Reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit For Dewatering and Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5123-1; NPDES No. FLG830000]

Reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

(NPDES) General Permit For Dewatering and Petroleum Fuel Contaminated

Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Final Rule--Reissuance of a NPDES General Permit to

the State of Florida.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IV is reissuing the

final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General

Permit No. FLG830000 to facilities within the political boundary of the

State of Florida. This final reissued NPDES general permit contains

effluent limitations, prohibitions, reporting requirements and other

conditions on facilities which discharge uncontaminated groundwater

associated with dewatering or treated groundwater and/or storm water

incidental to the groundwater cleanup operation which have been

contaminated by automotive gasoline, aviation and/or diesel fuels. This

permit authorizes discharges from facilities currently located in and

discharging to surface waters within the political boundary of the

State of Florida, and any new treatment facilities placed in operation

during the term of this permit. Reissuance of this final NPDES will

allow general dewatering and cleanup actions at petroleum contaminated

sites to begin without the delays of individual NPDES permit issuance

procedures.

For facilities seeking coverage for general dewatering discharges,

coverage under the general permit is automatic, upon the permittee's

receipt of acceptable groundwater screening values, as described in

Part I.A.3(c) of the general permit. The effluent from these general

dewatering activities shall be monitored within thirty (30) days after

commencement of the discharge and once every six months for the life of

the project to maintain coverage under the general permit.

Additionally, short-term pump tests, eight (8) hours in duration or

less, shall be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's

Notice of Intent (NOI) by EPA and the permittee will be responsible for

meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1 or A.2. DMRs shall be submitted

within thirty (30) days after completion of the pump test discharge.

Except for facilities meeting the above conditions, all other

facilities seeking coverage under the general permit by NOI requests

will be responded to by written notification of coverage by certified

mail from the Director, Water Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV.

This method of notification will be applicable to both new dischargers

applying for coverage for the first time and existing dischargers which

are seeking coverage under the reissued general permit. Facilities

which are currently discharging under the previous NPDES general permit

are required to submit another NOI requesting coverage under the

reissued general permit by February 14, 1995, in accordance with Part

II, Section F(b).

DATES: This general permit is effective on December 7, 1994, at 1:00

p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time.

Dates for coverage: (1) Dewatering Activity discharges are

authorized upon the permittee's receipt of acceptable groundwater

screening values listed in Part I.A.3. (2) Short-Term Pump Test

discharges, eight (8) hours in duration or less, are authorized upon

receipt of a complete NOI, as described in Part II, Section F(f). (3)

Petroleum Contaminated discharges, are only authorized after written

notification of coverage by certified mail from the Director, Water

Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV is received.

This action constitutes the Environmental Protection Agency's final

permit decision, in accordance with Title 40, Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 124.72.

The administrative record, including draft NPDES general permit,

fact sheet, state certification, comments received, and additional

information are available by writing the EPA, Region IV, or for review

and copying at 345 Courtland St., N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365, between

the hours of 8:15 A.M. and 4:30 P.M., Monday through Friday. Copies

will be provided at a nominal charge per page. Additional information

concerning the permit may be obtained at the address and during the

hours noted above from Ms. Lena Scott, Public Notice Coordinator, 404/

347-3004.

ADDRESSES: Notifications required under this general permit should be

sent to: Director, Water Management Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, N.E. Atlanta,

Georgia 30365 Request for Coverage: Written notification of intent to

be covered by the general permit (if required) shall be provided as

described in the permit Part II Section F.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Cole, Environmental Engineer,

Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, Water Management Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta,

Georgia 30365, (404) 347-3012 ext. 2948.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

On Thursday, August 25, 1988 (53 FR 32442), EPA, Region IV proposed

the issuance of the draft NPDES General Permit. During the 30-day

comment period, a request for an extension of the comment period was

received, and on Tuesday, October 25, 1988 (53 FR 43035), the comment

period was extended to November 15, 1988. On Monday, July 17, 1989 (54

FR 29986), EPA, Region IV issued the Final NPDES General Permit for

Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of

Florida.

On Friday, February 22, 1991 (56 FR 7379), EPA, Region IV published

a notice of a proposed modification to the NPDES General Permit for

Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida

(56 FR 7379) to include dewatering activities. On Thursday, August 29,

1991 (56 FR 42736), the final modification was issued. The general

permit expired on July 16, 1994. On Monday, September 19, 1994, EPA

Region IV published a notice concerning the reissuance of the general

permit (59 FR 47862) that is being issued in final form today.

The Region received comments from eight (8) commentors. All the

public comments received during the 30-day comment period are included

in the administrative record and were considered by Region IV in the

formulation of a final determination of the conditions of today's final

permit.

For reference, Region IV published a detailed fact sheet with the

proposed draft permit in 59 FR 47862. The Region is incorporating by

reference that fact sheet as part of the final fact sheet for today's

final permit. The discussions presented in the previous fact sheet

should be consulted in reviewing the applicability and scope of the

final permit conditions.

A formal hearing is available to challenge any NPDES permit issued

under 40 CFR 124.14 except for a general permit. Persons affected by a

general permit may not challenge the conditions of a general permit as

a right in further agency proceedings. They may instead either

challenge the general permit in court, or apply for an individual

permit under 40 CFR 122.21 as authorized at 40 CFR 122.28 and then

request a formal hearing on the issuance or denial of an individual

permit. Additional information regarding these procedures is available

by contacting Ms. Gwen Eason, Office of Regional Counsel, at the

address above or at (404) 347-2309.

II. Other Legal Requirements

A. Executive Order 12291

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from

the review requirements of Executive Order 12291 pursuant to Section

8[b] of that order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities

in this final general permit under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,

44 U.S.C. Sec. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements of

this permit have already been approved by the Office of Management and

Budget in submissions made for the NPDES permit program under the

provisions of the Clean Water Act.

C. State Certification Requirements

Section 301(b)(1)(c) of the Act requires that NPDES permits contain

conditions which ensure compliance with applicable State water quality

standards or limitations. Section 401 of the Act requires that States

certify that Federally issued permits are in compliance with State law.

This permit is for operations discharging to waters within the State of

Florida. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.53, EPA requested certification of the

permit on September 15, 1994. On October 27, 1994, the Florida

Department of Environmental Protection waived certification of the

general permit.

D. Effective Date

The final NPDES general permit issued today, December 6th, 1994, is

effective on December 7, 1994.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

After review of the facts presented in this document, I hereby

certify, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 605(b), that this

NPDES general permit will not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Moreover, the permit reduces a

significant administrative burden on regulated sources.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Deputy Regional Administrator.

Summary of Comments

Appendix A--Public Comments

Public notice of the draft permit reissuance was published at 59 FR

47862 (September 19, 1994). Additionally, the permit was publicly

noticed in five (5) major cities in the State of Florida on September

16, 1994, (Public Notice Number 94FL0167), to allow comments from

interested parties which would be considered in the formulation of a

final decision regarding reissuance of the proposed draft NPDES General

Permit No. FLG830000.

The following parties responded with written comments on reissuance

of the proposed NPDES general permit: Florida Department of

Environmental Protection (FDEP), Chevron Research & Technology Company,

Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Mobil Oil Corporation, Exxon Company, Walt

Disney World Company, Florida Chemical Industry Council and the United

States Fish and Wildlife Service.

Comment 1: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection

(FDEP), Bureau of Waste Cleanup, submitted comments by letter dated

October 3, 1994, which commented on Part I.A.3 of the general permit.

The FDEP wanted clarification concerning the intent of Part I.A.3. FDEP

stated that the statement on Page two (2) of the introduction states

that `` Except for facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.3,

written notice of intent to be covered by the reissued NPDES general

permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing Authority prior to

initiation of discharge to waters of the United States,'' implies that

this includes subparts of Part I.3., including I.3.(a), (b), and (c).

FDEP stated that this implies that for discharges that are either

uncontaminated or are contaminated with petroleum only and are treated,

notification to EPA is not required. It was stated that this is not

consistent with the phrase under I.3(a) which states ``upon receipt of

written EPA notification of coverage that the Notice of Intent (NOI)

request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence.'' The

State mentioned that this implies that not only must prior notification

be given by EPA for the short-term discharges from sites contaminated

by petroleum only, but that the person responsible for the discharge

must wait for a reply from EPA, and this inconsistency should be

reconciled.

Response: EPA agrees that the referenced statement on page 2 of the

introduction is incorrect. It has been corrected to read, ``except for

facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.A.3(c), written NOI to be

covered by the reissued permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing

Authority.''

Comment 2: FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to wait for a

response from EPA in order to initiate a short-term discharge for the

following reasons: (1) Chapter 62-770, requires that a Remedial Action

Plan (RAP) be submitted to the FDEP within 2 months of approval of a

Contamination Assessment Report (CAR), and that it is routine to

require pump tests to design information for the RAP, plus identify

aquifer characteristics. FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to delay

the RAP by requiring prior approval from EPA of these simple 8 hour

pump tests. (2) Due to varying hydrogeological conditions in Florida,

local departments commonly perform dewatering activities in their

right-of-way of previous retail service stations, plus have no

information before commencing these activities on the existence of

petroleum contamination. FDEP stated that these construction projects

should not be delayed for an extended period to wait on response from

EPA, since mobile treatment units can be deployed and designed to meet

EPA's discharge limitations in the NPDES general permit. (3) During

dewatering for construction and replacement of underground storage

tanks, FDEP mentioned that it was not reasonable for the tank

installation to be delayed for an extended period of time; especially

since discharges from these operations only last for a few hours at a

time and mobile equipment used is very reliable in achieving EPA's

discharge standards.

Response: EPA concurs with FDEP reason No. 1 above which allows

short-term 8 hour pump tests at sites which have identified petroleum

contamination, to be covered upon receipt of the NOI by the Permit

Issuing Authority. Only short-term pump tests, 8 hours in duration or

less, designed to obtain information on aquifer characteristics, will

be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's NOI, and the

permittee will be responsible or meeting the discharge limitations of

Part A.1 or A.2. General Permit numbers will be assigned to these sites

and DMR's sent with a copy of the general permit and a letter

acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Intent.

EPA responds to reasons # 2 and # 3 as proposed by the FDEP, which

would allow coverage by simply submitting an NOI for local departments

dewatering projects or scheduled dewatering during gasoline tank

replacements. It is EPA's understanding that the construction

activities described in No. 2 and No. 3 are planned well in advance of

the initiation of the dewatering process. For this reason, EPA sees no

reason to exempt these sites from NOI requirements. Unless preliminary

groundwater assessments have been performed along the right-of-way

project prior to startup, even the local departments may be unaware of

an contaminated plume that may be encountered during the road widening,

or excavation projects. The potential problem EPA expects in waiving

NOI requirements for these activities, is the lack of sufficient data

to cover these operations. The better approach would be for the

permittee to survey potential problem areas well in advance of the

dewatering startup, identify the type of contamination and seek

discharge coverage under the NPDES general permit using the NOI

process, for those potentially contaminated groundwater discharge

areas.

Comment 3: FDEP also questioned whether the indicator criteria

values listed under Part I.A.3, should be analyzed using untreated

groundwater or treated groundwater. FDEP also stated that if the intent

of Part I.A.3 is to allow short term discharges from sites contaminated

with petroleum only, then the indicators should be applied to treated

recovered groundwater, because if these indicators were applied to

untreated groundwater, this would preclude discharges from sites

contaminated with petroleum only. However, FDEP stated that applying

these indicator values to the treated effluent may allow treatment

alternatives that are capable of removing the metals listed and become

eligible to discharge under the general permit, since the indicator

values were not exceeded (even if the source of contamination was not

petroleum in nature).

Response: EPA notes that the indicator values apply to untreated

representative groundwater samples from the vicinity of the proposed

produced groundwater discharge. These could be tests from monitoring

wells, recovery wells, or samples of produced groundwater taken prior

to any treatment and would not allow treatment alternatives capable of

removing metals to be covered by this general permit. It should be

emphasized that the intent of Part I.A.3 is to allow the discharge of

produced groundwater from an uncontaminated site activity. If the site

is contaminated with petroleum fuels, the permit refers back to Parts

I.A.1 or I.A.2.

Comment 4: FDEP requested EPA's determination on a particular issue

before the finalization of the general permit. FDEP stated that many

petroleum sites are located in urban areas, and other possible sources

of contamination may be located in the vicinity of the petroleum site.

In these situations commingling of plumes from non-petroleum sites may

occur. It was noted that many sites performing Contamination Assessment

Reports (CARs) had detected low levels of TCE or PCE for many sites

which had a dry cleaner in the vicinity. FDEP stated that since these

solvents had similar characteristics and were volatile, most treatment

system designs based on permit effluent requirements for the petroleum

compounds will easily remove the PCE or TCE to non-detectable levels

without any oversizing of equipment or additional treatment processes.

FDEP stated that other compounds in relatively low concentrations from

off site sources should not preclude eligibility of the general permit

for the overall cleanup, which is to remediate the petroleum plume and

requested EPA's determination on the issue.

Response: EPA in it's initial conception of the general permit,

only made specific reference to contamination from petroleum fuels and

referenced gasoline, aviation gas, diesel and jet-fuel. The intent in

issuing this general permit was to provide general permit coverage for

the discharge of treated petroleum contaminated groundwater. To cover

other sources of contamination will require additional research and

public participation. Because the general permit expired on July 16,

1994, EPA sees an urgency to reissue this permit; therefore, EPA may

consider this issue in the future through a permit modification. EPA,

after collecting sufficient information, may consider the inclusion of

other chemicals associated with dry cleaners in the near future, but

due to the lack of sufficient information, will not address it at this

time.

Comment 5: Chevron Research and Technology Company, by letter dated

October 4, 1994, requested a copy of the NPDES Best Management Practice

(BMP) Guidance Document.

Response: EPA sent the NPDES BMP Guidance document to Chevron on

October 13, 1994.

Comment 6: Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (ML&B), Counselors at Law, by

letter dated October 15, 1994, made two comments concerning the permit.

ML&B mentioned that all references to Florida Administrative Code

Chapter 17-770, 17-302, or any other ``17-'' should be changed to

Chapter ``62-770, or 62- 302, and mentioned that Chapter ``62-'' is

where the current law is found. ML&B also mentioned that the Fact Sheet

should contain some discussion of discharge to ``surface waters'', the

triggering event. ML&B also mentioned that the permittee should know

where to go in order look up the definition of ``surface waters'' or

discharges to surface waters. Mentioned that these issues and basic

guidance thereon may ensure that all facilities obligated under the

general permit actually apply for coverage and discussion of this

significant jurisdictional issue in the Fact Sheet or permit itself

seems appropriate.

Response: EPA refers the commentor to the Clean Water Act (CWA)

which requires that point source discharges of pollutants to waters of

the United States be covered by NPDES permits. The definition of

``point source'' and ``waters of the U.S.'' can be found at 40 CFR

Section 122.2. Additionally, all references that refer to Florida

Administrative Code Chapter ``17'' will be changed to Florida

Administrative Code Chapter ``62.''

Comment 7: Mobil Oil Corporation (MOC), by letter dated October 17,

1994, supported the reissuance of the general permit, since it is more

efficient and cost effective approach to permitting routine activity

than the individual permitting process. MOC raised several concerns on

the draft NPDES general permit concerning the new requirements of the

whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests. MOC stated that the need for WET

testing has not been established. It was stated that the Fact Sheet

cited that the chemical criteria was significantly more stringent than

Florida's water quality standards and MOC stated that meeting the

chemical criteria, coupled with the required treatment processes should

be more than adequate to protect aquatic life.

Response: In response to MOC comment, EPA notes that the chemical

specific discharge limitations mentioned do provide adequate protection

to meet Florida's chemical specific water quality standards. However,

since previous toxicity monitoring tests did indicate that a number of

effluents were toxic, which is also a violation of Florida

Administrative Code (FAC) Section 17-4.244(3)(a), WET limits were

incorporated into the permit.

Comment 8: MOC stated that if WET testing is required, the

procedure outlined in Part V should be modified. MOC stated that if the

compliance limit for WET testing is an LC50 > 100%, the requirement for

a full concentration test is not warranted and only a screening test

(control and 100% final effluent only) should be run to demonstrate

compliance.

Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the use of multiple

dilutions, per the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4- 90/027F)

cited in the September 19,1994 Federal Register notice, such dilutions

are recommended to assess NPDES compliance for all WET tests (pg. 47-

48). They provide more information about the dose-response of the test,

increase the statistical power of the test, and decrease the inherent

variability found in conducting a single test concentration with a

control.

Comment 9: MOC stated that there was no advantage to static-renewal

versus the static procedure for these discharges and recommended the

static procedure for these WET tests.

Response: Regarding Mobil's comment that static tests only be

conducted, the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4-90/027F) cited

in the Federal Register notice above mandates the use of static renewal

tests for all tests exceeding 48 hr (pg. 57, 61, 65, 69). Because the

acute WET tests specified in this notice are 96-hrs. in duration,

static renewals tests must be conducted.

Comment 10: MOC also recommended that the mandatory requirement

that recommended concurrent standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing

be removed, since this provides limited information on the quality of

the testing laboratory. MOC mentioned that requiring facilities to pay

for these studies, when they receive no benefit is inappropriate.

Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the required concurrent

standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing with each WET test, the

September 19,1994 Federal Register notice does allow for monthly SRT

results to be submitted in lieu of such concurrent tests. Regarding

Mobil's comment on requiring contract laboratories to conduct such SRT

testing, EPA does not currently have a national laboratory

certification program for WET. EPA does acknowledge that some states do

have such a certification program. Until a national certification

program is established, EPA must have some means to assess the quality

of a given laboratory's performance. The use of SRTs is one way of

making that assessment. EPA notes that permittees have the option of

using in-house capabilities to conduct such WET tests. However, when

permittees rely on outside laboratories to conduct WET tests for NPDES

compliance purposes, the use of SRTs is required. EPA disagrees with

Mobil's comment that such SRT tests have no benefit for the permittee.

On the contrary, such SRT testing serves to validate the quality and

precision of the WET tests conducted by the contract laboratory on

behalf of the permittee that are submitted to the permitting authority.

Comment 11: MOC mentioned that facilities covered by the existing,

but expired general permit may be required to perform another testing

requirement, such a EPA 624 and 625 although this sampling was

performed for the existing general permit.

Response: EPA does not agree that facilities already discharging

under the general permit be excluded from performing an additional test

analysis on the effluent using EPA methods 624 or 625 priority

pollutant scan. This requirement conforms with the reapplication data

necessary for individual permits in which a permittee is required to

retest the effluent to obtain accurate information which determine

possible changes in effluent characteristics. This priority pollutant

scan shall be performed within 60 days of startup of the produced water

discharge, or within 60 days after receipt of notification of coverage

from EPA for facilities currently discharging under the previous

general permit.

Comment 12: Exxon Company (EC), by letter dated October 20, 1994,

stated that some risk-based analysis is an important element in

establishing water quality criteria for certain processes, and that the

proposed 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit appears to be absent of any

risk-based approach. EC stated that scientific data does not warrant

the restrictive 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit for release into

surface water and is even more stringent than that required under

Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 17-302.530 for Class I potable water

supplies and recommended that the national limit of 5.0 ug/l be

substituted as the benzene effluent limit.

Response: EPA concurs that the 1.0 ug/l limit for benzene is more

stringent than Florida's water quality standards. The limitation for

benzene is based on the best treatment technology available and happens

to be more stringent than FAC 17-302.530(9)[4/25/94], Class I potable

water supplies which is 1.18 ug/l. The 1.0 ug/l limitation is also more

stringent than Florida Class III water quality standard, which requires

an annual average limitation of 71.28 ug/l for benzene. Therefore,

since technology has proven capable of consistently maintaining the 1.0

ug/l limitation for benzene and numerous permittees have consistently

designed treatment systems that meet the requirements of the NPDES

general permit, EPA will retain the benzene limit. In addition,

maintaining the 1.0 ug/l benzene limit complies with Section 402(o)(1)

of the Water Quality Act of 1987, which states that a permit may not be

renewed, reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations which

are less stringent than the comparable effluent limitations in the

previous permit except in compliance with Section 303 (d)(4).

Comment 13: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the acceptable pH for

treated effluent under the previous and proposed NPDES general permit

is 6.0-8.5 standard units (SUs), and mentioned that many lakes and

streams in Central and North Florida have a pH range of 5.0-6.0 SUs. EC

stated that many influent pH samples for remedial pump and treat

systems are also in this range and recommended reducing the allowed

lower limit from 6.0 to 5.5 SUs. Response: In response to EC comments,

the pH language in the current proposed draft permit does allow some

variation for pH depending on natural background of the receiving

water. However, this natural background data must be furnished to EPA

by the permittee in the initial NOI request; in order to be considered

in determining the pH range for the facility during the notification of

coverage request. It should be noted that the pH of the receiving

stream, not the influent or effluent, influences the pH permit limits.

Comment 14: Exxon Company (EC) commented on Part I.A.3 concerning

the screen for metals that would indicate contamination from sources

other than petroleum fuels. EC mentioned that it is unwarranted to

require screening for additional metals that are not ordinarily

considered constituents of petroleum fuels as a basis for securing a

NPDES general permit for petroleum fuel contamination. EC mentioned

that if there is a cause for this additional screening at a particular

site, the regulatory processes in place will generate the additional

site investigation and testing needed, instead of testing every site

whether justified or not and recommended that the screening for other

metals be removed as a requirement from the NPDES general permit. EC

mentioned that if additional metal testing is required, annual testing

is much more appropriate than semi-annual, especially for groundwater

remedial systems at underground storage tank cleanup sites.

Response: In response to Exxon Company (EC) comments, EPA clarifies

the misconception that contaminated petroleum fuel sites must perform

the Part I.A.3 testing requirements for metals; these discharges must

comply only with the requirements of Part I.A.1 or I.A.2. EPA refers to

the general applicability of Part I.A.3, that allows produced water

discharges from any noncontaminated site, which could include

dewatering for tank removals, construction activity, or aquifer pump

tests from water wells. Any point source discharge of pollutants to

waters of the U.S. requires an NPDES permit, regardless of whether the

site is contaminated or uncontaminated. EPA, in its approach to

covering dewatering of produced groundwater associated with any

activity, placed the burden for verification on the permittee for

determining that the site groundwater has not been contaminated with

sources other than petroleum fuels. Requiring all permittees to perform

this screening allows facilities performing dewatering activities to be

placed under the general permit, assuming that the screening reveals no

contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels.

Comment 15: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the Discharge

Monitoring Report forms should be revised and the reporting procedure

should be simplified. Also, mentioned that the quality of forms

initially received from EPA tend to become illegible when photocopied.

EC also requested that EPA retain the current level of bioassay testing

instead of increasing the frequency as proposed.

Response: EPA will send original Discharge Monitoring Reports to

the permittee so that more legible photocopies can be produced. EPA

recommends that these originals be maintained by the permittee for

copying purposes. In reference to the bioassay requirements, permittees

which have previously obtained coverage under this general permit,

which effluents have not demonstrated unacceptable toxicity (LC 50 g/l........................... ............ 1.0......... 1/month........... Grab.

*Total Lead, g/l....................... ............ 30.0........ 1/month........... Grab.

pH, standard units..............................

(1) See Below

Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................

(2) See Part V Grab. ......

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.

An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less

will constitute a violation of Florida Administrative Code (FAC) (July

11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a) and the terms of this permit. The testing

for this requirement must conform with Part V of this permit.

For fresh waters and coastal waters, the pH of the effluent shall

not be lowered to less than 6.0 units for fresh waters, or less than

6.5 units for marine waters, or raised above 8.5 units, unless the

permittee submits natural background data in the NOI request confirming

a natural background pH outside of this range. If natural background of

the receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in

the NOI request, is determined to be less than 6.0 units for fresh

waters, or less than 6.5 units in marine waters, the pH shall not vary

below natural background or vary more than one (1) unit above natural

background for fresh and coastal waters. If natural background of the

receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in the

NOI request, is determined to be higher than 8.5 units, the pH shall

not vary above natural background or vary more than one (1) unit below

natural background of fresh and coastal waters. The acceptable pH range

will be included in the letter granting permit coverage and on the DMR.

The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or

continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4).

In accordance with FAC Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c)(4-25-93), the

discharge shall at all times be free from floating solids, visible

foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on

surface waters.

Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements

specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): Nearest

accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or

mixing with the receiving waters.

A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements: Existing Sources

and New Dischargers

2. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit

and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is

authorized to discharge treated groundwater and storm water that has

been contaminated by Aviation Gasoline, Jet Fuel or Diesel.

It is anticipated that these contaminated waters will be treated by

air stripping, followed by activated carbon adsorption, if necessary,

or equivalent treatment to meet the following effluent limitations.

Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as

specified below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discharge limitations Monitoring requirements

---------------------------------------------------------------

Effluent characteristic Measurement

Daily avg Daily max frequency Sample type

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flow, MGD....................................... Report...... Report...... Continuous........ Flowmeter.

Benzene, g/l........................... ............ 1.0......... 1/month........... Grab.

Naphthalene, g/l....................... ............ 100.0....... 1/month........... Grab.

*Total Lead, g/l....................... ............ 30.0........ 1/month........... Grab.

pH, standard units (SUs)........................

(3) See Part I.A.1

Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................

(2) See Part V Grab. ......

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.

An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less

will constitute a violation of FAC (July 11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a)

and the terms of this permit. The testing for this requirement must

conform with Part V of this permit.

The permittee shall comply with the same pH requirements for this

Part I.A.2 as in Part I.A.1.

The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or

continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4). In accordance with FAC

Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at all times be free from

floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such

amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.

Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements

specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): nearest

accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or

mixing with the receiving waters.

A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements

3. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit

and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is

authorized to discharge produced groundwater from any noncontaminated

site activity which discharges by a point source to waters of the

United States, only if the reported values for the parameters listed

below do not exceed any of the screening values below. Before discharge

of produced groundwater can occur from such sites, analytical tests on

samples of the untreated proposed discharge water shall be performed to

determine if contamination exists from other sources.

The following are the minimum reporting requirements for all

produced groundwater dischargers which have acceptable screening value

results as described below:

The effluent shall be sampled at the final effluent within thirty

(30) days after commencement of discharge and once every six months for

the life of the project to maintain continued coverage under this

general permit. The effluent shall be sampled for the parameters listed

below and the analytical results obtained shall be submitted to EPA at

the address given in Part III.A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parameter Daily maximum

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Organic Carbon................................ Report, mg/l.

pH.................................................. Report, standard

units

Total Recoverable Mercury........................... Report, g/

l.

Total Recoverable Cadmium........................... Report, g/

l.

Total Recoverable Copper............................ Report, g/

l.

Total Recoverable Lead.............................. Report, g/

l.

Total Recoverable Zinc.............................. Report, g/

l.

Total Recoverable Chromium (Hex.)................... Report, g/

l.

Benzene............................................. Report, g/

l.

Naphthalene......................................... Report, g/

l.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reported analytical test results for the parameters listed above

exceeding any of the screening values listed below shall be considered

an indication of contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parameter

Indicator if discharge is into -----------------------------------

Fresh waters Marine waters

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Organic Carbon................ 10.0 mg/l 10.0 mg/l

pH, SU's............................ 6.0-8.5 6.5-8.5

Total Recoverable Mercury........... 0.012 g/ 0.025 g/

l l

Total Recoverable Cadmium........... 9.3 g/l 9.3 g/l

Total Recoverable Copper............ 2.9 g/l 2.9 g/l

Total Recoverable Lead.............. 0.03 mg/l 5.6 g/l

Total Recoverable Zinc.............. 86.0 g/ 86.0 g/

l l

Total Recoverable Chromium 11.0 g/ 50.0 g/

(Hexavalent). l l

Benzene............................. 1.0 g/l 1.0 g/l

Naphthalene......................... 100.0 g/ 100.0 g/

l l

------------------------------------------------------------------------

If at any time during discharge, the effluent exceeds these

screening values, EPA may require the facility to cease discharge.

If any of the analytical test results, (except TOC, benzene or

naphthalene), exceed the above screening values, discharge is not

authorized by this permit. See paragraph I.A.(3)(b) for further

guidance.

For excessive benzene or naphthalene concentrations, see Part

A.(3)(a) below. For initial excessive TOC values that may be caused by

naturally-occurring, high molecular weight organic compounds, the

permittee may request to be exempted from the TOC requirement by

submitting additional information with the NOI which describes the

method used to exclude these naturally ocurring compounds.

In accordance with FAC 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at

all times be free from floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or

visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.

All discharges must comply with the following permit requirements:

(a) If analytical tests of Part I.A.3 reveal excessive benzene and

naphthalene concentrations indicative of contamination from petroleum

fuels, and the discharge will occur for thirty (30) days or less, the

permittee shall comply only with the applicable effluent limitations

and monitoring requirements in Part I.A.1 or I.A.2 for benzene, pH,

and/or naphthalene and total lead. The commencement of the Part V

biomonitoring program and Part I.B.3 EPA method 624 and 625 (one time

analysis) is not required for this short-term activity. One (1) grab

sample shall be analyzed per seven (7) days during the discharge

period, and the total volume discharged shall be recorded. For

discharges contaminated by petroleum fuels that last for less than a

week, daily monitoring will be required for the applicable parameters.

Upon receipt of written EPA notification of coverage that the NOI

request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence.

Discharge Monitoring Reports shall be submitted to EPA within thirty

(30) days after termination of the discharge.

(b) If contamination from sources other than petroleum

contamination does exist, as indicated by the results of the analytical

tests required by Part I. A.3 above, the discharge is not covered by

this general permit. The operator shall apply for an individual NPDES

permit at least one hundred and twenty (120) days prior to the date a

discharge to waters of the United States is expected. No discharge is

permissible without an effective NPDES permit.

(c) If analytical tests reveal no contamination exists from

petroleum fuels or sources other than petroleum contamination as a

result of the required analytical screening tests required in Part I.

A.3, the permittee can commence discharge immediately and is covered by

this permit without having to submit an NOI request for coverage to

EPA, Region IV. A short summary of the proposed activity and copy of

these analytical tests shall be sent to the same address specified in

Part III.A one (1) week after discharge begins. These analytical tests

shall be kept on site during discharge and made available to EPA, if

requested. Additionally, no Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms are

required to be submitted to EPA, Region IV.

B. Other Requirements

1. Any more frequent effluent discharge monitoring required by the

Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for the

parameters limited in this permit, or different parameters, shall be

reported to the Permit Issuing Authority in accordance with the

requirements of Part III of this permit.

2. Effluent limitations for combining contaminated groundwater

pumped to above-ground storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from

the site's recovery wells: The permittee shall notify FDEP of any

intent to combine contaminated groundwater pumped to above-ground

storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from the recovery well.

Approval of this combined effluent discharge by FDEP will constitute

approval to apply for coverage under this permit.

3. Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this permit or

startup of discharge the permittee shall also submit the results of the

following analyses. These analyses shall be performed on a

representative sample of the groundwater effluent discharge, taken

after final treatment.

Required analyses (one time only):

a. EPA Method 625--Acid and base/neutral extractable organics

b. EPA Method 624--Purgeable Organics

If such analyses required in Part B.3 above reveal toxic pollutants

other than those regulated in Part I.A. or subsequent Whole Effluent

Toxicity (WET) tests reveal an LC50 of 100% or less in a test of

96 hours duration or less, coverage under this general permit will be

reviewed for termination by EPA Region IV Enforcement Section.

4. If the pH is monitored continuously, the pH values shall not

deviate outside the required range more than 1% of the time in any

calendar month; and no individual excursion shall exceed 60 minutes. An

``excursion'' is an unintentional and temporary incident in which the

pH value of discharge wastewater exceeds the range set forth in this

permit.

C. Test Procedures

1. In performing the analysis for the dissolved constituents in the

surface water and groundwater, the permittee shall use the guidelines

recommended and described in FAC Sections 62-770.600(8)[a-d] of the

Petroleum Contamination Cleanup Criteria (PCCC), amended February 20,

1990, or the most current edition.

2. If the petroleum contamination is from a petroleum fuel in which

the source of contamination has not been identified, the groundwater

shall be analyzed (using the recommended methods) for the following

parameters as described in FAC Section 62.770.600(8)(c)1, of the PCCC,

amended February 20, 1990, or the most current edition:

a. Lead....................................... (EPA Method 239.2 or

Standard Method 304)

b. Priority Pollutant Volatile Organics....... (EPA Method 624)

c. Priority Pollutant Extractable Organics.... (EPA Method 625)

d. Non-Priority Pollutant Organics (with GC/MS (EPA Methods 624 and

Peaks greater than 10 ppb). 625)

D. Schedule of Compliance

1. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent

limitations specified for discharges in accordance with the following

schedule:

Permittees with Revoked Individual Permits:

Operational level attained--Upon Receipt of Notification of Coverage

New Dischargers:

Operational level attained--Upon Commencement of Discharge

2. No later than fourteen (14) calendar days after any date

identified in the above schedule of compliance the permittee shall

submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions

being required by identified dates, a written notice of compliance or

noncompliance. In the latter case, the notice shall include the cause

of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the probability of

meeting the next scheduled requirement.

Part II

Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits

Section A. General Conditions

1. Duty to Comply

The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any

permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and

is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation

and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit renewal

application.

2. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions

Any person who violates a permit condition is subject to a civil

penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day of such violation. Any person who

willfully or negligently violates permit conditions is subject to a

fine of up to $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not

more than 1 year, or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit

conditions is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000 to 50,000 per day

of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Also,

any person who violates a permit condition may be assessed an

administrative penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation with the

maximum not to exceed $125,000. [Ref: CFR 122.41(a)].

3. Duty to Mitigate

The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or

prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which has a

reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the

environment.

4. Duty to Reapply

Where EPA is the Permit Issuing Authority (PIA), the terms and

conditions of this permit are automatically continued in accordance

with 40 CFR 122.6, only where the permittee has submitted a timely and

complete Notice of Intent 180 days prior to expiration of this permit,

and the PIA is unable through no fault of the permittee to issue a new

permit before the expiration date.

5. Permit Modification

After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be

modified, terminated, or revoked for cause (as described in 40 CFR

122.62 et seq) including, but not limited to, the following:

a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;

b. Obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or failure to

disclose fully all relevant facts;

c. A change in any conditions that requires either temporary

interruption or elimination of the permitted discharge; or

d. Information newly acquired by the Agency indicating the

discharge poses a threat to human health or welfare.

If the permittee believes that any past or planned activity would

be cause for modification or revocation and reissuance under 40 CFR

122.62, the permittee must report such information to the Permit

Issuing Authority. The submittal of a new application may be required

of the permittee. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit

modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a

notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not

stay any permit condition.

6. Toxic Pollutants

Notwithstanding Paragraph A-4, above, if a toxic effluent standard

or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such

effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a)

of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and

such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for

such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be modified or revoked

and reissued to conform to the toxic effluent standard or prohibition

and the permittee so notified.

7. Civil and Criminal Liability

Except as provided in permit conditions on ``Bypassing'' Section B,

Paragraph B-3, nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the

permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.

8. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability

Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the

institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any

responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is

or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.

9. State Laws

Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the

institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any

responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any

applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section

510 of the Act.

10. Property Rights

The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights of

any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury

to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any

infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.

11. Severability

The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision

of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to

any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to

other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be

affected thereby.

12. Duty to Provide Information

The permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority, within

a reasonable time, any information which the Permit Issuing Authority

may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking

and reissuing, or terminating this permit or to determine compliance

with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Permit

Issuing Authority upon request, copies of records required to be kept

by this permit.

Section B. Operation and Maintenance of Pollution Controls

1. Proper Operation and Maintenance

The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all

facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related

appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve

compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and

maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate

quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of

back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed

by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve

compliance with the conditions of the permit.

2. Need to Halt or Reduce Not a Defense

It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action

that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted

activity in order to maintain compliance with the condition of this

permit.

3. Bypass of Treatment Facilities

a. Definitions

(1) ``Bypass'' means the intentional diversion of waste streams

from any portion of a treatment facility, which is not a designed or

established operating mode for the facility.

(2) ``Severe property damage'' means substantial physical damage to

property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to

become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural

resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a

bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by

delays in production.

b. Bypass Not Exceeding Limitations

The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause

effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for

essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are

not subject to the provisions of Paragraphs c. and d. of this section.

c. Notice

(1) Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the

need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least

ten days before the date of the bypass; including an evaluation of the

anticipated quality and effect of the bypass.

(2) Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an

unanticipated bypass as required in Section D, Paragraph D-4 (24-hour

notice).

d. Prohibition of Bypass

(1) Bypass is prohibited and the Permit Issuing Authority may take

enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless:

(a) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal

injury, or severe and extensive property damage;

(b) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as

maintenance of sufficient reserve holding capacity, the use of

auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, waste

hauling, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime.

This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment should

have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment

to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment

downtime or preventive maintenance; and

(c) The permittee submitted notices as required under Paragraph c.

of this section.

(2) The Permit Issuing Authority may, within its authority, approve

an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the

Permit Issuing Authority determines that it will meet the three

conditions listed above in Paragraph d.(1) of this section.

4. Upsets

``Upset'' means an exceptional incident in which there is

unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology based permit

effluent limitations because of factors beyond the control of the

permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused

by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,

inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or

careless or improper operation. An upset constitutes an affirmative

defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology

based permit limitation if the requirements of 40 CFR 122.41(n)(3) are

met. (Note that this provision does not apply to water quality

requirements.)

5. Removed Substances

This permit does not authorize discharge of solids, sludge, filter

backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or

control of wastewaters to waters of the United States unless

specifically limited in Part 1.

Section C. Monitoring and Records

1. Representative Sampling

Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be

representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. All

samples shall be taken at the monitoring points specified in this

permit and, unless otherwise specified, before the effluent joins or is

diluted by any other wastestream, body of water, or substance.

Monitoring points shall not be changed without notification to and the

approval of the Permit Issuing Authority.

2. Flow Measurements

Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with

accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to insure the

accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored

discharges. The devices shall be installed, calibrated and maintained

to insure that the accuracy of the measurements are consistent with the

accepted capability of that type of device. Devices selected shall be

capable of measuring flows with a maximum deviation of less than

10% from the true discharge rates throughout the range of

expected discharge volumes. Guidance in selection, installation,

calibration and operation of acceptable flow measurement devices can be

obtained from the following references:

(1) ``A Guide of Methods and Standards for the Measurement of Water

Flow'', U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS

Special Publication 421, May 1975, 97 pp. (Available from the U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Order by SD catalog

No. C13.10:421.)

(2) ``Water Measurement Manual'', U.S. Department of Interior,

Bureau of Reclamation, Second Edition, Revised Reprint, 1974, 327 pp.

(Available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

20402. Order by catalog No. 127.19/2:W29/2, Stock No. S/N 24003-0027.)

(3) ``Flow Measurement in Open Channels and Closed Conduits'', U.S.

Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS Special

Publication 484, October 1977, 982 pp. (Available in paper copy or

microfiche from National Technical Information Service (NTIS),

Springfield, VA 22151. Order by NTIS No. PB-273 535/5ST.)

(4) ``NPDES Compliance Flow Measurement Manual'', U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Enforcement,

Publication MCD-77, September 1981, 135 pp. (Available from the General

Services Administration (8BRC), Centralized Mailing Lists Services,

Building 41, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225.)

3. Monitoring Procedures

Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved

under 40 CFR Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified

in this permit.

4. Penalties for Tampering

The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers

with, or knowingly renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method

required to be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be

punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by

imprisonment for not more than 2 years per violation, or by both.

5. Retention of Records

The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information,

including all calibration and maintenance records and all original

strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation,

copies of all reports required by this permit, and records of all data

used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at

least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or

application. This period may be extended by the Permit Issuing

Authority at any time.

6. Record Contents

Records of monitoring information shall include:

a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;

b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;

c. The date(s) analyses were performed;

d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;

e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and

f. The results of such analyses.

7. Inspection and Entry

The permittee shall allow the Permit Issuing Authority, or an

authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials and

other documents as may be required by law, to:

a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility

or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept

under the conditions of this permit;

b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that

must be kept under the conditions of this permit;

c. Inspect at reasonable time any facilities, equipment (including

monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated

or required under this permit; and

d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of

assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean

Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.

Section D. Reporting Requirements

1. Change in Discharge

The permittee shall give notice to the Permit Issuing Authority as

soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to

the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:

a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one

of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a new source; or

b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature

or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification

applies to pollutants which are subject neither to effluent limitations

in the permit, nor to notification requirements under Section D,

Paragraph D-10(a).

2. Anticipated Noncompliance

The permittee shall give advance notice to the Permit Issuing

Authority of any planned change in the permitted facility or activity

which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. Any

maintenance or facilities, which might necessitate unavoidable

interruption of operation and degradation of effluent quality, shall be

scheduled during noncritical water quality periods and carried out in a

manner approved by the Permit Issuing Authority.

3. Transfer of Ownership or Control

A permit may be automatically transferred to another party if:

a. The permittee notifies the Permit Issuing Authority of the

proposed transfer at least 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer

date;

b. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and

new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of permit

responsibility, coverage, and liability between them; and

c. The Permit Issuing Authority does not notify the existing

permittee of his or her intent to modify or revoke and reissue the

permit. If this notice is not received, the transfer is effective on

the date specified in the agreement mentioned in paragraph b.

4. Monitoring Reports

See Part III of this permit.

5. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee

If the permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than

required by this permit, using test procedures approved under 40 CFR

136 or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring

shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data

submitted in the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). Such increased

frequency shall also be indicated.

6. Averaging of Measurements

Calculations for limitations which require averaging of

measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise

specified by the Permit Issuing Authority in the permit.

7. Compliance Schedules

Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress

reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any compliance

schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later than 14 days

following each schedule date. Any reports of noncompliance shall

include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the

probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.

8. Twenty-Four Hour Reporting

The permittee shall orally report any noncompliance which may

endanger health or the environment, within 24 hours from the time the

permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. A written submission

shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the permittee becomes

aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a

description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of

noncompliance, including exact dates and times; and if the

noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is

expected to continue, and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate,

and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. The Permit Issuing

Authority may verbally waive the written report, on a case-by-case

basis, when the oral report is made. The following violations shall be

included in the 24 hour report when they might endanger health or the

environment:

a. An unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in

the permit.

b. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit.

9. Other Noncompliance

The permittee shall report in narrative form, all instances of

noncompliance not previously reported under Section D, Paragraphs D-2,

D-4, D-7, and D-8 at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The

reports shall contain the information listed in Paragraph D-8.

10. Changes in Discharges of Toxic Substances

The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority as soon as

it knows or has reason to believe:

a. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result

in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of any toxic

substance(s) (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D, Table II and III) which

is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest

of the following ``notification levels'':

(1) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/l); or

(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/l) for acrolein and

acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l) for 2, 4-

dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram

per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.

b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result

in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis, of a toxic

pollutant (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D. Table II and III) which is

not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of

the following ``notification levels'':

(1) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l); or

(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.

11. Signatory Requirements

All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Permit

Issuing Authority shall be signed and certified.

a. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:

(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the

purpose of this Section, a responsible corporate officer means:

(1) a president, secretary, treasurer or vice president of the

corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other

person who performs similar policy--or decision-making functions for

the corporation, or (2) the manager of one or more manufacturing

production or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or

having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in

second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been

assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate

procedures.

(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner

or the proprietor, respectively; or

(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by

either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.

b. All reports required by the permit and other information

requested by the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed by a person

described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person.

A person is a duly authorized representative only if:

(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described

above;

(2) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position

having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated

facility or activity, such as the position of plant manager, operator

of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of equivalent

responsibility, or an individual or position having overall

responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly

authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any

individual occupying a named position.); and

(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Permit Issuing

Authority.

c. Certification. Any person signing a document under paragraphs

(a) or (b) of this section shall make the following certification:

``I certify under penalty of law that this document and all

attachments were prepared under the direction or supervision in

accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel

properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my

inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those

persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the

information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,

accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties

for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and

imprisonment for knowing violations.''

12. Availability of Reports

Except for data determined to be confidential under 40 CFR Part 2,

all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall

be available for public inspection at the offices of the Permit Issuing

Authority. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and

effluent data shall not be considered confidential.

13. Penalties for Falsification of Reports

The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes

any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or

other document submitted or required to be maintained under this

permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or

noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more

than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 2

years per violation, or by both.

Section E. Definitions

1. Permit Issuing Authority

The Regional Administrator of EPA Region IV or his designee, unless

at some time in the future the State receives the authority to

administer the NPDES program and assumes jurisdiction over the permit;

at which time, the Director of the State program receiving

authorization becomes the issuing authority.

2. Act

``Act'' means the Clean Water Act (formerly referred to as the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act) Public Law 92-500, as amended by

Public Laws 95-217, 95-576, 96-483, 97-117, and Public Law 100-4, 33

U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

3. Concentration Measurements

a. The ``average monthly concentration'', is the sum of the

concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a

calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled and measured,

divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured

during such month (arithmetic mean of the daily concentration values).

The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a

composite sample or in the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean

(weighted by flow value) of all the samples collected during the

calendar day.

b. The ``maximum daily concentration'', is the concentration of a

pollutant discharge during a calendar day. It is identified as ``Daily

Maximum'' under ``Other Limits'' in Part I of the permit and the

highest such value recorded during the reporting period is reported

under the ``Maximum'' column under ``Quality'' on the DMR.

4. Other Measurements

a. The effluent flow expressed as MGD is the 24 hour average flow

averaged monthly. It is the arithmetic mean of the total daily flows

recorded during the calendar month. Where monitoring requirements for

flow are specified in Part I of the permit the flow rate values are

reported in the ``Average'' column under ``Quantity'' on the DMR.

b. An ``instantaneous flow measurement'' is a measure of flow taken

at the time of sampling, when both the sample and flow will be

representative of the total discharge.

c. Where monitoring requirements for pH or dissolved oxygen are

specified in Part I of the permit, the values are generally reported in

the ``Quality or Concentration'' column on the DMR.

5. Types of Samples

a. Grab Sample: A ``grab sample'' is a single influent or effluent

portion which is not a composite sample. The sample(s) shall be

collected at the period(s) most representative of the total discharge.

6. Calendar Day

A calendar day is defined as the period from midnight of one day

until midnight of the next day. However, for purposes of this permit,

any consecutive 24-hour period that reasonably represents the calendar

day may be used for sampling.

7. Hazardous Substance

A hazardous substance means any substance designated under 40 CFR

Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.

8. Toxic Pollutant

A toxic pollutant is any pollutant listed as toxic under Section

307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.

Section F. Application Requirements

a. For expired individual NPDES permits, dischargers desiring

coverage under this general permit are required to submit a notice of

intent (NOI) to the Permit Issuing Authority. The NOI shall include (1)

the name and address of the person that the permit will be issued to

(2) the name, and address of the operation, including county location,

(3) the applicable individual NPDES number(s), (4) the identification

of any new discharge location not contained in the expired permit, (5)

evidence that the operation has obtained approval of a Remedial Action

Plan (RAP) Order from the FDEP, (6) a map showing the facility and

discharge location (including latitude and longitude), (7) the name of

the receiving water, and (8) for discharges lasting over one (1) year a

pollution prevention plan. (See Part IV.2) Operators having several

individual permits are encouraged to consolidate requests for coverage

into one NOI for all individual permits. The previous submission of the

proper forms in the renewal application does not relieve the permittee

desiring coverage under the general permit of the requirement to file a

NOI.

b. All facilities continued by the previous general permit, will be

required to submit a NOI requesting continued coverage under the

reissued general permit by [insert date 60 calendar days after the date

of publication in the Federal Register]. The NOI shall contain the same

information specified in paragraph a above.

c. Dischargers with current individual NPDES permits that desire

coverage under this general permit are required to file an NOI to the

Permit Issuing Authority at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration

of their current permit(s). The NOI shall contain the same information

specified in paragraph a above. Permittees desiring to renew their

individual permit are required to submit the appropriate application

forms at least 180 days before expiration of their individual permit.

d. Dischargers who have not previously obtained an individual NPDES

permit are required to submit to EPA the FDEP approval order letter

approving the site RAP. The RAP approval order shall be attached to an

NOI to be covered by the general permit and shall contain the same

information specified in paragraph (a) above. The application for

coverage under the general permit must be made at least fourteen (14)

days before the discharge is to commence.

e. Dischargers seeking coverage under Part I A.3.a. will be

required to submit to EPA the date the discharge is expected to cease,

results of analytical data and the same information in paragraph a

above, except items (3), (4), (5) and (8). Notification of coverage to

discharge will be upon receipt of EPA's short-term coverage letter.

f. Notification of coverage will be given by the Permit Issuing

Authority by certified mail to the permittee (except for short-term

pump tests, 8-hours in duration or less), for dischargers seeking

coverage under Part I Sections A.1 and A.2, with the issuance date for

each facility being the effective date of coverage by the Permit

Issuing Authority.

Short-term pump tests, shall be covered automatically once the

permittee receives acceptable groundwater screening values, and the

permittee will be responsible meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1

or A.2. The DMR's for these pump tests shall be submitted to within

thirty (30) days after discharge ceases.

g. Dischargers meeting the conditions set forth in Part I A.3.c.

are not required to submit an detailed NOI as outlined above, but must

submit a copy of the analytical tests and a summary of the proposed

activity one (1) week after discharge begins. These dischargers are

covered upon receipt of the data, unless notified otherwise by EPA.

h. The coverage of the permit shall expire on December 6, 1999.

i. In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(a)(2) permittees who are

covered by this general permit who seek to be continued under this

general permit, shall submit an complete NOI in accordance with

paragraph a, to EPA 180 days before the expiration of this permit.

Section G. Additional General Permit Conditions

1. The Permit Issuing Authority may require any person authorized

by this permit to apply for and obtain an individual NPDES permit when:

a. The discharge(s) is a significant contributor of pollution;

b. The discharger is not in compliance with the conditions of this

permit;

c. A change has occurred in the availability of the demonstrated

technology of practices for the control or abatement of pollutants

applicable to the point sources;

d. Effluent limitation guidelines are promulgated for point sources

covered by this permit;

e. A Water Quality Management Plan containing requirements

applicable to such point source is approved; or

f. The point source(s) covered by this permit no longer:

(1) Involve the same or substantially similar types of operations;

(2) Discharge the same types of wastes;

(3) Require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions;

(4) Require the same or similar monitoring; and

(5) In the opinion of the RA, are more appropriately controlled

under an individual permit than under a general permit. The Regional

Administrator (RA) may require any operator authorized by this permit

to apply for an individual NPDES permit only if the operator has been

notified in writing that a permit application is required.

2. Any operator authorized to discharge by this permit may request

to be excluded from the coverage of this general permit by applying for

an individual permit. The operator shall submit an application together

with the reasons supporting the request to the RA.

3. When an individual NPDES permit is issued to an operator

otherwise subject to this general permit, the applicability of this

permit to the owner or operator is automatically terminated on the

effective date of the individual permit.

4. A source excluded from coverage under this general permit solely

because it already has an individual permit may request that its

individual permit be revoked, and that it be covered by this general

permit. Upon revocation of the individual permit, this general permit

shall apply to the source.

5. A petroleum contamination recovery operation may be excluded

from this general permit if it proposes discharges to receiving waters

that are classified as ``Special Protection, Outstanding Florida

Waters, Outstanding National Resource Waters'' as set forth by FAC 62-

302.700, dated April 25, 1993.

6. The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority within

30 days after the permanent termination of discharge from their

facility. This letter shall include the necessary Site Rehabilitation

Completion Order (SRCO) from Florida Bureau of Waste Cleanup which

constitutes final action on the State level for completion of cleanup

activities at the affected site. After review of the SRCO, EPA will

inactivate coverage of the general NPDES permit for the facility.

Dischargers covered under this general permit without RAP approval

shall submit a No Discharge Certification Form to EPA, within 30 days

after ceasing discharge.

Part III

Other Requirements

A. Reporting of Monitoring Results

Monitoring results obtained for each calendar month shall be

summarized and reported on a DMR Form (EPA No. 3320-1), one DMR for

each month. Unless otherwise required in Part V, these forms shall be

submitted after each calendar quarter and postmarked no later than the

28th day of the month following the completed calendar quarter. (For

example, data for January-March shall be submitted by April 28.)

Calendar quarters are January-March, April-June, July-September and

October-December. Signed copies of these and all other reports required

by Section D of Part II, Reporting Requirements, and Part V shall be

submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority at the following address:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Enforcement Section,

Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, 345 Courtland Street, N.E.,

Atlanta, GA 30365.

If no discharge occurs during the reporting period, sampling

requirements of this permit do not apply. The statement ``No

Discharge'' shall be written on the DMR form. If, during the term of

this permit, the facility ceases discharge to surface waters, the

Permit Issuing Authority shall be notified immediately upon cessation

of discharge.

B. Reopener Clause

This permit shall be modified, or alternatively revoked and

reissued to comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation

issued or approved under Sections 301(b)(2)(C), and (D), 304(b)(2), and

307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act (the Act), if the effluent standard or

limitation so issued or approved--

1. Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent

than any condition in this permit; or

2. Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit. The permit as

modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other

requirements of the Act then applicable.

Part IV

Best Management Practices and Pollution Prevention Conditions

Section A. General Conditions

1. BMP Plan

Preparation of a Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan shall be

prepared in conjunction with development of the Remedial Action Plan

required by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (See Part

II.F.c.). The permittee shall maintain the BMP plan at the facility and

shall make the plan available to the permit issuing authority upon

request. The ``NPDES Guidance Document'' can be used as a reference

which contains technical information on BMPs and the elements of the

BMP program. The permittee shall develop and implement a BMP plan which

prevents, or minimizes the potential for, the release of pollutants

from ancillary activities, including material storage areas; plant site

runoff; in-plant transfer, process and material handling areas; loading

and unloading operations, and sludge and waste disposal areas, to the

waters of the United States through plant site runoff; spillage or

leaks; sludge or waste disposal; or drainage from raw material storage.

The term pollutants refers to any substance listed as toxic under

Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, oil, as defined in Section

311(a)(1) of the Act, and substance listed as hazardous under Section

311 of the Act. Copies of the ``NPDES Guidance Document'' may be

obtained by submitting written requests to: Director, Water Management

Division, U.S. EPA Region IV, 345 Courtland St. N.E., Atlanta, Georgia

30365.

2. Pollution Prevention Plan

New permittees with long term treatment systems expected to

discharge one (1) year or more shall develop a Pollution Prevention

Plan for the site and submit it with the NOI. It shall contain the

following information:

(a) A Narrative of What Caused the Groundwater Contamination.

(b) Methods currently being deployed at the site to prevent

groundwater contamination from reoccurring.

(c) Other alternative treatment options which were considered in

reducing the groundwater contamination.

(d) Explanation of why long term treatment of discharge to Surface

Waters of the United States was chosen as opposed to:

(1) Reduction-Monitor Phase I--Using a combination of techniques to

significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be achieved

in three (3) months or less, with the objective of reaching a monitor-

only status.

(2) Reduction-Monitor Phase II--Using a combination of techniques

to significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be

achieved in six (6) months or less, with the objective of reaching a

monitor-only status.

In an effort to promote pollution prevention, the Permit Issuing

Authority may issue permits which include or require pollution

prevention activities.

Part V

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Freshwater Language

As required by Part I of the permit, within 30-days after

commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to fresh waters,

which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the

surface is less than 1500 milligrams per liter, shall initiate the

series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent toxicity of

the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1) outfall exists,

separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All test species,

procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be in accordance

with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to

Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the most current

edition. The dilution/control water used will be moderately hard water

as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7, or the most current

edition. A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be

conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and

the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR).

Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted,

these results must be submitted with the DMR.

1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal

multi-concentration toxicity tests using the daphnid (Ceriodaphnia

dubia) and the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). All tests shall be

conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall be

conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution concentrations

at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.

b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test,

the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated.

A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not

exceed 10% for either species.

2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every

month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once

every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified

otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to

as ``routine'' tests.

3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less

occurs in either test species in any of the above-described tests

within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the

permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same

manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable

acute toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection

requirements and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1

above must be met for the test to be considered valid. The first test

shall begin within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and

shall be conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests

are completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the

toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.

b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable

acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the

Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test

was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of

completion of the second additional, valid test.

Part V

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Saltwater Language

As required by Part I of this permit, within 30-days after

commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to marine waters,

which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the

surface is greater than or equal to 1500 milligrams per liter, shall

initiate the series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent

toxicity of the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1)

outfall exists, separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All

test species, procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be

in accordance with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of

Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the

most current edition. The dilution/control water and effluent used will

be adjusted to a salinity of 20 parts per thousand using artificial sea

salts as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7 (or the most current

edition). A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be

conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and

the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR).

Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted,

these results must be submitted with the DMR.

1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal

multi-concentration toxicity tests using the mysid shrimp (Mysidopsis

bahia) and the inland silverside (Menidia beryllina). All tests shall

be conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall

be conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution

concentrations at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.

b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test,

the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated.

A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not

exceed 10% for either species.

2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every

month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once

every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified

otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to

as ``routine'' tests.

3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less

occurs in either test species in any of the above- described tests

within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the

permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same

manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable

toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection requirements

and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1 above must be

met for the test to be considered valid. The first test shall begin

within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and shall be

conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests are

completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the

toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.

b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable

acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the

Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test

was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of

completion of the second additional, valid test.

[FR Doc. 94-30952 Filed 12-15-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P