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed the specified limitations for mar waste source
(4{ The discharge c i chlorine is knitted lo a maximum o f rwc hours per day Tor each etecmcai generating umi.
;
i
:
.
[5] This value is an instantaneous limitation (at any time), not a daily maximum.
'
;
I
i .................................
. ;........................................
18
Outfall 001
Total Suspended Solids & Oil & Grease (Low Volume Waste, Metal Cleaning Waste, Coal Pile Run-off)
The technology based effluent limitations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil & Grease based on 40 CFR 423 would be 30 mg/l monthly average and 100 mg/l daily maximum (TSS) and 15 mg/l monthly average and 20 mg/l daily maximum (Oil & Grease). However, the current permit limits were developed previously using BPJ to be more protective of water quality and have been retained from the previous permit. The TSS limitations are 30 mg/l monthly average and 70 mg/l daily maximum. The Oil & Grease limitations are 10 mg/l monthly average and 15 mg/l daily maximum.
Iron (Metal Cleaning Waste)
Iron limitations have been retained from the previous permit and are required based upon the presence of periodic chemical and non-chemical metal cleaning waste in the discharge. The metal cleaning waste Technology Based Effluent Limit (TBEL) in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and 423.13 (e) identifies a daily maximum and monthly average limitation of 1.0 mg/l for Iron.
Copper (Metal Cleaning Waste)
Copper limitations are required based upon the presence of periodic chemical and non chemical metal cleaning waste in the discharge. The metal cleaning waste Technology Based Effluent Limit (TBEL) in 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5) and 40 CFR 423.13 (e) identifies daily maximum and monthly average limitations of 1.0 mg/l for Copper.
However, the water quality based effluent limitations (WQBELs) for copper are more stringent than the TBEL, and shall be applied whenever periodic chemical and non chemical metal cleaning waste could be present in the discharge. A more detailed discussion is provided in Section 5.3 below.
Total Chromium & Zinc (Cooling Tower Blowdown) and 126 Priority Pollutants
The discharge of cooling tower blowdown is regulated by 40 CFR 423.13(d). 40 CFR 423.13(d)(1) prohibits the discharge of the 126 priority pollutants listed in Appendix A of this regulations in detectable amounts with the exception of total zinc and total chromium which have specific numeric limits. In accordance with 423.12(d)(3), instead of the monitoring specified in 40 CFR 122.48(b), compliance with the limitations for the 126 priority pollutants in paragraph (d)(1) of 40 CFR 423.13 may be determined by engineering calculations which demonstrate that the regulated pollutants are not detectable in the final discharge by the analytical methods in 40 CFR Part 136. However, compliance with the above limitations for the 126 priority pollutants (with the exception of zinc and chromium) in paragraph (d)(1) of 40 CFR 423.13 must be reported each time there is a change in the chemicals added for cooling tower maintenance.
19
OutfaH 004
Total Suspended Solids & Oil & Grease
The technology based effluent limitations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil & Grease based on 40 CFR 423 would be 30 mg/l monthly average and 100 mg/l daily maximum (TSS) and 15 mg/l monthly average and 20 mg/l daily maximum (Oil & Grease). However, the current permit limits are more stringent and have been retained from the previous permit. The TSS limitations are 30 mg/l monthly average and 70 mg/l daily maximum. The Oil & Grease limitations are 10 mg/l monthly average and 15 mg/l daily maximum.
Outfalls 103/203
TBOD5, E. Coli, and TRC
The TBOD5 limitation has been retained from the previous permit and was originally based on the secondary treatment requirements for wastewater treatment facilities regulated in accordance with 327 IAC 5-5-3.
The E. Coli and TRC limitations have been retained from the previous permit and are based on the Disinfection Requirements required by 327 IAC 5-10-6.
5.3 W ater Q uality-Based E fflu ent Lim its
The water quality-based effluent limits were calculated using the criteria contained in Table 1 of 327 IAC 2-1-6, Minimum Surface Water Quality Standards, and the procedure contained in 327 IAC 5-2-11.1, Establishment of Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations for Dischargers not discharging to Waters within the Great Lakes System.
Narrative Water Quality Based Limits
The narrative water quality contained under 327 IAC 2-1-6(a)(1) (A)-(E) have been included in this permit to ensure that the narrative water quality criteria are met.
Numeric Water Quality Based Limits
The numeric water quality criteria and values contained in this permit have been calculated using the tables of water quality criteria under 327 IAC 2-1-6(b) & (c).
Outfall 001
pH
Discharges to waters of the state are limited to the range of 6.0-9.0 s.u., in accordance with 327 IAC 2-1-6.
20
Temperature
The facility has a closed cycle cooling water system consisting of recirculating cooling towers and other water recycling. The system withdraws approximately 8.7 MGD of water from the Ohio River and discharges approximately 1.53 MGD to the river. Monthly temperature limitations are not required because of the closed cooling system and the small amount of discharge to the Ohio River (Q7.10 flow of 8,333 MGD). However, monthly monitoring will be required.
Flow
The effluent flow is to be monitored in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-13(a)2.
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)-lntermittent
The intermittent TRC limit of 0.2 mg/l daily maximum has been retained from the previous permit and is based on 327 IAC 2-1-6. To be considered an intermittent discharge, total residual chlorine shall not be detected in the discharge from any single generating unit for a period of more than forty (40) minutes in duration, and such periods shall be separated by at least five (5) hours. The permittee is limited to no more than four (4) chlorination cycles per day. The intermittent TRC limitations were developed for the control of zebra mussels.
Chlorination Frequency
The monitoring of chlorination frequency applies only when the facility is chlorinating intermittently. The permit requires the permittee to provide a monthly report on the "times per day" the permittee is intermittently chlorinating. The permittee is limited to no more than four (4) chlorination cycles per day.
Chlorination Duration
The monitoring for duration of chlorination dose applies only when the facility is chlorinating intermittently. The permit requires the permittee to provide a monthly report on the number of minutes per chlorination cycle the permittee is chlorinating intermittently. The permittee is limited to no more than forty (40) minutes per chlorination cycles.
Total Suspended Solids & Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil & Grease limitations are pollutants of concern under 40 CFR 423. The effluent limitations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Oil and Grease at Outfall 001 have been retained from the previous permit. The TSS limitations are 30 mg/l monthly average and 70 mg/l daily maximum. The Oil & Grease limitations are 10 mg/l monthly average and 15 mg/l daily maximum.
21
Copper
Water quality based effluent limitations (WQBELs) for Copper are more stringent than the TBELs, and therefore are the applicable effluent limitations. These limits are Monthly Average 0.028 mg/l and Daily Maximum 0.056 mg/1. These calculations are based on Wasteload Allocation 002242 completed on December 8th, 2016. The permittee requested and provided justification for a 36-month schedule of compliance for these new limitations, therefore, a schedule of compliance has been included in the final permit.
Mercury
In accordance with the antibacksliding provisions contained in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11), these limits have been retained from the previous permit.
Chloride
Wasteload Allocation 002242, completed on December 8th, 2016 show Chloride has the Reasonable Potential to Exceed (RPE) Preliminary Effluent Limitations (PELs) for chloride. Chloride limits are set to a Monthly Average of 580 mg/l and a Daily Maximum of 1200 mg/l. The permittee requested and provided justification for a 36-month schedule of compliance for these new limitations, therefore, a schedule of compliance has been included in the final permit.
Selenium
Wasteload Allocation 002242, completed on December 8th, 2016 show Selenium has the Reasonable Potential to Exceed (RPE) Preliminary Effluent Limitations (PELs) for Selenium. Selenium limits are set to a Monthly Average of 0.13 mg/l and a Daily Maximum of 0.26 mg/l. The permittee requested and provided justification for a 36-month schedule of compliance for these new limitations, therefore, a schedule of compliance has been included in the final permit.
5.4 W hole Effluent T o xicity Testing (WETT)
The permit does not contain a requirement to conduct Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing (WETT).
5.5 A n tib a ckslid in g
None of the limits included in this permit conflict with antibacksliding regulations found in 327 IAC 5-2-10(11), therefore, backsliding is notan issue.
5.6 A ntidegradation
327 IAC 2-1.3 outlines the state's Antidegradation Standards and Implementation procedures. The Tier 1 antidegradation standard found in 327 IAC 2-1.3-3(a) applies to all surface waters of the state regardless of their existing water quality. Based on this standard, for all surface waters of the state, the existing uses and level of water quality necessary to protect those existing uses shall be maintained and protected. IDEM implements the Tier 1 antidegradation standard by
22
requiring NPDES permits to contain effluent limits and best management practices (BMPs) for regulated pollutants that ensure the narrative and numeric water quality criteria applicable to each of the designated uses are achieved in the water and any designated uses of the downstream water are maintained and protected.
The Tier 2 antidegradation standard found in 327 IAC 2-1.3-3(b) applies to surface waters of the state where the existing quality for a parameter is better than the water quality criterion for that parameter established in 327 IAC 2-1-6 or 327 IAC 2-1.5. These surface waters are considered high quality for the parameter and this high quality shall be maintained and protected unless the commissioner finds that allowing a significant lowering of water quality is necessary and accommodates important social or economic development in the area in which the waters are located. IDEM implements the Tier 2 antidegradation standard for regulated pollutants with numeric water quality criteria quality adopted in or developed pursuant to 327 IAC 2-1-6 or 327 IAC 2-1.5 and utilizes the antidegradation implementation procedures in 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 2 1.3-6.
According to 327 IAC 2-1.3-1 (b), the antidegradation implementation procedures in 327 IAC 2 1.3-5 and 2-1.3-6 apply to a proposed new or increased loading of a regulated pollutant to surface waters of the state from a deliberate activity subject to the Clean Water Act (CWA), including a change in process or operation that will result in a significant lowering of water quality.
This permit includes new permit limitations for Copper, Chloride, and Selenium. In accordance with 327 IAC 2-1.3-1 (b), the new permit limitations are not subject to the Antidegradation Implementation Procedures in 327 IAC 2-1.3-5 and 2-1.3-6 as the new permit limitations are not the result of a deliberate activity taken by the permittee.
The permittee is prohibited from undertaking any deliberate action that would result in a new or increased discharge of a bioaccumulative chemical of concern (BCC) or a new or increased permit limit for a regulated pollutant that is not a BCC unless information is submitted to the commissioner demonstrating that the proposed new or increased discharge will not cause a significant lowering of water quality, or an antidegradation demonstration submitted and approved in accordance 327 IAC 2-1.3.
5.7 Storm W ater
According to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) and 327 IAC 5-4-6(b)(1) facilities classified under Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 4911, are considered to be engaging in "industrial activity" for purposes of 40 CFR 122.26(b). Therefore, the permittee is required to have all storm water discharges associated with industrial activity permitted. Treatment for storm water discharges associated with industrial activities is required to meet, at a minimum, best available technology economically achievable/best conventional pollutant control technology (BAT/BCT) requirements. EPA has determined that non-numeric technology-based effluent limits have been determined to be equal to the best practicable technology (BPT) or BAT/BCT for storm water associated with industrial activity.
Storm water associated with industrial activity must be assessed to determine compliance with all water quality standards. The non-numeric storm water conditions and effluent limits contain
23
the technology-based effluent limitations. Effluent limitations, as defined in the CWA, are restrictions on quantities, rates, and concentrations of constituents which are discharged. Effective implementation of these requirements should meet the applicable water quality based effluent limitations. Violation of any of these effluent limitations constitutes a violation of the permit.
Additionally, IDEM has determined that with the appropriate implementation of the required control measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) found in Part I.D. of the permit, the discharge of storm water associated with industrial activity from this facility will meet applicable water quality standards and will not cause a significant lowering of water quality. Therefore, the storm water discharge is in compliance with Antidegradation Standards and Implementation Procedures found in 327 IAC 2-1.3 and an Antidegradation Demonstration is not required.
The TBELs require the permittee to minimize exposure of raw, final, or waste materials to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. In doing so, the permittee is required, to the extent technologically available and economically achievable, to either locate industrial materials and activities inside or to protect them with storm resistant coverings. In addition, the permittee is required to: (1) use good housekeeping practices to keep exposed areas clean, (2) regularly inspect, test, maintain and repair all industrial equipment and systems to avoid situations that may result in leaks, spills, and other releases of pollutants in storm water discharges, (3) minimize the potential for leaks, spills and other releases that may be exposed to storm water and develop plans for effective response to such spills if or when they occur, (4) stabilize exposed area and contain runoff using structural and/or non-structural control measures to minimize onsite erosion and sedimentation, and the resulting discharge of pollutants, (5) divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain or otherwise reduce storm water runoff, to minimize pollutants in the permitted facility discharges, (6) enclose or cover storage piles of salt or piles containing salt used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces, (7) train all employees who work in areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit (e.g., inspectors, maintenance personnel), including all members of your Pollution Prevention Team, (8) ensure that waste, garbage and floatable debris are not discharged to receiving waters by keeping exposed areas free of such materials or by intercepting them before they are discharged, and (9) minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final or waste materials.
To meet the non-numeric effluent limitations in Part I.D.4, the permit requires the facility to select control measures (including BMPs) to address the selection and design considerations in Part I.D.3.
The permittee must control its discharge as necessary to meet applicable water quality standards. It is expected that compliance with the non-numeric effluent limitations and other terms and conditions in this permit will meet this effluent limitation. However, if at any time the permittee, or IDEM, determines that the discharge causes or contributes to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards, the permittee must take corrective actions, and conduct follow-up monitoring.
24
" Terms and Conditions" to Provide Information in a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Distinct from the effluent limitation provisions in the permit, the permit requires the discharger to prepare a SWPPP for the permitted facility. The SWPPP is intended to document the selection, design, installation, and implementation (including inspection, maintenance, monitoring, and corrective action) of control measures being used to comply with the effluent limits set forth in Part I.D. of the permit. In general, the SWPPP must be kept up-to-date, and modified when necessary, to reflect any changes in control measures that were found to be necessary to meet the effluent limitations in the permit.
The requirement to prepare a SWPPP is not an effluent limitation, rather it documents what practices the discharger is implementing to meet the effluent limitations in Part I.D. of the permit. The SWPPP is not an effluent limitation because it does not restrict quantities, rates, and concentrations of constituents which are discharged. Instead, the requirement to develop a SWPPP is a permit "term or condition" authorized under sections 402(a)(2) and 308 of the Act. Section 402(a)(2) states, "[tjhe Administrator shall prescribe conditions for [NPDES] permits to assure compliance with the requirements of paragraph (1) of this subsection, including conditions on data and information collection, reporting, and such other requirements as he deems appropriate." The SWPPP requirements set forth in this permit are terms or conditions under the CWA because the discharger is documenting information on how it intends to comply with the effluent limitations (and inspection and evaluation requirements) contained elsewhere in the permit. Thus, the requirement to develop a SWPPP and keep it up-to-date is no different than other information collection conditions, as authorized by section 402(a)(2).
It should be noted that EPA has developed a guidance document, "Developing your Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan - A guide for Industrial Operators (EPA 833-B09-002), February 2009, to assist facilities in developing a SWPPP. The guidance contains worksheets, checklists, and model forms that should assist a facility in developing a SWPPP.
Public availability of documents
Part I.E.2.d(2) of the permit requires that the permittee retain a copy of the current SWPPP at the facility and it must be immediately available, at the time of an onsite inspection or upon request, to IDEM. Additionally, interested persons can request a copy of the SWPPP through IDEM. By requiring members of the public to request a copy of the SWPPP through IDEM, the Agency is able to provide the permittees with assurance that any Confidential Business Information contained within the permitted facility's SWPPP is not released to the public.
5.8 W ater Treatm ent A d d itive s
In the event that changes are to be made in the use of water treatment additives that could significantly change the nature of, or increase the discharge concentration of any of the additives contributing to Outfall 001 the permittee shall notify the IDEM as required in Part II.C.1 of the permit. The use of any new or changed water treatment additives/chemicals or dosage rates shall not cause the discharge from any permitted outfall to exhibit chronic or acute toxicity. Acute and chronic aquatic toxicity information must be provided with any notification
25
regarding any new or changed water treatment additives or dosage rates. The following is a list of water treatment additives currently approved for use at the facility:
Chemical Calcium Hypochlorite tablets
Corrshield NT 402 Cortrol OS 5607 Foamtrol AF 1440 Gengard 7044 Gengard 8142 Hypersperse MDC220 Inhibitor AZ 8104 Kermira PIX-111 Klaraid PC 1190 MetClear MR2405 Optisperse HP 2100 Optisperse HP 3100 Optisperse HTP 3001 Potassium Permanganate Scaletrol PDC 9325 Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Hypochlorite Steamate NA 2060
Sulfuric Acid
Puroose/Use Sanitizer
Corrosion Inhibitor Oxygen Scavenger
Antifoam Dispersant Corrosion inhibitor RO Antisealant Water-based corrosion inhibitor Flocculant Coagulant Flocculant Boiler Treatment Boiler Treatment BoilerTreatment
Oxidant Deposit Control pH Adjustment
Disinfectant Steam Condensate Treatment
pH Control
Outfall 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001
6.0 PERMIT DRAFT DISCUSSION
6.1 D ischarge Lim ita tio n s
The proposed final effluent limitations are based on the more stringent of the Indiana WQBELs, TBELS, or approved TMDLs and NPDES regulations as appropriate for each regulated outfall. Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of this document explain the rationale for the effluent limitations at each Outfall.
Outfall 001:
Parameter
Flow Oil and Grease
(O & G) TSS
Aluminum Arsenic Boron
Monthly Average Report
10
30 Report Report Report
Daily Maximum
Report 15
Units
MGD mg/l
Source of limitation
IAC BPJ
Minimum Frequency
Daily 1 X Week
Sample Type
24 Hour Total Grab
70 Report Report Report
mg/l
BPJ
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
j n s i ______ ____ WQBEL
26
1 X Week 1 X Month 1 X Month 2 X Month
Grab 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. Grab
Cadmium T. Chromium Zinc Copper
Interim Final
Metal Cleaning Non-Metal Cleaning Free Cyanide Nickel Mercury
Report Report Report
0,033 0.028
-- Report Report Report
12
Report m.q/l Report mg/l
Report mg/l
0.067 mg/l 0.056 mg/l
1.0
mg/l
Report mg/l
Report mg/l
Report mg/l
20
ng/l
Selenium Interim Final
Silver Sulfate TRC -intermittent
Frequency Duration Duration/Day Temperature Chloride Interim Final Fluoride Alkalinity Sodium
Report 0.13 Report Report --
-- -- -- Report
Report 580
Report Report Report
Report mg/l
0.26
mg/l
Report mg/l
Report mg/l
0.2
mg/l
4 40 120 Report
Times/Day Minutes/Dose Minutes/Day F
Report 1200 Report Report Report
mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l
Lmfl4______
Parameter
Daily Minimum Daily Maximum
Units
pH
6.0
9.0
Std Units
WQBEL TBEL TBEL
WQBEL WQBEL
TBEL TBEL WQBEL WQBEL WQBEL
WQBEL WQBEL WQBEL WQBEL WQBEL
WQBEL WQBEL TBEL WQBEL
WQBEL WQBEL BPJ BPJ BPJ
2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month
2 X Month 2 X Month
1 XDay 2 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Month 1 X Bimonthly
1 X Month 1 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month Daily
Daily Daily Daily 1 X Month
2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month
24 Hr. Comp; 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp,
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp Grab 24 Hr. Comp. Grab
24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. 24 Hr. Comp. Grab Grab
Report Report Report Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
;
Grab
Grab
Source of limitation
IAC
Minimum Frequency 1 x Month
Sample Type Grab
Outfall 004: Must be eliminated by the compliance date in permit unless an alternate compliance date is established in accordance with section I.G. of this permit.
Parameter
Monthly Daily Maximum
Average
Flow
Report
Report
Oil and Grease
10
15
TSS
30
70
Cadmium
--
Report
Copper
--
Report
Selenium
--
Report
Nickel
--
Report
Aluminum
--
Report
Silver
--
Report
Free Cyanide
--
Report
Zinc
--
Report
Arsenic
--
Report
T. Chromium
--
Report
Mercury
--
Report
` Daily during discharge
Units
Source of
limitation
MGD
IAC
mg/l
TBEL
mg/l
TBEL
mg/l________ WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
pg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
TBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
27
Minimum Frequency Daily Daily Daily
*
* * * * * * *
*
*
*
Sample Type
24 Hr. Total
Grab
Grab
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
Grab
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp.
24 Hr. Comp. ,
Grab
Parameter
Daily Minimum
PH ........
6.0
Outfalls 103 and 203:
Daily Maximum 9.0
Units Std Units
Source of limitation
IAC
Minimum Frequency
1 x Day
Sample Type Grab
Parameter
Flow TBODs E. coli TSS
Monthly Average Report Report
125 Report
Parameter TRC
Daily Minimum 0.5
Outfall 005S and 006S:
Daily Maximum
Units
Report 45 235
Report
MGD mg/i cfu/100 ml
j M _______
Source of limitation IAC TBEL WQBEL TBEL
Daily Maximum
Units
-
__ _________
Source of limitation WQBEL
Minimum Frequency 1 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month 2 X Month
Sample Type
24 Hr. Total 24 Hr. Comp. Grab Grab
Minimum Frequency 1 X Month
Sample Type Grab
Parameter Flow
Daily Maximum Report
Units MGD
Source of limitation IAC
pH Oil & Grease
CBODs
COD TSS Total Phosphorus Ammonia (as N) Total Kjeidahl Nitrogen Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen Aluminum Zinc
Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report
Report Report
s.u.
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/i
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
mg/l
WQBEL
j u M _______________ WQBEL
6.2 M onitoring C on ditio ns and R ationale
Minimum Frequency Annually
Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually
Annually Annually
Sample Type
Estimate Total Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Grab Grab
Analytical and sampling methods used shall conform to the version of 40 CFR 136 as referenced in 327 IAC 5-2-13(d)(1).
6.3 S chedule o f C om pliance
The draft permit contains new effluent limits for Chloride, Copper, and Selenium. In accordance with 40 CFR 122.47(a), 40 CFR 123.25(a)(18), and 327 IAC 5-2-12, a schedule of compliance is allowed in a NPDES permit when requested and justified by the permittee, but only when appropriate and when the schedule of compliance requires achievement of compliance "as soon as possible" and meets other specified conditions.
The permittee requested a 36-month compliance schedule from the effective date of the permit, with status reports at 9-month increments, to allow for adequate time to 1) review and analyze
28
potential sources of the three listed pollutants, 2) assess treatment alternatives, and 3) design and construct pollutant control equipment, if necessary. A 36-month schedule of compliance schedule has been included in the final permit.
6.4 Special C onditions and O ther Perm it R equirem ents
6.4.1 Clean W ater A c t S ection 316(b) C oo ling W ater Intake S tructure(s) (CWIS)
Introduction
In accordance with 40 CFR 401.14, the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.
The EPA promulgated a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) regulation on August 15, 2014, that establishes standards for cooling water intake structures. 79 Fed. Reg. 48300-439 (August 15, 2014). The regulation establishes best technology available standards to reduce impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms at existing power generation and manufacturing facilities and it became effective on October 14, 2014.
For permits expiring prior to 45 months from the effective date (before July 2018), the permittee can (1) negotiate an alternative schedule for submitting required information with the Director (IDEM) after demonstrating need, or (2) request waiver(s) for submitting required information. An alternative schedule for submission of information required under the current CWA section 316(b), or waiver(s) of submittal requirements shall be approved by IDEM. Upon approval of such alternative schedules and /or waivers, or until the time the required information/reports are submitted and the permit is renewed or modified following public notice, the IDEM is required to make a BTA determination using Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) to comply with CWA Section 316(b) based on existing information. The BTA determination is subject to change after the required information is submitted in accordance with the federal regulations effective October 14, 2014.
Intake Water Structures Descriptions (121.21(r)(3)):
A.B. Brown Plant cooling water intake provides, approximately 8.7 MGD, through a pumped caisson located approximately 1.5 miles away from the plant on the bank of the Ohio River. The caisson system includes three pumps that withdraw water through two wedge wire screen with 0.125-inch slots. The screens are positioned 102 ft. offshore at a mean depth of 22 ft. below the water surface. Each pump is capable of 3,300 gpm at 176 ft. of head and each screen is capable of passing 14,000 gpm at 0.5 ft/sec through-slot velocity. It takes two pumps to run both units and there are two screens that each pass 3,300 gpm, which calculated to a throughslot velocity of 0.12 ft/s. The screens are back flushed with compressed air as necessary to clear debris.
The cooling water intake is in operation throughout the year. The operated time of each electric generating unit varies throughout the year and from year to year. During the last five years,
29
ABB Unit 1 has averaged 61.17% capacity factor while ABB Unit 2 averaged 57.55%. The average station capacity factor for 2011 through 2015 was 59.36%. Both units were simultaneously off-line an average of 4 days per year (2011 = 1 day, 2012 = 0 days, 2013 =3 days, 2014 = 2 days, and 2015 = 12 days). In 2015, ABB Unit 1 average withdrawal from the river was 2200 gpm and ABB Unit 2 was 1700 gpm.
Conclusion
A copy of the A.B. Brown Generating Station permit renewal application was sent to U.S. Fish and Wildlife on May 12, 2016. No comments were received. IDEM has made a Best Technology Available (BTA) determination that the existing cooling water intake structure represent best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impact in accordance with Section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. section 1326) at this time based on the following information:
1. Actual Intake flow is 9.1 MGD due to use of cooling towers. That 9.1 MGD is significantly less than 5% of the mean annual flow of the source water body.
2. This facility's CWIS uses a wedge wire screen with 0.125 slot openings and a through slot velocity < 0.5 ft/s. Based upon studies conducted for the development of the categorical 316(b) regulations, maintaining velocities below 0.5 ft/s allows most aquatic life to avoid impingement upon the intake structure(s).
Permit Conditions
In accordance with the recently promulgated rules at 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 125, the owner or operator of a facility that has CWIS with a Design Intake Flow (DIF) > 2 MGD and an Actual Intake Flow (AIF) < 125 MGD must submit the information required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (6) and (8), including ail of the associated supporting documentation and/or studies. Studies defined at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(7) are also required when applicable. In addition, the permittee shall comply with requirements below:
1. In accordance with 40 CFR 125.98(b)(1), nothing in this permit authorizes take for the purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
2. At all times properly operate and maintain the intake equipment and incorporate management practices and operational measures necessary to ensure proper operation of the CWIS..
3. Inform IDEM of any proposed changes to the CWIS or proposed changes to operations at the facility that affect the information taken into account in the current BTA evaluation.
4. There shall be no discharge of debris from intake screen washing which will settle to form objectionable deposits which are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious, or which will produce colors or odors constituting a nuisance.
5. All required reports shall be submitted to the IDEM, Office of Water Quality, NPDES Permits Branch.
6. Submit the information required to be considered by the Director per 40 CFR 125.98
30
to assist IDEM with the fact sheet or statement of basis for entrainment BTA, as soon as practicable, but no later than with the application for the next permit renewal,
7. During the next permit period, monitor the intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal. As part of the current permit renewal application the permittee submitted information as required at 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(2) through (r)(5) and (r)(8). This information must be resubmitted as part of the next permit renewal application. Information to address 40 CFR 122.21 (r)(6) and (r)(7) was not submitted because the facility has cooling towers, which meet the requirement for Best Available Technology.
6.4.2 P olychlorinated B iphenyl (PCB)
There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) compounds attributable to facility operations such as those historically used in transformer fluids. In order to determine compliance with the PCB discharge prohibition, the permittee shall provide the following PCB data with the next NPDES permit renewal application for at least one sample taken from each final outfall. The corresponding facility water intakes shall be monitored at the same time as the final outfalls.
Pollutant________ Test Method
PCBs*
EPA 608
LOP_______ LOQ 0.1 ug/L 0.3 ug/L
*PCB 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, 1016
6.5 S pill Response and R eporting R equirem ent
Reporting requirements associated with the Spill Reporting, Containment, and Response requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 are included in Part II.B.2.(d), Part ll,B.3.(c), and Part II.C.3. of the NPDES permit. Spills from the permitted facility meeting the definition of a spill under 327 IAC 2-6.1-4(15), the applicability requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1-1, and the Reportable Spills requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1-5 (other than those meeting an exclusion under 327 IAC 2-6.1-3 or the criteria outlined below) are subject to the Reporting Responsibilities of 327 IAC 2-6.1-7.
It should be noted that the reporting requirements of 327 IAC 2-6.1 do not apply to those discharges or exceedances that are under the jurisdiction of an applicable permit when the substance in question is covered by the permit and death or acute injury or illness to animals or humans does not occur. In order for a discharge or exceedance to be under the jurisdiction of this NPDES permit, the substance in question (a) must have been discharged in the normal course of operation from an outfall listed in this permit, and (b) must have been discharged from an outfall for which the permittee has authorization to discharge that substance.
31
6.6 Perm it P roce ssing /P u blic C om m ent
Pursuant to 1C 13-15-5-1, IDEM will publish a general notice in the newspaper with the largest general circulation within the above county. A 30-day comment period is available in order to solicit input from interested parties, including the general public. Comments concerning the draft permit should be submitted in accordance with the procedure outlined in the enclosed public notice form.
6.7 Post P ublic N otice A ddendum
The draft NPDES permit for the SIGECO A.B. Brown Generating Station was made available for public comment from December 29, 2016 through January 30, 2017 as part of Public Notice No. 2016-12C-RD. During this comment period, a comment letter dated January 27, 2017, from Angie Casbon-Scheller with Vectren Corporation, was received. Also, a letter dated January 30, 2017 from Tony Mendoza with Sierra Club was received. The comments submitted by each party, and this Office's corresponding responses are summarized below: Any changes to the permit and/or fact sheet are so noted below.
Comments from Vectren:
Comment 1: Part I.A. 1,Table 1(page 2 of 56) -The limit of 1.0 mg/L does not retain the prior permit limit and does not agree with the Fact Sheet. Page 25 of the Fact Sheet states "report only" and is further supported on page 18 of the Fact Sheet by the statement "Iron limitations have been retained from the previous permit." The monthly average for iron metal cleaning should be report only, not 1.0 mg/L.
Response T. This typo has been corrected.
Comment 2: Part I.A.1 .Table 1(page 2 of 56) - Copper and Iron Metal Cleaning parameters each contain a reference to footnote 16, which discusses net limitations, yet footnote 16 is not included. The footnote language as contained in the previous permit should be restored. We have always had net limits, so not having them would be a significant change. To restore the footnote language, and account for the background sample collection timing adjustment made during the current permit term in a letter from IDEM dated May 28, 2014, we would request that DEM add the following footnote [16] language, "Net limits may apply. Net limitations are to be calculated by subtracting the measured background levels of these parameters in the ash pond from the actual measured concentration of these parameters when limitations apply. These background levels are to be calculated by monitoring the ash pond effluent concentrations of Iron and Copper over a period of time, to consist of a minimum of ten samples taken over a minimum of thirty (30) days when there is no discharge of metal cleaning wastes during a period that is at least 30 days but not to exceed 90 days preceding each discharge of metal cleaning wastes. The background levels demonstrated by this monitoring, along with supporting data are to be submitted with monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) when reporting discharge of metal cleaning wastes."
32
Response 2: The requirement for net limits for iron has been added back into the permit, A compliance schedule to meet the water quality based effluent limits for copper has been added to the permit.
Comment 3: Part I.A.1 .Table 1(pages 2-3 of 56) - Strike TRO from the list of parameters, strike the term "bromination" from the "Chlorination/Bromination" parameter, and strike the TRC- continuous parameter. The facility does not use bromine, therefore references to it and the TRO parameter are not applicable. The facility uses Sodium Hypochlorite (bleach) in the cooling towers for controlling biological growth, and it is only fed on an intermittent basis.
Response 3: TRO has been removed from the list of parameters as the facility does not use bromine.
Comment 4: Part I.A.1, Footnote [8] (page 4 of 56) - Strike this footnote since bromine is not used, thereby rendering the TRO parameter not applicable.
Response 4: This footnote has been removed.
Comment 5: Part I.A.1, Footnote [11] (page 4 of 56) - The outfall and therefore the flow measuring device is located in the middle of a rail spur that is owned by a neighboring company. The A.B. Brown personnel have to coordinate with the train schedule for the neighboring company and a recent change in that company's ownership has led to our outfall access point being blocked more frequently and causing delays to move the rail cars. In addition, the A.B. Brown facility has varying staffing levels throughout the week which can make getting to the outfall that much more challenging on certain days. We would request that IDEM restore the language from the current permit (effective date October 1, 2011), so the footnote will read; [11] The weekly volume of discharged water will be collected using a flow meter totalizer and the weekly flow volume will be used to calculate the daily average which will be reported to IDEM,
Response 5: This language has been restored.
Comment 6; Part I.A.1,Footnote [12] (page 5 of 56) - Strike the terms "bromination" and "brominating" because bromine is not used at the facility.
Response 6: Reference to bromination has been removed.
Comment 7; Part I.A.2, Footnote [8] (page 7 of 56) - Outfall 004 only discharges during significant rainfall events and is not dependent on the Coal Pile / South Side Runoff Pond discharging to the ash pond. Modify this footnote to read, "Daily when the ash pond is discharging to Outfall 004."
Response 7; This clarification has been made.
Comment 8; Part I.A.2, Footnote [9) (page 7 of 56) - Remove "Cooling Tower Blowdown" from this footnote. The cooling tower blowdown water does not discharge to the ash
33
pond. [9] Outfall 004 is the emergency overflow from the Ash Pond. The discharge is limited to Coeling-Towe rB lowdown, Coal Pile Runoff, Metal Cleaning Waste, Low Volume Waste, and storm water.
Response 8: Reference to Cooling Tower Blowdown has been removed.
Comment 9: Part I.A.4 (page 10 of 56) - "Unnamed tributaries to" was removed from the description of where samples are to be collected. We would request that you restore the previous language, which will make this section match the Fact Sheet and the prior permit. The fourth sentence of the opening paragraph, just prior to the DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS table, should read, "Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements below shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge but prior to entry into unnamed tributaries to the Ohio River."
Response 9: This change has been made.
Comment 10: Part I.D.7 (page 25 of 56) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 14 days is too restrictive. As a result, we are requesting to revise the corrective action deadlines to a more reasonable timeline, which will allow for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution. The facility operates under a comprehensive Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, which facilitates sound management practices.
Response 10: This change has been made.
Comment 11: Part I.D.8 (page 25 of 56) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 24 hours is too restrictive. As a result, we are requesting to revise the corrective action deadlines to a more reasonable timeline, which will allow for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution. The facility operates under a comprehensive Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, which facilitates sound management practices.
Response 11: This change has been made.
Comment 12: Part I.D.8 (page 26 of 56) - While we acknowledge 120 days, as allowed in the currently effective permit, may be excessive under the guidelines of the 2015 MSGP, we feel 14 days is too restrictive. As a result we are requesting 45 days for the corrective action deadlines, which are reasonable for appropriate research and planning to select the most effective and economic solution.
Response 12: This change has been made.
Comment 13: Part I.D.9.e.i (page 30 of 56) - We would request that you add an exception to taking a substitute sample when adverse weather conditions prevent the collection of a sample during a quarter. Depending on weather conditions, such as drought, inadequate rainfall quantities, and rain events that occur too close in succession,
34
requiring a substitute sample could result in sampling events that are close enough together that the conditions have not varied, and/or result in falling into a continuous substitute sampling routine. The facility is currently only required to collect an annual sample, so the collection of quarterly visual samples is a significant increase in the level of water quality monitoring, even with adding the suggested exception.
Response 13: This change has been made.
Comment 14: Part I.F.3 (page 36 of 56) - Revise the language to add clarity. `This permit may be modified or alternately revoked and reissued after public notice and opportunity for rehearing, to comply with any applicable final agency standards, regulations ..."
Response 14: This clarification has been made.
Comment 15: Part I.F.4 (page 37 of 56) - Revise the language to add clarity that the alternate applicability date for transport waters allows up to December 31,2023. "The permittee may submit an implementation schedule and justification for an alternate applicability date for the ELG BAT limits under 423.13 (h)(1)(i) and (k)(1)(i) for fly ash and bottom ash transport waters no later than twelve months..."
Response 15: This clarification has been made.
Comment 16: Part I.F.4 (page 37 of 56) - Add new subsection "e. A public announcement for coal unit retirement no later than December 31,2023."
Response 16: This new section has been added.
Comment 17: Part I.F.6 (pages 37-38 of 56) - Revise language to reflect the new subsection e requested in the preceding comment and to clarify. "If within 12 months from the effective date of this permit the permittee doesn't notify IDEM of its intent to permanently retire the coal units at the facility no-later than December 34,2023 pursuant to subsection l.4.e of this permit, this permit may be modified..."
Response 17: This clarification has been made.
Comment 18: Part V.B.7 (page 56 of 56) - We would request that you replace "measure" with "approximate" to clarify how this information is determined and when it is reported, and establish that the data shall be collected for a period of one year, and not the entirely of the permit. This section should now read: "During the next permit period, monitor the actual intake flows at a minimum frequency of daily for one continuous year. The permittee may be-use engineering calculations, such as pump capacity, to measure approximate intake flow. The daily intake flow information shall be submitted with the application for the next permit renewal."
Response 18: This clarification has been made.
Comment 19: Fact Sheet, Section 2.2 (page 6), Facility Description Outfall Locations - Outfall
35
001 Flow Summary language should be modified as follows, "...treatment system #1,fly ash transport water, bottom ash transport water, ash pond wastewater, treatment system #2, periodic metal cleaning wastewaters,..."
Response 19: This clarification has been made.
Comment 20: Fact Sheet, Section 2.2 (page 6), Facility Description Outfall Locations - Outfalls 005S and 006S Avg. Flow (MGD) should be changed to variable because these are storm water flows, which can vary greatly depending on a variety of conditions. As currently listed in the draft permit, these values could be incorrectly interpreted as daily volumes.
Response 20: Variable has been added.
Comment 21: Fact Sheet, Section 2.3 (page 8) - Ash Pond Wastewater: The description has been corrected to clarify the waters which enter the ash pond and to add language about a recently installed storm water bypass line that was installed as a result of decommissioning the upper dam to meet CCR obligations.
Response; 21: This description has been clarified.
Comment 22: Fact Sheet, Section 2.3 (page 8) - Treatment System #2: We would request that you remove the last three sentences as this language has now been incorporated into the Ash Pond Wastewater description.
Response 22: This description has been clarified.
Comment 23; Fact Sheet, Section 2.3, Figure 2 (page 10) - An updated Flow (Water Balance) Diagram to more accurately reflect the information throughout the permit is provided with these comments. See Attachment A.
Response 23; An updated Water Balance has been added to the Fact Sheet as Figure 4.
Comment 24: Fact Sheet, Section 5.2 (15) - Revise language to reflect current information. An official announcement of retirement would not occur until a formal filing with the IURC. "IDEM has determined that there is a need to establish internal monitoring stations to determine compliance with the TBELs.
Response 24: The language has been revised.
Comment 25: Fact Sheet, Section 5.2 (page 18) - We would request that you remove the reference to Outfall 004 because the parameters discussed are not applicable to Outfall 004, and restore a separate section for Outfall 004 as listed in the current permit (effective date October 1,2011) that contains the applicable language for Total Suspended Solids and Oil & Grease.
Response 25: Reference to Outfall 004 has been removed.
36
Comment 26: Fact Sheet, Section 5.3 Outfall 001 Temperature (page 19) - Remove the statement "Effluent Limitations for temperature are based on 327 AC 2-1 -6(b)." The facility does not have temperature limits and temperature data is submitted as report only.
Response 26: This statement has been removed.
Comment 27: Fact Sheet, Section 5.3 Outfall 001 Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)-Continuous (page 19-20)- remove this section because the facility does not use a continuous chlorine feed.
Response 27: This section has been removed.
Comment 28: Fact Sheet, Section 5.3 Outfall 001 Total Residual Oxidants (TRO) (page 20) Remove this section because the facility does not use bromine.
Response 28: This section has been removed.
Comment 29: Fact Sheet, Section 5.3 Outfall 001 Chlorination / Bromination (page 20) Remove all references to bromination and brominating because the facility does not use bromine.
Response 29: References to bromine has been removed.
Comment 30: Fact Sheet, Section 6.1 Outfall 004 (page 26) - Revise table header to be consistent with other sections. "Outfall 004: Must be eliminated by the compliance date in the permit unless an alternate compliance date is established in accordance with section I.G. of this permit."
Response 30: Table header has been revised.
Comment 31: Fact Sheet, Section 6.1 Outfall 004 (page 26) - Sampling minimum frequency should be daily during discharge for all parameters. Remove the notation, "*Daily when the Coal Pile/South Side Run Off Pond Discharges to the Ash Pond" from the bottom of the table.
Response 31; This clarification has been made.
Comment 32: Fact Sheet, 6.4.1 (page 29)- And finally, we would request that you replace "measure" with "approximate" to clarify how this information is determined and when it is reported, and establish that the data shall be collected for a period of one year, and not the entirely of the permit.
Response 32: This clarification has been made.
37
Comments from Sierra Club - Tony Mendoza and Casey Roberts Including Exhibit 1 to Sierra Club Comments on the Draft A.B. Brown NPDES Permit:
Comment 1: Specifically, IDEM's finding that the A.B, Brown plant does not discharge flue gas desulfurization ("FGD") wastewaters within the meaning of the Effluent Limitations Guidelines ("ELGs")1 is incorrect and must be revisited.
... the A.B. Brown plant discharges wastewater that "comes into contact with...the FGD solids1' and that are best described as "FGD solids wash water," which is explicitly included in such definition.3 Because no exemption to this broad definition applies and because A.B. Brown discharges this wastewater to the Ohio River, IDEM must revise the Draft Permit before re-issuance to require compliance with the ELGs discharge limitations for FGD wastewaters.
Nor can the belt filter wash water be deemed "cleaning FGD solids dewatering equipment" within the meaning of the ELGs rule's definition for two reasons. First, as Dr. Sahu concludes, the belt filter washwater is not used for "cleaning FGD solids dewatering equipment" because cleaning typically is a periodic or intermittent process as opposed to a continuous one. In general, equipment is used for its intended purpose for the majority of the time and occasionally, when its performance degrades below acceptable metrics, it is cleaned. Thus, cleaning is inherently an intermittent or occasional activity, interspersed by much longer time intervals when the equipment in question is in use and not being cleaned.19
Flere, it appears that large amounts of water are used continuously-- for washing FGD solids off the belt to allow the process to continue. The use of these waters is therefore not to clean the belt but instead is part of the treatment process itself. Second, as Dr. Sahu notes, there is a canon of regulatory interpretation that holds that an exemption should be narrowly interpreted to reduce the effect of a general prohibition.20
Response 1: IDEM does not agree that the A.B. Brown plant wastewater that comes into contact with the FGD solids is "FGD solids wash water".
The FGD wastewaters at A.B. Brown are generated from the washwater used to spray off the belt filter press as well as the wastewater collected in the filter cake truck loading bays. The EPA definition of FGD wastewater specifically excludes wastewater generated from cleaning the FGD solids dewatering equipment or that is collected in the floor drains in the FGD process area.
As stated in the Fact Sheet with the Public Noticed Draft permit - the FGD wastewaters at A.B. Brown are therefore not considered FGD wastewater subject to ELG limitations in the rule.
Given that the wash waters are used for cleaning the belt filter press and that there is no distinction in the rule for `continuous cleaning' vs. `batch' cleaning, IDEM also does not agree with the arguments raised by Sierra Club that the wastewaters are subject to ELG limitations simply because they are continuously
38
cleaning the belt filter press. IDEM's above conclusions are further supported by the USEPA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating
P oint Source C ategory: EP A s R esponse to P u blic Com m ents - P art 3 o f 10, Page 3-580. In that Response to Comments, EPA stated that "the dual alkali FGD scrubber at A. B. Brown Station would not be subject to the final FGD limitations(as the final FGD only apply if the unit discharges FGD wastewater as defined by the rule) Comment 2: IDEM must revisit, revise, and re-issue the Draft Permit for public comment before issuing it in its final form. In applying the ELGs rule to any facility, IDEM is required to make its own independent judgment regarding any dispute as to the applicability of these standards and explain its rationale. In the proposed A.B. Brown permitting action, IDEM has failed to make such independent judgment. Response !: The Fact Sheet clearly states that the wastewaters collected in the scrubber sumps and belt filter wash are not considered FGD wastewater. IDEM is making no change to this conclusion and therefore does not need to revisit, revise or re issue the Draft Permit.
39
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PUBLIC NOTICE NO: 2 0 1 7 - 2 B - F DATE OF NOTICE; FEBRUARY 28. 2017 The Office of Water Quality issues the following NPDES FINAL PERMIT.
MAJOR - RENEWAL
SIGECO A.B. BROWN GENERATING STATION, Permit No. IN0052191, VANDERBURGH COUNTY, Evansville, IN.
This major industrial facility discharges 1.6 million gallons daily o f storm water, sanitary & process wastewater into the Ohio River. Permit Manager: Nicole Gardner, ngardner@idem.in.gov or 317/232-8707.
Notice of Right to Administrative Review fPermits]
If you wish to challenge this Permit, you must file a Petition for Administrative Review with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA), and serve a copy of the Petition upon IDEM. The requirements for filing a Petition for Administrative Review are found in 1C 4-21.5-3-7, IC 13-15-6-1 and 315 IAC 1-3-2. A summary of the requirements of these laws is provided below.
A Petition for Administrative Review must be filed with the Office of Environmental Adjudication (OEA) within fifteen (15) days of the issuance of this notice (eighteen (18) days if you received this notice by U.S. Mail), and a copy must be served upon IDEM. Addresses are:
Director Office of Environmental Adjudication Indiana Government Center North Room 501 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North Room 1301 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
The Petition must contain the following information:
1. The name, address and telephone number of each petitioner. 2. A description of each petitioner's interest in the Permit. 3. A statement of facts demonstrating that each petitioner is:
a. a person to whom the order is directed; b. aggrieved or adversely affected by the Permit; or c. entitled to administrative review under any law. 4. The reasons for the request for administrative review. 5. The particular legal issues proposed for review. 6. The alleged environmental concerns or technical deficiencies of the Permit. 7. The Permit terms and conditions that the petitioner believes would be appropriate and would comply with the law. 8. The identity of any persons represented by the petitioner. 9. The identity of the person against whom administrative review is sought. 10. A copy of the Permit that is the basis of the petition. 11. A statement identifying petitioner's attorney or other representative, if any.
Failure to meet the requirements of the law with respect to a Petition for Administrative Review may result in a waiver of your right to seek administrative review of the Permit. Examples are:
1. Failure to file a Petition by the applicable deadline; 2. Failure to serve a copy of the Petition upon IDEM when it is filed; or 3. Failure to include the information required by law.
If you seek to have a Permit stayed during the Administrative Review, you may need to file a Petition for a Stay of Effectiveness. The specific requirements for such a Petition can be found in 315 IAC 1-3-2 and 315 IAC 1-3-2.1. Pursuant to IC 4-21.5-3-17, OEA will provide all parties with Notice of any pre-hearing conferences, preliminary hearings, hearings, stays, or orders disposing of the review of this action. If you are entitled to Notice under IC 4-21,5-3-5{b) and would like 'a obtain notices of any pre-hearing conferences, preliminary hearings, hearings, stays, or orders disposing of the review of this action without intervening in the proceeding you must submit a written request to OEA at the address above. If you have procedural or scheduling questions regarding your Petition for Administrative Review you may contact the Office of Environmental Adjudication at (317) 232-8591 or see OEA's website at http://www.in.gov/oea.
APPENDIX B
S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In the matter of the application o f
)
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY
)
for authority to increase its rates for
)
the generation and distribution of
)
electricity and for other relief.
)
____________________________________)
Case No. U-l 8322
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF
HEATHER A. BREINING ON BEHALF OF
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY
March 2017
1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A.
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Please state your name and business address. My name is Heather A. Breining and my business address is 1945 West Pamall Road, Jackson, Michigan 49201. By whom are you employed and in what capacity? I am employed by Consumers Energy Company ("Consumers Energy" or the "Company") as a Senior Engineering Technical Analyst II. I assumed this position as of June 1, 2013. Please describe your educational background and experience. In 2001 I earned a Bachelor degree in Mathematics with a minor in Physics from Spring Arbor University. I have been employed by Consumers Energy for 15 years in various areas including Environmental Services, Transaction Strategies, and Resource Planning. What are your responsibilities as a Senior Engineering Technical Analyst II? I am responsible for evaluating and analyzing potential compliance options with environmental regulations and/or legislation and assuring that Consumers Energy's capital expenditures for environmental compliance are technically sound, economic, and complement the broader corporate strategy related to delivering safe, reliable, and reasonably priced energy. In addition, I am responsible for managing the Company's emission allowance portfolio as well as providing the necessary environmental documentation to support both Power Supply Cost Recovery and Electric Rate Case proceedings. Have you previously testified before the Michigan Public Service Commission ("MPSC" or the "Commission")? Yes. I testified in the 2016 electric rate case, Case No. U-17990.
te0317-hab
1 Q.
2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 Q.
12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 Q.
22 A.
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
What is the purpose of your testimony?
The purpose of my testimony is to describe the environmental regulations with which the
Company's electric generating fleet must comply, the cost of compliance with those
regulations, as well as the timing and the justification for the investments made to ensure
regulatory compliance. My testimony and exhibits support Company witness
Danielle M. Hill's Exhibit A-61 (DMH-4). The rationale and description of expenditures
related to Resource Conservation Recovery Act ("RCRA"), Steam Electric Effluent
Guidelines ("SEEG") compliance, and for studies that are necessary in order to ensure
compliance with Clean Water Act ("CWA") Section 316(b) will be addressed in my
testimony.
Are you sponsoring exhibits with your testimony?
Yes, I am sponsoring the following exhibits:
Exhibit A-38 (HAB-1)
Air Quality Compliance Costs & Schedule;
Exhibit A-39 (HAB-2)
Coal Combustion Residuals Compliance Costs & Schedule;
Exhibit A-40 (HAB-3)
Water Quality Compliance Costs & Schedule;
Exhibit A-41 (HAB-4)
Confidential - Coal Combustion Residuals Supporting Documentation; and
Exhibit A-42 (HAB-5)
Confidential - Water Quality Compliance Supporting Documentation.
Were these exhibits prepared by you or under your direction?
Yes.
te0317-hab
2
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Q. Can you please list the environmental regulations with which Consumers Energy is
required to comply and that are relevant to expenditures for which the Company is
seeking recovery in this case?
A. Yes. The Company's fossil-fueled Electric Generating Units ("EGUs") are subject to
numerous, complex, and overlapping air regulations intended to reduce the emission of
air contaminants. In addition to air regulations, there are also a number of additional
environmental regulations related to water and waste regulation. The Company is
seeking recovery of costs incurred for compliance with the following regulations:
Air Quality Regulations
Regulation
Acronym
a. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
CSAPR
b. Mercury Air Toxics Standards
MATS
c. Michigan Mercury Rule
MMR
Compliance is 2016 with a one-year extension
Controlled Pollutant
NOx, S 0 2 Hg, PM, Acid Gases, Metals
Hg
Compliance Date 2015
2015*
2015*
Water Quality Regulations
Regulation
f. Clean Water Act 316(b) Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines
Acronym
316(b) SEEG
Controlled Pollutant Fish Protection Effluent
Compliance Date
2018-2021 2018-2023
Coal Combustion Residuals fWaste) Regulations
Regulation
Acronym
h. Resource Conservation Recovery Act RCRA
Controlled Pollutant
Coal Combustion By-Product
Compliance Date
2018
te0317-hab
3
1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Environmental Regulations - Air Quality Can you please describe the Cross State Air Pollution Rule ("CSAPR")? CSAPR is a cap and trade rule much like the Clean Air Interstate Rule. CSAPR governs the emission of sulfur dioxide ("SO2 ") and nitrogen oxides ("NOx") from fossil-fueled EGUs through the use of an allowance based "cap and trade" program except that it restricts interstate trading for use only for addressing relatively small changes in year-toyear emissions variability. Under this program, NOx is regulated on both an annual basis and during the ozone season (May through September). Each allowance (annual or ozone) permits the emission of one ton of NOx, with the emissions cap and number of allocated allowances decreasing over time. SO2 is regulated on an annual basis only, with the emissions cap decreasing over time. Phase I was effective from January 1,2015 through December 31, 2016 and Phase II became effective on January 1, 2017. Can you please describe the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards ("MATS")? MATS is a federal rule that was finalized by the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") in December 2011 and regulates emissions of mercury, acid gases, certain metals, and organic constituents via emission rate limits or the use of work practices for coal- and oil-fired EGUs. Unlike prior regulations allowing allowance purchases or emission averaging over multiple units, MATS requires unit-by-unit control equipment. Compliance with MATS was required by April 16, 2015; however, the Company received an extension from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality ("MDEQ") which pushed compliance to April 16, 2016. Consumers Energy has five coal-fired units and two oil-fired units subject to MATS.
te0317-hab
4
1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Can you please describe the Michigan Mercury Rule ("MMR")? The purpose of the MMR is to regulate the emissions of mercury in the State of Michigan. Existing coal-fired EGUs must choose one of three methods to comply with the emission limits and any new EGU will be required to utilize Best Available Control Technology. Initial compliance with MMR was January 1, 2015; however, in response to the Office of Regulatory Reform recommendation A-2, the MDEQ revised the MMR in October of 2013 to align the compliance deadline to the MATS' required compliance date. In addition, the MDEQ issued variances for compliance requirements under MMR and also indicated that construction extensions granted via the MATS process would also cover MMR related requirements. Therefore, the effective date of compliance with MMR was April 16, 2016. Please describe what regulations EGUs face regarding Greenhouse Gases. On October 23, 2015, the EPA published into the Federal Register the finalized Clean Power Plan addressing carbon emissions from EGUs. This was a parallel rulemaking under the Clean Air Act ("CAA") Section 111(d) Existing Source Performance Standards and CAA Section 111(b) New Source Performance Standards ("NSPS"). Legal proceedings have begun as petitions for review challenging the final Section 111(d) rule for existing EGUs have been filed. In addition, motions to stay the rule have been filed by numerous utilities, unions, states (led by West Virginia and Texas), coal interests (led by the National Mining Association), and by business interests (led by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States). On February 9, 2016, the United States Supreme Court acted on the filed motions and issued five orders granting a stay of the Clean Power Plan pending judicial review. The orders indicate that the stay will be in effect through a
te0317-hab
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
determination by the Court to deny any petitions for writs of certiorari that are filed, or after a judgment is issued by the Court if the Court takes the case on certiorari. In addition, the Trump administration has indicated that it intends to re-evaluate the Clean Power Plan.
Consumers Energy cannot predict the outcome of these EPA rules in court or the effect of the new Trump administration on the EPA rules, but will continue to monitor regulatory activity regarding greenhouse gas emissions standards that may affect EGUs. As a result, the Company is not seeking recovery, as a part of this filing, for any expenditure related to greenhouse gas emissions compliance as it currently has none identified for its existing fleet of generating units. Air Quality Compliance Strategy Describe Consumers Energy's historic Air Quality Compliance Strategy ("AQCS"). Cost recovery reflecting the Company's AQCS was approved in the November 19, 2015 Order in electric rate Case No. U-17735. This AQCS has prudently ensured compliance with applicable state and federal environmental regulations. The Company's actions and investments to achieve such compliance have been performed in a manner which has minimized, to the extent reasonably possible, the associated costs for customers. The investments made to ensure environmental compliance have allowed the continued operation of Michigan-based coal generation, thus helping preserve the fuel diversity necessary to protect customers from significant fuel price fluctuations and helped ensure continued supply reliability for the Company's customers and the State of Michigan.
Ie0317-hab
6
1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
What capital investments are the Company seeking recovery of in this case that are specifically related to air quality control? As shown in Exhibit A-38 (HAB-1), the Company has nearly completed the installation of the entire suite of AQCS projects. The Company is seeking recovery in this proceeding for the remaining project close-out costs associated with the installation of Pulse Jet Fabric Filter at J.H. Campbell Unit 1 for compliance with MATS, MMR, and CSAPR. Environmental Regulations and Compliance Strategy - Waste Can you please describe the relevant parts of the RCRA as related to Coal Combustion Residual ("CCR") management? On April 17, 2015, the EPA published 40 CFR Parts 257 and 261, Disposal of CCRs from Electric Utilities, in the Federal Register under Subtitle D of the RCRA. The new rules establish minimum national criteria for purposes of determining which CCR solid waste disposal facilities and solid waste management practices pose a reasonable probability of adverse effect on health or the environment under RCRA. The rule is considered self-implementing, meaning that affected facilities must certify compliance with the published standards and schedules despite existing state rules or adaptation of state rules to encompass new standards. By codifying standards under Subtitle D, Owners and Operators are not required to obtain permits and states are not required to adopt and implement the new rules. Instead, the rules' only enforcement mechanism is for a state or citizen group to bring a RCRA citizen suit in federal district court against any facility that is alleged to be in noncompliance with the newly promulgated minimum standards. In December 2016, the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act
te0317-hab
7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
("WIIN") was passed. This bill provides authority for state implementation of coal ash management through a state permit program in lieu of the current enforcement of the CCR Rule through the RCRA Citizen Suit Authority. States may elect to submit a CCR permit program to the EPA for approval and the EPA must either approve the permit program or enforce their own. In the interim the EPA has direct enforcement authority of the RCRA CCR rule in addition to states and citizens. How does Consumers Energy intend to comply with management of CCRs under the RCRA? The current strategy is to implement the bulk of these requirements by the end of 2019 to comply with RCRA deadlines.
At J.H. Campbell and D.E. Karn, the bottom ash ponds will cease accepting CCR by 2018. Consumers Energy has elected to replace the unlined bottom ash ponds with more protective concrete tanks by the end of 2017 and will continue wet sluicing bottom ash to these tanks. Due to the cessation of electric generating operation at J.C. Weadock, B.C. Cobb, and J.R. Whiting, bottom ash pond closures at those facilities will also begin in 2017 as these impoundments are no longer receiving bottom ash.
The D.E. Kam landfill has commenced closure, and closure activities will continue at a rate that allows for placement of CCR in the final cover system to adequately construct the final cover. The J.C. Weadock landfill will continue to operate for the life of the D.E. Karn facility. As a result of RCRA, beginning in 2015, and continuing through 2016, efforts commenced to remove water conveyances from the landfill, followed by grading to promote drainage to ditches. This work included modifying the existing outlet structure and systematically draining ponded water out of
te0317-hab
8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
low areas. The modifications of the existing outlet structure allow for gravity drainage of the interior of the disposal area thus minimizing groundwater infiltration to the landfill. In 2018 the installation of a soil-bentonite slurry wall at the Weadock landfill is planned to fully enclose the perimeter dike. Completing the construction of the slurry wall eliminates the passive "vent" to the discharge channel and provides encapsulation of CCR materials as well as controls for potential sources of groundwater impacts. What capital investments are Consumers Energy seeking recovery of in this case that are specifically related to RCRA compliance? As shown on Exhibit A-39 (HAB-2), Consumers Energy is seeking recovery during the test year in this proceeding for the construction of the bottom ash concrete tanks. The installation of the concrete tanks assures that the Company will be able to continue wet sluicing bottom ash, and thus not require any major operational changes to the generating units. The Company will also be completing the slurry wall at the J.C. Weadock site during the test year for this case, the costs for which the Company is also seeking recovery. Are there potentially less-costly alternatives for the Company's RCRA compliance strategy? Potentially, yes. The passage of the WIIN Act in late December 2016, and subsequent Company discussions with MDEQ in January and February of 2017, together provide a likelihood that the State of Michigan will have a permitting program for CCR by 2019. This state permitting program provides permit protection for the applicant which reduces the potential liability associated with defending a third party lawsuit under the Federal CCR program. This new state permit possibility has allowed us to consider less robust
te0317-hab
9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
and thus less expensive alternative compliance plans. As a result, at the DE Kam site we are exploring the potential for a double-lined bottom-ash surface-impoundment, under a possible early retirement scenario. The referenced lower-cost alternative is only potentially feasible for the DE Kam Units 1&2, and would not be feasible for the JH Campbell Units 1&2. Even if economic modeling indicates that JH Campbell Unit 1 and/or Unit 2 should retire earlier than their planned 2030 retirement date, JH Campbell Unit 3 will still be in operation to 2040. Since all three units will have a shared system, and bottom ash tanks are a more robust, longer-term solution, that site will still require the installation of the tanks. What would the cost impact of undertaking the less expensive double-lined bottom-ash surface impoundment alternative, instead of constructing the bottom ash concrete tanks at DE Karn Units 1&2? The capital construction cost for a double-lined impoundment is estimated to be approximately $8 million dollars less than the total capital cost of concrete tanks at the DE Kam Units 1&2. If the decision is made to retire DE Karn Units 1&2 early and switch to the lower cost option for RCRA compliance at these units, then the overall 2017 expenditures would be significantly reduced and dollars would be shifted into 2018. As a result, the test year costs would increase by approximately $5.1 million, while reducing DE Kam's total overall RCRA compliance by approximately S8 million. These preliminary estimates are budgetary in nature due to the early stage of evaluation.
te03!7-hab
10
1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Environmental Regulations and Compliance Strategy - Water Can you please describe the CWA Section 316(b)? On August 15, 2014, the EPA published the final Section 316(b) rule ("Final Rule") in the Federal Register, establishing new standards for Cooling Water Intake Structures ("CWIS"). The Final Rule became effective on October 14, 2014 and requires existing power generation facilities with a design intake flow greater than two million gallons per day ("mgd") from waters of the United States for cooling to reduce impingement and entrainment of fish and other aquatic organisms at CWIS. Additionally, any facility subject to the Final Rule with actual flows in excess of 125 mgd must provide an entrainment study with its National Pollutant Discharge System ("NPDES") permit application. As such, the Final Rule will apply to all of Consumers Energy's base-load generation facilities and require submittal of entrainment studies. Consumers Energy has been conducting the required studies since the Final Rule was finalized. These studies are critical to demonstrating which controls are compliant technology options to protect aquatic life.
The Final Rule establishes national requirements which apply to the location, design, construction, and capacity of CWIS and requires the use of Best Technology Available ("BTA") for minimizing adverse environmental impact. For impingement, the EPA has determined the BTA to be modified traveling screens, with fish return systems. However, six additional alternatives, with equal or better performance, are available for a facility to meet this standard. For entrainment, the EPA did not determine a BTA, because no one technology can be universally employed at all facilities. Rather, entrainment BTA is determined on a site-specific basis by the regulatory agency
te0317-hab
11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
responsible for administering the NPDES program. The site specific controls are justified through a series of prescribed studies, including but not limited to entrainment characterization; technical feasibility and cost evaluation; benefits valuations; non-water quality and other environmental impacts; and peer review. For the J.H. Campbell and D.E. Kam facilities, these prescribed studies are scheduled to be completed during the first quarter of 2017. Several studies must receive peer review, which is scheduled to be completed during the last quarter of 2017. How does Consumers Energy intend to comply with the CWA Section 316(b)? To demonstrate compliance with impingement and entrainment standards, it is projected that D.E. Kam Units 1&2 will require installation of new fine mesh wedge wire screen intakes. D.E. Karn Units 3&4 will require no new controls as their existing cooling towers are sufficient. J.H. Campbell Unit 3 will require no new controls as its existing offshore wedge wire screen intake is sufficient. For J.H. Campbell Units 1&2, preliminary evaluation suggests modifying the deep water intake for J.H. Campbell Unit 3 to accommodate intake for Units 1&2 has the potential for significant cost savings and environmental benefits over installing fine mesh screens at the J.H. Campbell Unit I&2 intake. B.C. Cobb, J.C. Weadock, and J.R. Whiting will be in the decommissioning phase and will not be required to provide additional demonstration studies or modify their cooling water intake structures.
The prescribed studies and associated BTA demonstrations for D.E. Karn and J.H. Campbell were to be submitted to the MDEQ by the NPDES permit application which was due April 4, 2016; however, the Company petitioned and the MDEQ accepted the proposal to submit information by April 1, 2018. The MDEQ's final determination on
te0317-hab
12
1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
BTA is expected in late 2018 or early 2019, with an assumed operational compliance date by year-end 2021. This timeline is dependent on the State's timely issuance of the final NPDES permit, the particular site-specific controls/technologies ultimately determined to be BTA, and the negotiation of appropriate timelines in the NPDES permitting process for the J.H. Campbell and D.E. Karn generating complexes. Are there other water related regulations to which Consumers Energy's facilities are subject? Yes. On November 3, 2015, the EPA published the final Effluent Limitation Guidelines ("ELG") rule for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category (referred to as "SEEG") into the Federal Register. The final SEEG rule establishes effluent limitations based on BTA for existing sources. The final rule excludes oil-fired generation units and units with a nameplate capacity of 50 MW or less. The final rule also establishes NSPS and Pretreatment Standards for Existing and New Sources that discharge to Publically Owned Treatment Works. What BTA technologies have been defined for each waste stream? The final SEEG rule, in addition to already regulating effluent limitations for several waste streams (such as low volume wastewaters), establishes BTA model technologies for the following waste streams:
te0317-hab
13
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Waste Stream
Existing Source BTA Model Technology
FGD Wastewater*
Chemical Precipitation + Biological Treatment
Fly Ash Transport Water*
Dry handling
Bottom Ash Transport Water Dry handling/Closed loop
Combustion Residual
Impoundment (Equal to existing BPT)
Leachate
FGMC Wastewater*
Dry handling
Gasification Wastewater*
Evaporation
Nonchemical Metal Cleaning No technology chosen - BTA for nonchemical metal
Wastes
cleaning wastewater is reserved.
Note: * These waste streams are not generated at the J.H. Campbell or D.E. Kam
facilities.
Existing source BTA effluent limitations for waste streams present at Consumers Energy
facilities are summarized below:
Waste stream Bottom Ash Transport Water
Combustion Residual Leachate Nonchemical Metal Cleaning Wastes
Present At J.H. Campbell D.E. Kam
J.H. Campbell J.H. Campbell D.E. Karn
Existing Source BTA Effluent Limitations
No discharge of pollutants, including if transport water is used in other plant process or is sent to a treatment system. Exception for reuse in FGD scrubber. Low volume, short duration discharges from minor leaks or minor maintenance events is allowed.
TSS Daily Max. = 100 mg/L TSS Monthly Avg. = 30 mg/L
Reserved. No federal limits established. EPA expects the permitting authority to examine the historical permitting record to determine how discharges of this waste stream should be permitted.
Q. What are the applicability dates apply for SEEG?
A. Compliance with new BTA limitations does not apply until a date determined by the
permitting authority that is "as soon as possible" beginning November 1, 2018, but no
later than December 31, 2023. The "as soon as possible" date determined may or may
not be the same for each waste stream. The permitting authority must consider several
factors, including time for the facility to plan changes being made or planned in response
te0317-hab
14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
to other regulations, such as the CCR rule, and other factors as appropriate. The final CCR rule regulates infrastructure also affected by the SEEG rule, specifically bottom ash ponds/impoundments. If unlined impoundments cannot meet certain criteria, facilities are required to cease using them in 2018. The evaluation of a potential double-lined surface impoundment in lieu of a tank mentioned in my RCRA testimony is projected to still comply with these requirements.
In light of the EPA's proposed timing of implementation, Consumers Energy needs to implement SEEG requirements within the next NPDES permit cycle (2016 2021). In order to do so, Consumers Energy was required to describe process water and water management changes in the Company's April 2016 permit reissuance application.
The current SEEG compliance strategy is to plan for full compliance by year-end 2021, which is consistent with a three- to four-year implementation timeline after receipt of the NPDES permit renewals, which is expected in late 2017 or early 2018 for J.H. Campbell and D.E. Karn, Why is Consumers Energy planning for SEEG implementation by year-end 2021 when the finalized SEEG rule allows for a permit writer to establish applicability dates no later than December 31, 2023? An applicability date of December 31, 2023 would be the Company's preferred and optimal path forward, but the Company has determined that the MDEQ is unlikely to grant the Company's request for extension based on recently established applicability dates (December 31, 2021) which the MDEQ established for the DTE Electric Company's Belle River facility. The Company has communicated its desire for an extension to the MDEQ and will continue to pursue such timing in reissued NPDES
te0317-hab
15
1 2 3 4
5
6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15
16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
permits. NPDES permit applications for reissuance were submitted to the MDEQ in April, 2016, with MDEQ review and draft permit issuance anticipated in late-2017; however, the MDEQ has no requirement to respond by a date certain. Until NPDES permit reissuance is finalized, likely in 2018, assuming the MDEQ would establish the latest possible applicability date would be imprudent. The Company is therefore proceeding with a compliance plan which is based on an applicability date of December 31,2021. How does Consumers Energy intend to comply with SEEG? At J.H. Campbell and D.E. Kam, as explained above, the RCRA-CCR rule requires unlined bottom ash ponds not meeting performance standards to cease accepting CCR in 2018. As a result, Consumers Energy has elected to replace the unlined bottom ash ponds with concrete tanks by the end of 2017 and to continue wet sluicing bottom ash to these tanks. Per the SEEG rule, the transport water will need to be managed in a closed loop system and not discharged. A blow-down stream will need to be treated and returned to the closed loop system or disposed of in a terminal process to manage the expected eventual build-up of suspended and dissolved solids. While the concrete tanks will be constructed in 2017, the closed loop systems will likely not be constructed until the 2020-2021 timeframe to accommodate reissuance of NPDES permits as previously mentioned. However, if Consumers Energy determines that it should retire DE Kam Units 1&2 early and employ the lined impoundment option instead of constructing concrete tanks for RCRA compliance, there is the potential we could avoid having to install the closed loop systems with wastewater treatment. Any potential cost savings associated with closed loop systems with wastewater treatment would occur beyond the
te0317-hab
16
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
1
test year of this case. The expenditures within the test year allow for the finalization of
2
the various studies and required reviews necessary for successful NPDES negotiations
3
with the MDEQ, which are necessary regardless of whether or not a decision is made to
4
retire the units early.
5
At J.H. Campbell, low volume wastewaters and other non-bottom ash transport
6
process water streams currently flowing to the bottom ash ponds will be segregated from
7
the bottom ash system, treated in new lined impoundments and oil/water separators (to
8
remove suspended solids and oil and grease). Post treatment, these waste streams will be
9
discharged to the Unit 3 intake canal for subsequent reuse in the cooling water or house
10
service water systems (referred to as a multi-stream reuse system) or potentially used as
II
make up in the Spray Dry Absorber raw water feed system, where it would be consumed
12
entirely, without discharge. Coal pile runoff water currently drains to the bottom ash
13
pond/ditch system. In 2016, coal pile runoff modifications were completed to ensure the
14
discharge quality of this waste stream. Upon approval from the MDEQ, the coal pile
15
runoff water will be retained in an expanded detention basin, and if necessary, receive
16
further treatment to remove total suspended solids and discharged to the Unit 1&2 intake
17
canal for subsequent reuse. No change to the management of combustion residual
18
leachate system is planned.
19
At D.E. Kam, low volume wastewaters and other process water streams currently
20
flowing to the bottom ash pond will be segregated from the bottom ash system, treated in
21
new lined impoundments and oilAvater separators (to remove suspended solids, oil, and
22
grease) and either discharged to the intake canal for subsequent reuse in cooling water or
te0317-hab
17
1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 10
11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
house service water systems (referred to as a multi-stream reuse system) or used for the coal pile dust suppression system.
J.R. Whiting and B.C. Cobb are expected to have industrial storm water (non-contact) runoff discharges only and thus are not anticipated to be affected by SEEG. What capital investments are Consumers Energy seeking recoveries for in this case that is specifically related to Section 316(b) and SEEG compliance? As shown on Exhibit A-40 (HAB-3), Consumers Energy is seeking recovery for expenditures at the J.H. Campbell and D.E. Kam sites that are necessary for compliance with CWA Section 316(b) and SEEG. During the test year, Section 316(b) expenditures are for the completion of the required studies for entrainment and impingement, obtaining peer reviews and compiling the submittal packages for the MDEQ. Beyond the test year, the Company is seeking recovery for the design, engineering, and construction of fine mesh wedge wire screens at the D.E. Karn facility and an alternate intake channel at J.H. Campbell facility.
For SEEG compliance, the Company is seeking recovery for the segregation and management of low volume wastewaters and other non-bottom ash transport process water streams from the bottom ash system. In addition to the water segregation, the Company will be optimizing the performance of the bottom ash tank systems. This includes characterization o f the bottom ash tank recirculation system and treatment of the low volume miscellaneous waste in order to meet the required discharge limits at the outfall. Once the water characterization has been completed, the Company anticipates the commencement of the design and engineering of the wastewater treatment and closed
te0317-hab
18
1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 8 9 A.
10 11 12
13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
loop recirculating systems at both its D.E. Karn and J.H. Campbell facilities. The construction of these systems will occur beyond the test year. In the February 28, 2017 Order in Case No. U-17990 (pages 30-31), the Commission stated that it was not persuaded that Consumers Energy would incur SEEG expenditures in the test year for that case given that the Company had requested the MDEQ for an extension in the SEEG compliance deadline from 2021 to 2023. Given that the Company's request for such an extension remains pending, will the SEEG test year expenditures sponsored by you in this proceeding occur prior to September 30, 2018? Yes. The projected SEEG expenditures in this case have been minimized to the greatest extent possible, without compromising the schedule for SEEG compliance. The test year expenditures allow for the finalization of the various studies and reviews necessary for NPDES negotiations with the MDEQ. It also allows time for the results of the economic modeling associated with the "Medium Four" units to be completed. In the February 28, 2017 Order in Case No. U-17990 (page 31), the Commission cited concern regarding the Company's historical spending on SEEG compliance being less than that which was projected in previous rate case filings. Can you address this issue in the context of the Company's projections for SEEG spending in this proceeding? As stated previously, the projected SEEG expenditures in this case have been minimized to the greatest extent possible, without compromising the schedule for SEEG compliance. The test year expenditures allow for the finalization of the various studies and reviews necessary for NPDES negotiations with the MDEQ. It also allows time for the results of the economic modeling associated with the "Medium Four" units to be completed.
t e 0 3 17-hab
19
1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Are there any water-related expenditures that would be avoidable if any of the "Medium four" units is retired by year-end 2023? As previously stated, compliance timelines for 316(b) and SEEG are entirely dependent upon the NPDES process. The State will determine the site-specific controls/ technologies which are deemed to be BTA; there will be a negotiation of appropriate timelines in the NPDES permitting process for the J.H. Campbell and D.E. Karn generating complexes and the ultimate issue of the finalized NPDES permit. We strongly believe it is likely that SEEG and 316(b) compliance will be required by year-end 2021, although 2023 is the latest allowable under federal law for those regulations. The MDEQ has provided no indication that leads to a reasonable conclusion that it will grant an extension to the 2023 deadline for compliance, and its recent action in denying DTE Electric Company's request for such an extension supports the Company's position that it must act to achieve compliance by the end of 2021.
If both DE Karn units were to retire by year-end 2023, then all 316(b) and SEEG expenditures for that site would likely cease no later than fourth quarter of 2018. Any associated potential cost savings would occur beyond the test year. The expenditures v/ithin the test year allow for the finalization of the various studies and required peer reviews necessary for successful NPDES negotiations with the MDEQ, which are necessary regardless of whether or not a decision is made to retire the units early.
At the JH Campbell site, Units 1&2 share an intake channel. Unit 3 has a separate intake channel. The current strategy for 316(b) compliance is to reroute the Unit 1 and Unit 2 intake channel into the Unit 3 deep water intake and add an additional array of wedge wire screens. If either Unit 1 or Unit 2 were to retire by year-end 2023, then there
te0317-liab
20
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
1
likely would not be a need for the alternate intake, and therefore all of those costs would
2
be avoidable. While the associated projected cost savings would occur beyond the test
3
year, the remaining expenditures within the test year allow for the finalization of the
4
various studies and required peer reviews necessary for NPDES negotiations with the
5
MDEQ, and would still be necessary and incurred.
6
SEEG compliance is much more complicated. All three units at the JH Campbell
7
site will have a completely combined system. Even though there may be potential for
8
either Unit 1 and/or Unit 2 to retire early, depending upon the outcome of the retirement
9
study, Unit 3 will still be operational. Any potential cost savings associated with SEEG
10
compliance for Units 1 or 2 would occur beyond the test year, but the exact timing of
11
when the savings will occur is entirely dependent upon the applicability date that is
12
determined by the State in the NPDES permit. If the MDEQ determines the 316(b) and
13
SEEG applicability date to be year-end 2021, but early retirements do not occur until
14
year-end 2023, then there would be no SEEG capital cost savings.
15
All three units will be sending their bottom ash transport water to one bottom ash
16
tank at the site. The closed loop systems with wastewater treatment will need to be sized
17
appropriately to accommodate all three units, even if for only two years in this scenario.
18
Additional engineering studies would be required to determine the precise cost savings
19
related to wastewater treatment and closed loop recirculation costs pertaining to Units 1,
20
2, or both being retired on or before 2023.
te0317-hab
21
1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Environmental Capital Investment Summary Describe how Consumers Energy's overall environmental compliance plan for air, water, and waste provides value to customers. The Company's approach has considered a variety of technologies; deferral of expenditures for as long as possible consistent with the applicable rules; risks associated with relying on and use of emission allowance purchases; and the wisdom of retrofitting older, smaller generating units. As noted previously in Case No. U-17735, the Company's economic analyses indicate that it is not in the best interest of the customers to retrofit the older, smaller coal-fired units at this time. The Company is, however, moving forward with environmental control installations on the five larger coal units. When complete, these major investments in emission control technology will allow the Company to continue down the path of sustainability by providing significant environmental benefits through the substantial reduction of SOi, NOx, particulate matter, mercury, metals, acid gases, and other pollutants as well as an enhancement in CCR management, water management, and fish protection. These efforts will improve the quality of life we enjoy in Michigan. These investments also allow the continued operation of 1,250 MW of Michigan-based, coal-fired electric generation, thus, preserving the fuel diversity that is necessary to protect customers from significant fuel price fluctuations. How do customers benefit from the Company's sustainability efforts? We do many things each day that are consistent with sustainable principles and provide great customer value. One such example is our commitment to provide safe, clean, reliable, and affordable energy. Good air quality is valued by our customers and it is
te0317-hab
22
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
1
important to us. Consumers Energy has been reducing emissions for decades using
2
various approaches, including fuel switching and emission reduction technology. By
3
2020, we have committed to reducing our S 0 2 emissions by 92% and our nitrogen
4
dioxide emissions by 89%. This commitment single-handedly provides a positive quality
5
of life that our customers deserve.
6
Over the last 20 plus years, Consumers Energy has minimized its solid waste
7
generation and disposal, but to further support continued sustainability improvement the
8
Company has established a waste minimization goal of one million cubic yards of landfill
9
space saved through 2019. The Company will achieve this goal by increasing its
10
cumulative amount of landfill avoided material by 10% every year through 2019 and
11
currently, we are exceeding those interim targets. To put this into perspective, one
12
million cubic yards of trash would be the equivalent of five football fields stacked from
13
goal line to goal line 100 feet deep. Reducing the amount of waste that is sent to landfill
14
not only saves on disposal costs, but it also protects the environment.
15
Stewardship of water is also a major focus for the Company. Water use is integral
16
to our business. We treat it as the precious resource it is. Hydroelectric and steam
17
electric generation account for the majority of the water we use, so that's where we're
18
focusing much of our immediate attention. That means cutting back and recycling water
19
wherever feasible at existing plants, and making water conservation a priority when we
20
consider new generation sources. We're currently working on a two-phase water
21
reduction plan that would ultimately reduce our water use by 320 million gallons per day.
te03l7-hab
23
1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
How has Consumers Energy ensured that the costs associated with the installation of pollution control equipment, for the various environmental regulations, are reasonable and prudent? Consumers Energy ensures that the costs for pollution control equipment are reasonable and prudent in several different ways. Company witness Hill discusses the project cost reasonableness and prudency in her direct testimony.
In addition to Ms. Hill's testimony, please refer to Confidential Exhibit A-41 (HAB-4) and Confidential Exhibit A-42 (HAB-5). In Confidential Exhibit A-41 (HAB-4) you will find documents which support the Company's RCRA compliance plan and expenditures. Tn Confidential Exhibit A-42 (HAB-5) you will find documents which support our 316(b) and SEEG compliance plan and expenditures. Are Consumers Energy's environmental compliance plan and associated investments reasonable and prudent? Yes. The Company has reasonably ensured compliance with applicable state and federal environmental regulations. The Company's investments made to achieve such compliance have been made in a manner that has minimized, to the extent reasonably possible, the associated costs for customers. The investments made ensure continued supply reliability and sustainability. They ensure sustainability by maintaining environmental compliance and achieving significant reduction of pollutants. They ensure supply reliability by allowing for the continued operation of Michigan-based coal generation, thus helping preserve the fuel diversity necessary to protect customers from significant fuel price fluctuations. The Commission should approve the Company's costs associated with its environmental regulatory compliance efforts.
te0317-hab
24
1 Q.
2 A.
HEATHER A. BREINING DIRECT TESTIMONY
Does this conclude your testimony?
Yes.
te0317-hab
25
S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In the matter of the application of
)
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY
)
for authority to increase its rates for
)
the generation and distribution of
)
electricity and for other relief.
)
___________________________________________________________)
Case No. U-l 8322
EXHIBITS OF
HEATHER A. BREINING ON BEHALF OF
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY
(REDACTED VERSION)
March 2017
MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Consumers Energy Company Sum mary of Projected E lectric & C om m on Capital E xpenditures for the Years2C15 through Seotem ber 2018 ($0 0 0 )
Case No.: U-18322 Exhibit: A -38 (HAB-1)
W ilness: HABreinng Date: March 2017 Page 1 of 1
Line No.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Air Quality C om piance Projects (a)
D E , Kam. Unit 1 - Spray Dry Absorber D.E. Karn, U n it 1 - A ct valed Carbon Injection D.E. Kam. Unit 2 - Spray Dry A bsorber D.E. Kam , Unit 2 - A ctivated Carbon injection J.H. Cam pbell, Unit 1 - Dry Sorbent Injection J.H. Cam pbell, Unit 1 - Pulse Jet Fabric Filter J.H. Cam pbell. Unit 1 - Activated Carbon Injection v.H. Cam pbell. Unit 2 - S elective Catalytic Reduction J.H. Cam pbell, Unit 2 - Pulse Jet Fabric F ilter J.H. Cam pbell, U nit 2 - Dry Sorbent Injection J.H Cam pbell, u n it 2 - Activated Carbon Injection J.H C anpoeil, U rit 3 - Spray Dry Absorber J.H. Cam pbell, Unit 3 - Pulse Jet Fabric Filter J.H Cam pbell. Unit 3 -A ctiva te d Carbon Injection
Total E xpenditures
2015 Actual
(c) -$2,001
$876 $5,231 $\1 0 1 $19,830 $48,874 $5,330
$0 517 $23,575 $6.640 $70,153 $42,388 $2,240 $224,254
2016 Actual
(d) $375 -S68 $154 -S50 $10,000 $8,887 $2,391
SO so $11,895 $2,187 $51,071 $45,388 $1,760 $133,991
9 Months Ended
S eptem ber 30. 2017 P ro je c te d J) $0 $0 $0
$0 $479
$315 $26
$0
$0 $522
$21 $896
$591 $0
$2,849
3 Months Ended
December 31,2017 Projected
(e ) $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $5 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $5
9 Months Ended
S ep tem be r 30, 2018 P ro je c te d (f> $0 $0 $0
$0
$0 50 $0
$C $c
$0
$0
$0 $0
$0 $0
MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Consumers Energy Company Summary of Projected Electric &Common Capital Expenditures for the Years 2015 through September 2018
($ 000)
Line
No.
Resource Conservation Recovery Act
(a)
1
D E Karn Facility - Bottom Ash Tanks
2
D.E Karn Facility - Ground Water Monitors
3
J.H. Campbell Facility - Bottom Ash Tanks
4
J.H. Campbell Facility - Ground Water Monitors
5
J.C. Weadock Facility - Landfill Improvements
6
J.C. Weadock Facility - Slurry Wall
7
J.C. Weadock Facility - Ground Water Monitors
8
B.C. Cobb Facility - Ground Water Monitors
9
J.R. Whiting Facility - Ground Water Monitors
10
Total RCRA Expenditures
Case No.: U-18322 Exhibit: A-39 (HAB-2) Witness: HABreining
Date: Ma'ch 2017 Page 1 of 1
2015 Actual
(b) $324 $89
$365 $300 $2,179 $0 $323 $196 $152 $3,928
2016 Actual
(c) $1,311
$28
$1,900 $55
$1,639 $0 $45 $17 $0
$4,996
9 Months Ended September 30, 2017 Projected
W $12,823
$0
$23,038
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$35,861
3 Months Ended December 31, 2017 Projected
(e> $965
$0
$1,734
$0
$0
so
$0
$0
$0
$2,699
9 Months Ended September 30, 2018 Projected
(f) $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$3,194
$0
$0
$0
53,194
MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Consigners Energy Company Summary of Projected Electric & Com m or Capita Expenditures for the Years 2015 through September 2018 (SOOO)
Line
No.
Clean W ater Act 5316(b)
(a)
1
D.E. Kam Facility - Demonstration Testing
2
D.E. Kam Facility - Fine-mesh Wedge Wire Intakes
3
J.H. Campbell Facility - Demonstration Testing
4
J.H. Campbell Facility - intake Modification
5
Total CWA 316fb) Expenditures
20-5 Actual
(t>> $562
$0
$384
SC $946
Case No.: U-18322 Exhibit: A-40 (HAB-3) Witness: HABreining
Date: March 2017 Page 1 of 1
2016 Actual
(c) $12 $0
S3
$0 $14
9 Months Ended
September 30.2017 Projected 0
$44
$0
$26
$75
$146
3 Months Ended
December 31. 2017 Projectec
(e)
S15
$0
$9
$25
$48
9 Months Ended
September 30, 2018 ro je c te d <0
$45
$0
$28
$69
$142
Lne
No.
Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines
(a)
5
D.E. Kam Fac lity - Waste Water Treatment*
7
D.E. Kam Facility - Closed Loop Systems
8
J.H. Campbell Facility - Waste Water Treatm ent'
9
J.H. Campbell Facility - Closed Loop Systems
8
Total SEEG Expenditures
2015 Actual
(b) $439
SO $614
SO $1,053
2016 Actual
(c) $641
$0
$2,740
$0 $3,381
9 Months Ended
September 30, 2017 Projected Ml
$336
$0
$828
so
$1,164
3 Months Ended
December 31, 2017 Projected
w
$112
$0
$182
$0
$294
9 Months Ended
September 30, 2018 Projected (0
$371
$0
S643
$0
$1,014
* Expenditures May Include: Tressel Modifications. Coei Pile Run-off MocJifcatrans, MISC W aste W ater Studies d M odified ions
\
nnctir I len O n lu
HUNTON&
-
.
W ILLIAM S
MUNTON & WILLIAMS LLPRIVERFRONT PLAZA EAST TOWER
951 EAST BYRD STREET RICHMOND VIRGINIA 23219-4074
17
The Honorable E. S c o t t P r u i t t Administrator United S tates Environmental P ro tec tio n William Jefferson C linton B uilding 1 2 0 0 P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e , NW Mail Code:' II01A W a s h i n g t o n - DC 2 0 4 6 0
Agency
Route
T o : P ruitt.Scott
EPA Mail
U N ITED STATE S PO STAL SE R V IC E
9114999944238451101701 cm-
'
|S
Dnc0n
9114 9999 4423 8451 1017 01
M ailstop ARN Departm ent. 1101A S igcon
4999944238451101701