[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 241 (Friday, December 16, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30952]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 16, 1994]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5123-1; NPDES No. FLG830000]

 

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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Final Rule--Reissuance of a NPDES General Permit to 
the State of Florida.

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

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IV is reissuing the 
final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General 
Permit No. FLG830000 to facilities within the political boundary of the 
State of Florida. This final reissued NPDES general permit contains 
effluent limitations, prohibitions, reporting requirements and other 
conditions on facilities which discharge uncontaminated groundwater 
associated with dewatering or treated groundwater and/or storm water 
incidental to the groundwater cleanup operation which have been 
contaminated by automotive gasoline, aviation and/or diesel fuels. This 
permit authorizes discharges from facilities currently located in and 
discharging to surface waters within the political boundary of the 
State of Florida, and any new treatment facilities placed in operation 
during the term of this permit. Reissuance of this final NPDES will 
allow general dewatering and cleanup actions at petroleum contaminated 
sites to begin without the delays of individual NPDES permit issuance 
procedures.
    For facilities seeking coverage for general dewatering discharges, 
coverage under the general permit is automatic, upon the permittee's 
receipt of acceptable groundwater screening values, as described in 
Part I.A.3(c) of the general permit. The effluent from these general 
dewatering activities shall be monitored within thirty (30) days after 
commencement of the discharge and once every six months for the life of 
the project to maintain coverage under the general permit. 
Additionally, short-term pump tests, eight (8) hours in duration or 
less, shall be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's 
Notice of Intent (NOI) by EPA and the permittee will be responsible for 
meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1 or A.2. DMRs shall be submitted 
within thirty (30) days after completion of the pump test discharge.
    Except for facilities meeting the above conditions, all other 
facilities seeking coverage under the general permit by NOI requests 
will be responded to by written notification of coverage by certified 
mail from the Director, Water Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV. 
This method of notification will be applicable to both new dischargers 
applying for coverage for the first time and existing dischargers which 
are seeking coverage under the reissued general permit. Facilities 
which are currently discharging under the previous NPDES general permit 
are required to submit another NOI requesting coverage under the 
reissued general permit by February 14, 1995, in accordance with Part 
II, Section F(b).

DATES: This general permit is effective on December 7, 1994, at 1:00 
p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time.
    Dates for coverage: (1) Dewatering Activity discharges are 
authorized upon the permittee's receipt of acceptable groundwater 
screening values listed in Part I.A.3. (2) Short-Term Pump Test 
discharges, eight (8) hours in duration or less, are authorized upon 
receipt of a complete NOI, as described in Part II, Section F(f). (3) 
Petroleum Contaminated discharges, are only authorized after written 
notification of coverage by certified mail from the Director, Water 
Management Division, U.S. EPA Region IV is received.
    This action constitutes the Environmental Protection Agency's final 
permit decision, in accordance with Title 40, Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) 124.72.
    The administrative record, including draft NPDES general permit, 
fact sheet, state certification, comments received, and additional 
information are available by writing the EPA, Region IV, or for review 
and copying at 345 Courtland St., N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365, between 
the hours of 8:15 A.M. and 4:30 P.M., Monday through Friday. Copies 
will be provided at a nominal charge per page. Additional information 
concerning the permit may be obtained at the address and during the 
hours noted above from Ms. Lena Scott, Public Notice Coordinator, 404/
347-3004.

ADDRESSES: Notifications required under this general permit should be 
sent to: Director, Water Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, N.E. Atlanta, 
Georgia 30365 Request for Coverage: Written notification of intent to 
be covered by the general permit (if required) shall be provided as 
described in the permit Part II Section F.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Cole, Environmental Engineer, 
Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, Water Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, 
Georgia 30365, (404) 347-3012 ext. 2948.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    On Thursday, August 25, 1988 (53 FR 32442), EPA, Region IV proposed 
the issuance of the draft NPDES General Permit. During the 30-day 
comment period, a request for an extension of the comment period was 
received, and on Tuesday, October 25, 1988 (53 FR 43035), the comment 
period was extended to November 15, 1988. On Monday, July 17, 1989 (54 
FR 29986), EPA, Region IV issued the Final NPDES General Permit for 
Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of 
Florida.
    On Friday, February 22, 1991 (56 FR 7379), EPA, Region IV published 
a notice of a proposed modification to the NPDES General Permit for 
Petroleum Fuel Contaminated Ground/Storm Waters in the State of Florida 
(56 FR 7379) to include dewatering activities. On Thursday, August 29, 
1991 (56 FR 42736), the final modification was issued. The general 
permit expired on July 16, 1994. On Monday, September 19, 1994, EPA 
Region IV published a notice concerning the reissuance of the general 
permit (59 FR 47862) that is being issued in final form today.
    The Region received comments from eight (8) commentors. All the 
public comments received during the 30-day comment period are included 
in the administrative record and were considered by Region IV in the 
formulation of a final determination of the conditions of today's final 
permit.
    For reference, Region IV published a detailed fact sheet with the 
proposed draft permit in 59 FR 47862. The Region is incorporating by 
reference that fact sheet as part of the final fact sheet for today's 
final permit. The discussions presented in the previous fact sheet 
should be consulted in reviewing the applicability and scope of the 
final permit conditions.
    A formal hearing is available to challenge any NPDES permit issued 
under 40 CFR 124.14 except for a general permit. Persons affected by a 
general permit may not challenge the conditions of a general permit as 
a right in further agency proceedings. They may instead either 
challenge the general permit in court, or apply for an individual 
permit under 40 CFR 122.21 as authorized at 40 CFR 122.28 and then 
request a formal hearing on the issuance or denial of an individual 
permit. Additional information regarding these procedures is available 
by contacting Ms. Gwen Eason, Office of Regional Counsel, at the 
address above or at (404) 347-2309.

II. Other Legal Requirements

A. Executive Order 12291

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from 
the review requirements of Executive Order 12291 pursuant to Section 
8[b] of that order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities 
in this final general permit under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 
44 U.S.C. Sec. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements of 
this permit have already been approved by the Office of Management and 
Budget in submissions made for the NPDES permit program under the 
provisions of the Clean Water Act.

C. State Certification Requirements

    Section 301(b)(1)(c) of the Act requires that NPDES permits contain 
conditions which ensure compliance with applicable State water quality 
standards or limitations. Section 401 of the Act requires that States 
certify that Federally issued permits are in compliance with State law. 
This permit is for operations discharging to waters within the State of 
Florida. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.53, EPA requested certification of the 
permit on September 15, 1994. On October 27, 1994, the Florida 
Department of Environmental Protection waived certification of the 
general permit.

D. Effective Date

    The final NPDES general permit issued today, December 6th, 1994, is 
effective on December 7, 1994.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    After review of the facts presented in this document, I hereby 
certify, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 605(b), that this 
NPDES general permit will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Moreover, the permit reduces a 
significant administrative burden on regulated sources.
Patrick M. Tobin,
Deputy Regional Administrator.

Summary of Comments

Appendix A--Public Comments

    Public notice of the draft permit reissuance was published at 59 FR 
47862 (September 19, 1994). Additionally, the permit was publicly 
noticed in five (5) major cities in the State of Florida on September 
16, 1994, (Public Notice Number 94FL0167), to allow comments from 
interested parties which would be considered in the formulation of a 
final decision regarding reissuance of the proposed draft NPDES General 
Permit No. FLG830000.
    The following parties responded with written comments on reissuance 
of the proposed NPDES general permit: Florida Department of 
Environmental Protection (FDEP), Chevron Research & Technology Company, 
Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Mobil Oil Corporation, Exxon Company, Walt 
Disney World Company, Florida Chemical Industry Council and the United 
States Fish and Wildlife Service.
    Comment 1: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection 
(FDEP), Bureau of Waste Cleanup, submitted comments by letter dated 
October 3, 1994, which commented on Part I.A.3 of the general permit. 
The FDEP wanted clarification concerning the intent of Part I.A.3. FDEP 
stated that the statement on Page two (2) of the introduction states 
that `` Except for facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.3, 
written notice of intent to be covered by the reissued NPDES general 
permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing Authority prior to 
initiation of discharge to waters of the United States,'' implies that 
this includes subparts of Part I.3., including I.3.(a), (b), and (c). 
FDEP stated that this implies that for discharges that are either 
uncontaminated or are contaminated with petroleum only and are treated, 
notification to EPA is not required. It was stated that this is not 
consistent with the phrase under I.3(a) which states ``upon receipt of 
written EPA notification of coverage that the Notice of Intent (NOI) 
request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence.'' The 
State mentioned that this implies that not only must prior notification 
be given by EPA for the short-term discharges from sites contaminated 
by petroleum only, but that the person responsible for the discharge 
must wait for a reply from EPA, and this inconsistency should be 
reconciled.
    Response: EPA agrees that the referenced statement on page 2 of the 
introduction is incorrect. It has been corrected to read, ``except for 
facilities meeting the conditions of Part I.A.3(c), written NOI to be 
covered by the reissued permit shall be provided to the Permit Issuing 
Authority.''
    Comment 2: FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to wait for a 
response from EPA in order to initiate a short-term discharge for the 
following reasons: (1) Chapter 62-770, requires that a Remedial Action 
Plan (RAP) be submitted to the FDEP within 2 months of approval of a 
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR), and that it is routine to 
require pump tests to design information for the RAP, plus identify 
aquifer characteristics. FDEP stated that it is not reasonable to delay 
the RAP by requiring prior approval from EPA of these simple 8 hour 
pump tests. (2) Due to varying hydrogeological conditions in Florida, 
local departments commonly perform dewatering activities in their 
right-of-way of previous retail service stations, plus have no 
information before commencing these activities on the existence of 
petroleum contamination. FDEP stated that these construction projects 
should not be delayed for an extended period to wait on response from 
EPA, since mobile treatment units can be deployed and designed to meet 
EPA's discharge limitations in the NPDES general permit. (3) During 
dewatering for construction and replacement of underground storage 
tanks, FDEP mentioned that it was not reasonable for the tank 
installation to be delayed for an extended period of time; especially 
since discharges from these operations only last for a few hours at a 
time and mobile equipment used is very reliable in achieving EPA's 
discharge standards.
    Response: EPA concurs with FDEP reason No. 1 above which allows 
short-term 8 hour pump tests at sites which have identified petroleum 
contamination, to be covered upon receipt of the NOI by the Permit 
Issuing Authority. Only short-term pump tests, 8 hours in duration or 
less, designed to obtain information on aquifer characteristics, will 
be automatically covered upon receipt of the permittee's NOI, and the 
permittee will be responsible or meeting the discharge limitations of 
Part A.1 or A.2. General Permit numbers will be assigned to these sites 
and DMR's sent with a copy of the general permit and a letter 
acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Intent.
    EPA responds to reasons # 2 and # 3 as proposed by the FDEP, which 
would allow coverage by simply submitting an NOI for local departments 
dewatering projects or scheduled dewatering during gasoline tank 
replacements. It is EPA's understanding that the construction 
activities described in No. 2 and No. 3 are planned well in advance of 
the initiation of the dewatering process. For this reason, EPA sees no 
reason to exempt these sites from NOI requirements. Unless preliminary 
groundwater assessments have been performed along the right-of-way 
project prior to startup, even the local departments may be unaware of 
an contaminated plume that may be encountered during the road widening, 
or excavation projects. The potential problem EPA expects in waiving 
NOI requirements for these activities, is the lack of sufficient data 
to cover these operations. The better approach would be for the 
permittee to survey potential problem areas well in advance of the 
dewatering startup, identify the type of contamination and seek 
discharge coverage under the NPDES general permit using the NOI 
process, for those potentially contaminated groundwater discharge 
areas.
    Comment 3: FDEP also questioned whether the indicator criteria 
values listed under Part I.A.3, should be analyzed using untreated 
groundwater or treated groundwater. FDEP also stated that if the intent 
of Part I.A.3 is to allow short term discharges from sites contaminated 
with petroleum only, then the indicators should be applied to treated 
recovered groundwater, because if these indicators were applied to 
untreated groundwater, this would preclude discharges from sites 
contaminated with petroleum only. However, FDEP stated that applying 
these indicator values to the treated effluent may allow treatment 
alternatives that are capable of removing the metals listed and become 
eligible to discharge under the general permit, since the indicator 
values were not exceeded (even if the source of contamination was not 
petroleum in nature).
    Response: EPA notes that the indicator values apply to untreated 
representative groundwater samples from the vicinity of the proposed 
produced groundwater discharge. These could be tests from monitoring 
wells, recovery wells, or samples of produced groundwater taken prior 
to any treatment and would not allow treatment alternatives capable of 
removing metals to be covered by this general permit. It should be 
emphasized that the intent of Part I.A.3 is to allow the discharge of 
produced groundwater from an uncontaminated site activity. If the site 
is contaminated with petroleum fuels, the permit refers back to Parts 
I.A.1 or I.A.2.
    Comment 4: FDEP requested EPA's determination on a particular issue 
before the finalization of the general permit. FDEP stated that many 
petroleum sites are located in urban areas, and other possible sources 
of contamination may be located in the vicinity of the petroleum site. 
In these situations commingling of plumes from non-petroleum sites may 
occur. It was noted that many sites performing Contamination Assessment 
Reports (CARs) had detected low levels of TCE or PCE for many sites 
which had a dry cleaner in the vicinity. FDEP stated that since these 
solvents had similar characteristics and were volatile, most treatment 
system designs based on permit effluent requirements for the petroleum 
compounds will easily remove the PCE or TCE to non-detectable levels 
without any oversizing of equipment or additional treatment processes. 
FDEP stated that other compounds in relatively low concentrations from 
off site sources should not preclude eligibility of the general permit 
for the overall cleanup, which is to remediate the petroleum plume and 
requested EPA's determination on the issue.
    Response: EPA in it's initial conception of the general permit, 
only made specific reference to contamination from petroleum fuels and 
referenced gasoline, aviation gas, diesel and jet-fuel. The intent in 
issuing this general permit was to provide general permit coverage for 
the discharge of treated petroleum contaminated groundwater. To cover 
other sources of contamination will require additional research and 
public participation. Because the general permit expired on July 16, 
1994, EPA sees an urgency to reissue this permit; therefore, EPA may 
consider this issue in the future through a permit modification. EPA, 
after collecting sufficient information, may consider the inclusion of 
other chemicals associated with dry cleaners in the near future, but 
due to the lack of sufficient information, will not address it at this 
time.
    Comment 5: Chevron Research and Technology Company, by letter dated 
October 4, 1994, requested a copy of the NPDES Best Management Practice 
(BMP) Guidance Document.
    Response: EPA sent the NPDES BMP Guidance document to Chevron on 
October 13, 1994.
    Comment 6: Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (ML&B), Counselors at Law, by 
letter dated October 15, 1994, made two comments concerning the permit. 
ML&B mentioned that all references to Florida Administrative Code 
Chapter 17-770, 17-302, or any other ``17-'' should be changed to 
Chapter ``62-770, or 62- 302, and mentioned that Chapter ``62-'' is 
where the current law is found. ML&B also mentioned that the Fact Sheet 
should contain some discussion of discharge to ``surface waters'', the 
triggering event. ML&B also mentioned that the permittee should know 
where to go in order look up the definition of ``surface waters'' or 
discharges to surface waters. Mentioned that these issues and basic 
guidance thereon may ensure that all facilities obligated under the 
general permit actually apply for coverage and discussion of this 
significant jurisdictional issue in the Fact Sheet or permit itself 
seems appropriate.
    Response: EPA refers the commentor to the Clean Water Act (CWA) 
which requires that point source discharges of pollutants to waters of 
the United States be covered by NPDES permits. The definition of 
``point source'' and ``waters of the U.S.'' can be found at 40 CFR 
Section 122.2. Additionally, all references that refer to Florida 
Administrative Code Chapter ``17'' will be changed to Florida 
Administrative Code Chapter ``62.''
    Comment 7: Mobil Oil Corporation (MOC), by letter dated October 17, 
1994, supported the reissuance of the general permit, since it is more 
efficient and cost effective approach to permitting routine activity 
than the individual permitting process. MOC raised several concerns on 
the draft NPDES general permit concerning the new requirements of the 
whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests. MOC stated that the need for WET 
testing has not been established. It was stated that the Fact Sheet 
cited that the chemical criteria was significantly more stringent than 
Florida's water quality standards and MOC stated that meeting the 
chemical criteria, coupled with the required treatment processes should 
be more than adequate to protect aquatic life.
    Response: In response to MOC comment, EPA notes that the chemical 
specific discharge limitations mentioned do provide adequate protection 
to meet Florida's chemical specific water quality standards. However, 
since previous toxicity monitoring tests did indicate that a number of 
effluents were toxic, which is also a violation of Florida 
Administrative Code (FAC) Section 17-4.244(3)(a), WET limits were 
incorporated into the permit.
    Comment 8: MOC stated that if WET testing is required, the 
procedure outlined in Part V should be modified. MOC stated that if the 
compliance limit for WET testing is an LC50 > 100%, the requirement for 
a full concentration test is not warranted and only a screening test 
(control and 100% final effluent only) should be run to demonstrate 
compliance.
    Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the use of multiple 
dilutions, per the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4- 90/027F) 
cited in the September 19,1994 Federal Register notice, such dilutions 
are recommended to assess NPDES compliance for all WET tests (pg. 47-
48). They provide more information about the dose-response of the test, 
increase the statistical power of the test, and decrease the inherent 
variability found in conducting a single test concentration with a 
control.
    Comment 9: MOC stated that there was no advantage to static-renewal 
versus the static procedure for these discharges and recommended the 
static procedure for these WET tests.
    Response: Regarding Mobil's comment that static tests only be 
conducted, the EPA acute WET protocol manual (EPA/600/4-90/027F) cited 
in the Federal Register notice above mandates the use of static renewal 
tests for all tests exceeding 48 hr (pg. 57, 61, 65, 69). Because the 
acute WET tests specified in this notice are 96-hrs. in duration, 
static renewals tests must be conducted.
    Comment 10: MOC also recommended that the mandatory requirement 
that recommended concurrent standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing 
be removed, since this provides limited information on the quality of 
the testing laboratory. MOC mentioned that requiring facilities to pay 
for these studies, when they receive no benefit is inappropriate.
    Response: Regarding Mobil's comment on the required concurrent 
standard reference toxicant (SRT) testing with each WET test, the 
September 19,1994 Federal Register notice does allow for monthly SRT 
results to be submitted in lieu of such concurrent tests. Regarding 
Mobil's comment on requiring contract laboratories to conduct such SRT 
testing, EPA does not currently have a national laboratory 
certification program for WET. EPA does acknowledge that some states do 
have such a certification program. Until a national certification 
program is established, EPA must have some means to assess the quality 
of a given laboratory's performance. The use of SRTs is one way of 
making that assessment. EPA notes that permittees have the option of 
using in-house capabilities to conduct such WET tests. However, when 
permittees rely on outside laboratories to conduct WET tests for NPDES 
compliance purposes, the use of SRTs is required. EPA disagrees with 
Mobil's comment that such SRT tests have no benefit for the permittee. 
On the contrary, such SRT testing serves to validate the quality and 
precision of the WET tests conducted by the contract laboratory on 
behalf of the permittee that are submitted to the permitting authority.
    Comment 11: MOC mentioned that facilities covered by the existing, 
but expired general permit may be required to perform another testing 
requirement, such a EPA 624 and 625 although this sampling was 
performed for the existing general permit.
    Response: EPA does not agree that facilities already discharging 
under the general permit be excluded from performing an additional test 
analysis on the effluent using EPA methods 624 or 625 priority 
pollutant scan. This requirement conforms with the reapplication data 
necessary for individual permits in which a permittee is required to 
retest the effluent to obtain accurate information which determine 
possible changes in effluent characteristics. This priority pollutant 
scan shall be performed within 60 days of startup of the produced water 
discharge, or within 60 days after receipt of notification of coverage 
from EPA for facilities currently discharging under the previous 
general permit.
    Comment 12: Exxon Company (EC), by letter dated October 20, 1994, 
stated that some risk-based analysis is an important element in 
establishing water quality criteria for certain processes, and that the 
proposed 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit appears to be absent of any 
risk-based approach. EC stated that scientific data does not warrant 
the restrictive 1.0 ug/l benzene effluent limit for release into 
surface water and is even more stringent than that required under 
Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 17-302.530 for Class I potable water 
supplies and recommended that the national limit of 5.0 ug/l be 
substituted as the benzene effluent limit.
    Response: EPA concurs that the 1.0 ug/l limit for benzene is more 
stringent than Florida's water quality standards. The limitation for 
benzene is based on the best treatment technology available and happens 
to be more stringent than FAC 17-302.530(9)[4/25/94], Class I potable 
water supplies which is 1.18 ug/l. The 1.0 ug/l limitation is also more 
stringent than Florida Class III water quality standard, which requires 
an annual average limitation of 71.28 ug/l for benzene. Therefore, 
since technology has proven capable of consistently maintaining the 1.0 
ug/l limitation for benzene and numerous permittees have consistently 
designed treatment systems that meet the requirements of the NPDES 
general permit, EPA will retain the benzene limit. In addition, 
maintaining the 1.0 ug/l benzene limit complies with Section 402(o)(1) 
of the Water Quality Act of 1987, which states that a permit may not be 
renewed, reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations which 
are less stringent than the comparable effluent limitations in the 
previous permit except in compliance with Section 303 (d)(4).
    Comment 13: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the acceptable pH for 
treated effluent under the previous and proposed NPDES general permit 
is 6.0-8.5 standard units (SUs), and mentioned that many lakes and 
streams in Central and North Florida have a pH range of 5.0-6.0 SUs. EC 
stated that many influent pH samples for remedial pump and treat 
systems are also in this range and recommended reducing the allowed 
lower limit from 6.0 to 5.5 SUs. Response: In response to EC comments, 
the pH language in the current proposed draft permit does allow some 
variation for pH depending on natural background of the receiving 
water. However, this natural background data must be furnished to EPA 
by the permittee in the initial NOI request; in order to be considered 
in determining the pH range for the facility during the notification of 
coverage request. It should be noted that the pH of the receiving 
stream, not the influent or effluent, influences the pH permit limits.
    Comment 14: Exxon Company (EC) commented on Part I.A.3 concerning 
the screen for metals that would indicate contamination from sources 
other than petroleum fuels. EC mentioned that it is unwarranted to 
require screening for additional metals that are not ordinarily 
considered constituents of petroleum fuels as a basis for securing a 
NPDES general permit for petroleum fuel contamination. EC mentioned 
that if there is a cause for this additional screening at a particular 
site, the regulatory processes in place will generate the additional 
site investigation and testing needed, instead of testing every site 
whether justified or not and recommended that the screening for other 
metals be removed as a requirement from the NPDES general permit. EC 
mentioned that if additional metal testing is required, annual testing 
is much more appropriate than semi-annual, especially for groundwater 
remedial systems at underground storage tank cleanup sites.
    Response: In response to Exxon Company (EC) comments, EPA clarifies 
the misconception that contaminated petroleum fuel sites must perform 
the Part I.A.3 testing requirements for metals; these discharges must 
comply only with the requirements of Part I.A.1 or I.A.2. EPA refers to 
the general applicability of Part I.A.3, that allows produced water 
discharges from any noncontaminated site, which could include 
dewatering for tank removals, construction activity, or aquifer pump 
tests from water wells. Any point source discharge of pollutants to 
waters of the U.S. requires an NPDES permit, regardless of whether the 
site is contaminated or uncontaminated. EPA, in its approach to 
covering dewatering of produced groundwater associated with any 
activity, placed the burden for verification on the permittee for 
determining that the site groundwater has not been contaminated with 
sources other than petroleum fuels. Requiring all permittees to perform 
this screening allows facilities performing dewatering activities to be 
placed under the general permit, assuming that the screening reveals no 
contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels.
    Comment 15: Exxon Company (EC) mentioned that the Discharge 
Monitoring Report forms should be revised and the reporting procedure 
should be simplified. Also, mentioned that the quality of forms 
initially received from EPA tend to become illegible when photocopied. 
EC also requested that EPA retain the current level of bioassay testing 
instead of increasing the frequency as proposed.
    Response: EPA will send original Discharge Monitoring Reports to 
the permittee so that more legible photocopies can be produced. EPA 
recommends that these originals be maintained by the permittee for 
copying purposes. In reference to the bioassay requirements, permittees 
which have previously obtained coverage under this general permit, 
which effluents have not demonstrated unacceptable toxicity (LC 50 < 
100%), may continue to sample 1/year. All sampling procedures and test 
methods must comply with Part V. It should be noted that the permit 
limit identified in Part V is applicable to those facilities covered by 
this general permit under Sections I.A.1 and I.A.2.
    Comment 16: Walt Disney World (WDW) Company, by letter dated 
October 18, 1994, submitted comments on the Reissuance of the NPDES 
General Permit for the State of Florida. WDW made general comments 
concerning the proposed effluent limitations for (1) Total Organic 
Carbon and (2) pH, for discharge of uncontaminated produced 
groundwater. WDW mentioned most of the uncontaminated groundwater below 
their property exceeds EPA's proposed total organic carbon (TOC) 
limitation solely because of its naturally ocurring properties. WDW 
indicated that only lakes on the property fall below the 10 mg/l 
requirement and four isolated wetlands had TOC values averaging better 
than 90 mg/l or better, with all other TOC values ranging between 10 
and 65 mg/l. WDW mentioned that these organic compounds are naturally 
occurring and large; greater than 500 molecular weight, most of which 
consist of humic acids which generally come from the decomposition of 
organic matter.
    Response: EPA concurs that some elevated TOC levels are the result 
of naturally occurring conditions. Therefore, EPA will revise the 
language in Part A.3 to read as follows: If any of the analytical test 
results, (except TOC, benzene or naphthalene), exceed the above 
screening values the discharge is not authorized by this general 
permit. For excessive benzene or naphthalene concentrations, see Part 
A.3(a) below. For initial excessive TOC values that may be caused by 
naturally-occurring, high molecular weight organic compounds, the 
permittee may submit additional information which describes the method 
used to prove that these compounds are naturally occurring compounds. 
This additional information shall be submitted to EPA during the filing 
of the NOI request for coverage under the general permit. EPA will 
review this data and determine if coverage under the general permit is 
appropriate.
    Comment 17: Walt Disney World (WDW) made comments concerning the pH 
limitation as proposed in the NPDES general permit. WDW mentioned that 
the pH of the waters on the WDW property range between 3.7 and 7.7 
standard units. WDW mentioned that the general permit should allow 
discharge of uncontaminated produced groundwaters into any receiving 
waters so long as the produced groundwater pH falls within the lower 
and upper background pH limits of the receiving waters as determined 
from sampling data submitted by the applicant in the Notice of Intent 
(NOI) request.
    Response: Since the pH requirements as proposed are based on 
Florida Administrative Code (FAC) Section 17-302.530(52)(c), EPA will 
retain the language in the final NPDES general permit.
    Comment 18: The Florida Chemical Industry Council (FCIC), by letter 
dated October 21, 1994, mentioned that the proposed permit requires all 
produced groundwater discharges to submit analytical results to EPA, 
regardless of project size or duration even if contamination is 
undetected. FCIC mentioned the permit should allow a de minimis limit, 
so that very small construction projects will not be required to report 
and would eliminate small projects that do not involve cleanup at 
uncontaminated sites.
    Response: The Clean Water Act (CWA) does not allow for exclusion 
based on the volume of the discharge. However, having all potential 
permittees perform the analytical screen for any produced groundwater 
discharge to surface waters of the U.S., places the burden on the 
potential discharger to verify that the groundwater is uncontaminated 
prior to discharge regardless of the length of discharge. The CWA 
requires that all point source discharges of pollutants to waters of 
the U.S. be authorized by NPDES permits.
    Comment 19: The United States, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 
submitted general comments on the NPDES general permit No. FLG830000. 
The FWS recommended that the permit be denied unless it includes 
discharge limitations and other appropriate permit conditions that will 
assure the maintenance of natural pre-project habitat quality, 
including: (a) Water quality, (b) sediment quality and, (c) vegetative 
species diversity and abundance, plus the best available technology and 
scientific data be utilized to avoid any adverse effects on fish and 
wildlife, their behavior, and the reproduction of any species.
    Response: Since some technology based limits in this general permit 
are more stringent than Florida's water quality standards, and the 
Water Quality-based limits are based on Florida's water quality 
standards, EPA believes that the maintenance of pre-project water 
quality will be maintained. Additionally, the requirement to perform 
acute toxicity testing on more sensitive organisms assures that 
adequate monitoring is in place to avoid potential adverse impacts on 
fish and wildlife.

III. Other Changes to Final NPDES General Permit at Issuance:

    1. The word ``Dewatering'' was added to the title of the final 
issued permit to indicate that the permit covers general dewatering.
    2. In Part I.A.3 the language was revised to read: The following 
are the minimum reporting requirements for all produced groundwater 
dischargers which have acceptable screening value results as described 
below: Additionally, the language was revised to allow initial sampling 
to begin within thirty (30) days after commencement of discharge.
    3. In Part I.A.3(c) and in Part II, Section F(g), the language was 
revised to allow the short summary and analytical results to be sent 
one (1) week after discharge begins.
Permit No. FLG830000

General Permit To Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System

    In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as 
amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq; the ``Act''),
    Discharges of uncontaminated groundwater from dewatering 
activities, treated groundwater and incidental storm water, which are 
contaminated with gasoline or aviation fuel, are authorized to 
discharge to waters of the United States within the State of Florida in 
accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other 
conditions set forth herein. This final permit consists of Part I, Part 
II, Part III, Part IV, and Part V.
    This permit shall become effective on December 7, 1994. This permit 
and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, Eastern 
Daylight Savings Time, on December 6, 1999.

    Date Issued: December 6, 1994.
Robert F. McGhee,
Acting Director, Water Management Division.

Part I

A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements: Existing Sources 
and New Dischargers

    1. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 
and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is 
authorized to discharge treated groundwater and storm water that has 
been contaminated by Automotive Gasoline. It is anticipated that these 
contaminated waters will be treated by air stripping, followed by 
activated carbon adsorption, if necessary, or equivalent treatment to 
meet the following effluent limitations. Such discharges shall be 
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Discharge limitations          Monitoring requirements     
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
             Effluent characteristic                                              Measurement                   
                                                    Daily avg     Daily max        frequency        Sample type 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flow, MGD.......................................  Report......  Report......  Continuous........  Flowmeter.    
Benzene, g/l...........................  ............  1.0.........  1/month...........  Grab.         
*Total Lead, g/l.......................  ............  30.0........  1/month...........  Grab.         
pH, standard units..............................                                                                
(1) See Below                                                                                                   
Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................                                                                
(2) See Part V                                    Grab. ......                                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.                    

    An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less 
will constitute a violation of Florida Administrative Code (FAC) (July 
11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a) and the terms of this permit. The testing 
for this requirement must conform with Part V of this permit.
    For fresh waters and coastal waters, the pH of the effluent shall 
not be lowered to less than 6.0 units for fresh waters, or less than 
6.5 units for marine waters, or raised above 8.5 units, unless the 
permittee submits natural background data in the NOI request confirming 
a natural background pH outside of this range. If natural background of 
the receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in 
the NOI request, is determined to be less than 6.0 units for fresh 
waters, or less than 6.5 units in marine waters, the pH shall not vary 
below natural background or vary more than one (1) unit above natural 
background for fresh and coastal waters. If natural background of the 
receiving water, as revealed by sampling data from the permittee in the 
NOI request, is determined to be higher than 8.5 units, the pH shall 
not vary above natural background or vary more than one (1) unit below 
natural background of fresh and coastal waters. The acceptable pH range 
will be included in the letter granting permit coverage and on the DMR. 
The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or 
continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4).
    In accordance with FAC Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c)(4-25-93), the 
discharge shall at all times be free from floating solids, visible 
foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on 
surface waters.
    Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements 
specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): Nearest 
accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or 
mixing with the receiving waters.

A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements: Existing Sources 
and New Dischargers

    2. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 
and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is 
authorized to discharge treated groundwater and storm water that has 
been contaminated by Aviation Gasoline, Jet Fuel or Diesel.
    It is anticipated that these contaminated waters will be treated by 
air stripping, followed by activated carbon adsorption, if necessary, 
or equivalent treatment to meet the following effluent limitations. 
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as 
specified below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Discharge limitations          Monitoring requirements     
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
             Effluent characteristic                                              Measurement                   
                                                    Daily avg     Daily max        frequency        Sample type 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flow, MGD.......................................  Report......  Report......  Continuous........  Flowmeter.    
Benzene, g/l...........................  ............  1.0.........  1/month...........  Grab.         
Naphthalene, g/l.......................  ............  100.0.......  1/month...........  Grab.         
*Total Lead, g/l.......................  ............  30.0........  1/month...........  Grab.         
pH, standard units (SUs)........................                                                                
(3) See Part I.A.1                                                                                              
Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity...................                                                                
(2) See Part V                                    Grab. ......                                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Monitoring for this parameter is required only when contamination results from leaded fuel.                    

    An LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 96 hours duration or less 
will constitute a violation of FAC (July 11, 1993) Sec. 62-4.244(3)(a) 
and the terms of this permit. The testing for this requirement must 
conform with Part V of this permit.
    The permittee shall comply with the same pH requirements for this 
Part I.A.2 as in Part I.A.1.
    The pH shall be monitored once every month by grab sample, or 
continuously with a recorder. (See item I.B.4). In accordance with FAC 
Sec. 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at all times be free from 
floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or visible oil in such 
amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.
    Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements 
specified above shall be taken at the following location(s): nearest 
accessible point after final treatment but prior to actual discharge or 
mixing with the receiving waters.

A. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements

    3. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 
and lasting through the term of this permit, the permittee is 
authorized to discharge produced groundwater from any noncontaminated 
site activity which discharges by a point source to waters of the 
United States, only if the reported values for the parameters listed 
below do not exceed any of the screening values below. Before discharge 
of produced groundwater can occur from such sites, analytical tests on 
samples of the untreated proposed discharge water shall be performed to 
determine if contamination exists from other sources.
    The following are the minimum reporting requirements for all 
produced groundwater dischargers which have acceptable screening value 
results as described below:
    The effluent shall be sampled at the final effluent within thirty 
(30) days after commencement of discharge and once every six months for 
the life of the project to maintain continued coverage under this 
general permit. The effluent shall be sampled for the parameters listed 
below and the analytical results obtained shall be submitted to EPA at 
the address given in Part III.A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Parameter                          Daily maximum  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Organic Carbon................................  Report, mg/l.     
pH..................................................  Report, standard  
                                                       units            
Total Recoverable Mercury...........................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Total Recoverable Cadmium...........................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Total Recoverable Copper............................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Total Recoverable Lead..............................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Total Recoverable Zinc..............................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Total Recoverable Chromium (Hex.)...................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Benzene.............................................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
Naphthalene.........................................  Report, g/
                                                       l.               
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reported analytical test results for the parameters listed above 
exceeding any of the screening values listed below shall be considered 
an indication of contamination from sources other than petroleum fuels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Parameter            
   Indicator if discharge is into    -----------------------------------
                                        Fresh waters      Marine waters 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Organic Carbon................  10.0 mg/l         10.0 mg/l       
pH, SU's............................  6.0-8.5           6.5-8.5         
Total Recoverable Mercury...........  0.012 g/ 0.025 g/
                                       l                 l              
Total Recoverable Cadmium...........  9.3 g/l  9.3 g/l
Total Recoverable Copper............  2.9 g/l  2.9 g/l
Total Recoverable Lead..............  0.03 mg/l         5.6 g/l
Total Recoverable Zinc..............  86.0 g/  86.0 g/
                                       l                 l              
Total Recoverable Chromium            11.0 g/  50.0 g/
 (Hexavalent).                         l                 l              
Benzene.............................  1.0 g/l  1.0 g/l
Naphthalene.........................  100.0 g/ 100.0 g/
                                       l                 l              
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If at any time during discharge, the effluent exceeds these 
screening values, EPA may require the facility to cease discharge.
    If any of the analytical test results, (except TOC, benzene or 
naphthalene), exceed the above screening values, discharge is not 
authorized by this permit. See paragraph I.A.(3)(b) for further 
guidance.
    For excessive benzene or naphthalene concentrations, see Part 
A.(3)(a) below. For initial excessive TOC values that may be caused by 
naturally-occurring, high molecular weight organic compounds, the 
permittee may request to be exempted from the TOC requirement by 
submitting additional information with the NOI which describes the 
method used to exclude these naturally ocurring compounds.
    In accordance with FAC 62-302.500(1)(a-c), the discharge shall at 
all times be free from floating solids, visible foam, turbidity, or 
visible oil in such amounts as to form nuisances on surface waters.
    All discharges must comply with the following permit requirements:
    (a) If analytical tests of Part I.A.3 reveal excessive benzene and 
naphthalene concentrations indicative of contamination from petroleum 
fuels, and the discharge will occur for thirty (30) days or less, the 
permittee shall comply only with the applicable effluent limitations 
and monitoring requirements in Part I.A.1 or I.A.2 for benzene, pH, 
and/or naphthalene and total lead. The commencement of the Part V 
biomonitoring program and Part I.B.3 EPA method 624 and 625 (one time 
analysis) is not required for this short-term activity. One (1) grab 
sample shall be analyzed per seven (7) days during the discharge 
period, and the total volume discharged shall be recorded. For 
discharges contaminated by petroleum fuels that last for less than a 
week, daily monitoring will be required for the applicable parameters. 
Upon receipt of written EPA notification of coverage that the NOI 
request is complete, these short-term discharges may commence. 
Discharge Monitoring Reports shall be submitted to EPA within thirty 
(30) days after termination of the discharge.
    (b) If contamination from sources other than petroleum 
contamination does exist, as indicated by the results of the analytical 
tests required by Part I. A.3 above, the discharge is not covered by 
this general permit. The operator shall apply for an individual NPDES 
permit at least one hundred and twenty (120) days prior to the date a 
discharge to waters of the United States is expected. No discharge is 
permissible without an effective NPDES permit.
    (c) If analytical tests reveal no contamination exists from 
petroleum fuels or sources other than petroleum contamination as a 
result of the required analytical screening tests required in Part I. 
A.3, the permittee can commence discharge immediately and is covered by 
this permit without having to submit an NOI request for coverage to 
EPA, Region IV. A short summary of the proposed activity and copy of 
these analytical tests shall be sent to the same address specified in 
Part III.A one (1) week after discharge begins. These analytical tests 
shall be kept on site during discharge and made available to EPA, if 
requested. Additionally, no Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms are 
required to be submitted to EPA, Region IV.

B. Other Requirements

    1. Any more frequent effluent discharge monitoring required by the 
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for the 
parameters limited in this permit, or different parameters, shall be 
reported to the Permit Issuing Authority in accordance with the 
requirements of Part III of this permit.
    2. Effluent limitations for combining contaminated groundwater 
pumped to above-ground storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from 
the site's recovery wells: The permittee shall notify FDEP of any 
intent to combine contaminated groundwater pumped to above-ground 
storage tanks with contaminated groundwater from the recovery well. 
Approval of this combined effluent discharge by FDEP will constitute 
approval to apply for coverage under this permit.
    3. Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this permit or 
startup of discharge the permittee shall also submit the results of the 
following analyses. These analyses shall be performed on a 
representative sample of the groundwater effluent discharge, taken 
after final treatment.
    Required analyses (one time only):

a. EPA Method 625--Acid and base/neutral extractable organics
b. EPA Method 624--Purgeable Organics

    If such analyses required in Part B.3 above reveal toxic pollutants 
other than those regulated in Part I.A. or subsequent Whole Effluent 
Toxicity (WET) tests reveal an LC50 of 100% or less in a test of 
96 hours duration or less, coverage under this general permit will be 
reviewed for termination by EPA Region IV Enforcement Section.
    4. If the pH is monitored continuously, the pH values shall not 
deviate outside the required range more than 1% of the time in any 
calendar month; and no individual excursion shall exceed 60 minutes. An 
``excursion'' is an unintentional and temporary incident in which the 
pH value of discharge wastewater exceeds the range set forth in this 
permit.

C. Test Procedures

    1. In performing the analysis for the dissolved constituents in the 
surface water and groundwater, the permittee shall use the guidelines 
recommended and described in FAC Sections 62-770.600(8)[a-d] of the 
Petroleum Contamination Cleanup Criteria (PCCC), amended February 20, 
1990, or the most current edition.
    2. If the petroleum contamination is from a petroleum fuel in which 
the source of contamination has not been identified, the groundwater 
shall be analyzed (using the recommended methods) for the following 
parameters as described in FAC Section 62.770.600(8)(c)1, of the PCCC, 
amended February 20, 1990, or the most current edition:


a. Lead.......................................  (EPA Method 239.2 or    
                                                 Standard Method 304)   
b. Priority Pollutant Volatile Organics.......  (EPA Method 624)        
c. Priority Pollutant Extractable Organics....  (EPA Method 625)        
d. Non-Priority Pollutant Organics (with GC/MS  (EPA Methods 624 and    
 Peaks greater than 10 ppb).                     625)                   
                                                                        

D. Schedule of Compliance

    1. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent 
limitations specified for discharges in accordance with the following 
schedule:
    Permittees with Revoked Individual Permits:

Operational level attained--Upon Receipt of Notification of Coverage 
    New Dischargers:
Operational level attained--Upon Commencement of Discharge

    2. No later than fourteen (14) calendar days after any date 
identified in the above schedule of compliance the permittee shall 
submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions 
being required by identified dates, a written notice of compliance or 
noncompliance. In the latter case, the notice shall include the cause 
of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the probability of 
meeting the next scheduled requirement.

Part II

Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits

Section A. General Conditions

1. Duty to Comply
    The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any 
permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and 
is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation 
and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit renewal 
application.
2. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
    Any person who violates a permit condition is subject to a civil 
penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day of such violation. Any person who 
willfully or negligently violates permit conditions is subject to a 
fine of up to $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not 
more than 1 year, or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit 
conditions is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000 to 50,000 per day 
of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Also, 
any person who violates a permit condition may be assessed an 
administrative penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation with the 
maximum not to exceed $125,000. [Ref: CFR 122.41(a)].
3. Duty to Mitigate
    The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or 
prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which has a 
reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the 
environment.
4. Duty to Reapply
    Where EPA is the Permit Issuing Authority (PIA), the terms and 
conditions of this permit are automatically continued in accordance 
with 40 CFR 122.6, only where the permittee has submitted a timely and 
complete Notice of Intent 180 days prior to expiration of this permit, 
and the PIA is unable through no fault of the permittee to issue a new 
permit before the expiration date.
5. Permit Modification
    After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be 
modified, terminated, or revoked for cause (as described in 40 CFR 
122.62 et seq) including, but not limited to, the following:
    a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;
    b. Obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or failure to 
disclose fully all relevant facts;
    c. A change in any conditions that requires either temporary 
interruption or elimination of the permitted discharge; or
    d. Information newly acquired by the Agency indicating the 
discharge poses a threat to human health or welfare.
    If the permittee believes that any past or planned activity would 
be cause for modification or revocation and reissuance under 40 CFR 
122.62, the permittee must report such information to the Permit 
Issuing Authority. The submittal of a new application may be required 
of the permittee. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit 
modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a 
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not 
stay any permit condition.
6. Toxic Pollutants
    Notwithstanding Paragraph A-4, above, if a toxic effluent standard 
or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such 
effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) 
of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and 
such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for 
such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be modified or revoked 
and reissued to conform to the toxic effluent standard or prohibition 
and the permittee so notified.
7. Civil and Criminal Liability
    Except as provided in permit conditions on ``Bypassing'' Section B, 
Paragraph B-3, nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the 
permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
8. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the 
institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any 
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is 
or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.
9. State Laws
    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the 
institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any 
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any 
applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section 
510 of the Act.
10. Property Rights
    The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights of 
any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury 
to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any 
infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.
11. Severability
    The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision 
of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to 
any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to 
other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be 
affected thereby.
12. Duty to Provide Information
    The permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority, within 
a reasonable time, any information which the Permit Issuing Authority 
may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking 
and reissuing, or terminating this permit or to determine compliance 
with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Permit 
Issuing Authority upon request, copies of records required to be kept 
by this permit.

 Section B. Operation and Maintenance of Pollution Controls

1. Proper Operation and Maintenance

    The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all 
facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related 
appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve 
compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and 
maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate 
quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of 
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed 
by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve 
compliance with the conditions of the permit.

2. Need to Halt or Reduce Not a Defense

    It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action 
that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted 
activity in order to maintain compliance with the condition of this 
permit.

3. Bypass of Treatment Facilities

a. Definitions
    (1) ``Bypass'' means the intentional diversion of waste streams 
from any portion of a treatment facility, which is not a designed or 
established operating mode for the facility.
    (2) ``Severe property damage'' means substantial physical damage to 
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to 
become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural 
resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a 
bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by 
delays in production.
b. Bypass Not Exceeding Limitations
    The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause 
effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for 
essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are 
not subject to the provisions of Paragraphs c. and d. of this section.
c. Notice
    (1) Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the 
need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least 
ten days before the date of the bypass; including an evaluation of the 
anticipated quality and effect of the bypass.
    (2) Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an 
unanticipated bypass as required in Section D, Paragraph D-4 (24-hour 
notice).
d. Prohibition of Bypass
    (1) Bypass is prohibited and the Permit Issuing Authority may take 
enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless:
    (a) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal 
injury, or severe and extensive property damage;
    (b) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as 
maintenance of sufficient reserve holding capacity, the use of 
auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, waste 
hauling, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. 
This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment should 
have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment 
to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment 
downtime or preventive maintenance; and
    (c) The permittee submitted notices as required under Paragraph c. 
of this section.
    (2) The Permit Issuing Authority may, within its authority, approve 
an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the 
Permit Issuing Authority determines that it will meet the three 
conditions listed above in Paragraph d.(1) of this section.

4. Upsets

    ``Upset'' means an exceptional incident in which there is 
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology based permit 
effluent limitations because of factors beyond the control of the 
permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused 
by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, 
inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or 
careless or improper operation. An upset constitutes an affirmative 
defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology 
based permit limitation if the requirements of 40 CFR 122.41(n)(3) are 
met. (Note that this provision does not apply to water quality 
requirements.)

5. Removed Substances

    This permit does not authorize discharge of solids, sludge, filter 
backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or 
control of wastewaters to waters of the United States unless 
specifically limited in Part 1.

Section C. Monitoring and Records

1. Representative Sampling

    Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be 
representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. All 
samples shall be taken at the monitoring points specified in this 
permit and, unless otherwise specified, before the effluent joins or is 
diluted by any other wastestream, body of water, or substance. 
Monitoring points shall not be changed without notification to and the 
approval of the Permit Issuing Authority.

2. Flow Measurements

    Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with 
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to insure the 
accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored 
discharges. The devices shall be installed, calibrated and maintained 
to insure that the accuracy of the measurements are consistent with the 
accepted capability of that type of device. Devices selected shall be 
capable of measuring flows with a maximum deviation of less than 
 10% from the true discharge rates throughout the range of 
expected discharge volumes. Guidance in selection, installation, 
calibration and operation of acceptable flow measurement devices can be 
obtained from the following references:
    (1) ``A Guide of Methods and Standards for the Measurement of Water 
Flow'', U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS 
Special Publication 421, May 1975, 97 pp. (Available from the U.S. 
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Order by SD catalog 
No. C13.10:421.)
    (2) ``Water Measurement Manual'', U.S. Department of Interior, 
Bureau of Reclamation, Second Edition, Revised Reprint, 1974, 327 pp. 
(Available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 
20402. Order by catalog No. 127.19/2:W29/2, Stock No. S/N 24003-0027.)
    (3) ``Flow Measurement in Open Channels and Closed Conduits'', U.S. 
Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBS Special 
Publication 484, October 1977, 982 pp. (Available in paper copy or 
microfiche from National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 
Springfield, VA 22151. Order by NTIS No. PB-273 535/5ST.)
    (4) ``NPDES Compliance Flow Measurement Manual'', U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Enforcement, 
Publication MCD-77, September 1981, 135 pp. (Available from the General 
Services Administration (8BRC), Centralized Mailing Lists Services, 
Building 41, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225.)

3. Monitoring Procedures

    Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved 
under 40 CFR Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified 
in this permit.

4. Penalties for Tampering

    The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers 
with, or knowingly renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method 
required to be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be 
punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by 
imprisonment for not more than 2 years per violation, or by both.

5. Retention of Records

    The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, 
including all calibration and maintenance records and all original 
strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, 
copies of all reports required by this permit, and records of all data 
used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at 
least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or 
application. This period may be extended by the Permit Issuing 
Authority at any time.

6. Record Contents

    Records of monitoring information shall include:
    a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
    b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
    c. The date(s) analyses were performed;
    d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
    e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
    f. The results of such analyses.

7. Inspection and Entry

    The permittee shall allow the Permit Issuing Authority, or an 
authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials and 
other documents as may be required by law, to:
    a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility 
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept 
under the conditions of this permit;
    b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that 
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
    c. Inspect at reasonable time any facilities, equipment (including 
monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated 
or required under this permit; and
    d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of 
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean 
Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.

Section D. Reporting Requirements

1. Change in Discharge

    The permittee shall give notice to the Permit Issuing Authority as 
soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to 
the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
    a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one 
of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a new source; or
    b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature 
or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification 
applies to pollutants which are subject neither to effluent limitations 
in the permit, nor to notification requirements under Section D, 
Paragraph D-10(a).

2. Anticipated Noncompliance

    The permittee shall give advance notice to the Permit Issuing 
Authority of any planned change in the permitted facility or activity 
which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. Any 
maintenance or facilities, which might necessitate unavoidable 
interruption of operation and degradation of effluent quality, shall be 
scheduled during noncritical water quality periods and carried out in a 
manner approved by the Permit Issuing Authority.

3. Transfer of Ownership or Control

    A permit may be automatically transferred to another party if:
    a. The permittee notifies the Permit Issuing Authority of the 
proposed transfer at least 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer 
date;
    b. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and 
new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of permit 
responsibility, coverage, and liability between them; and
    c. The Permit Issuing Authority does not notify the existing 
permittee of his or her intent to modify or revoke and reissue the 
permit. If this notice is not received, the transfer is effective on 
the date specified in the agreement mentioned in paragraph b.

4. Monitoring Reports

    See Part III of this permit.

5. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee

    If the permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than 
required by this permit, using test procedures approved under 40 CFR 
136 or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring 
shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data 
submitted in the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). Such increased 
frequency shall also be indicated.

6. Averaging of Measurements

    Calculations for limitations which require averaging of 
measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise 
specified by the Permit Issuing Authority in the permit.

7. Compliance Schedules

    Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress 
reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any compliance 
schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later than 14 days 
following each schedule date. Any reports of noncompliance shall 
include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the 
probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.

8. Twenty-Four Hour Reporting

    The permittee shall orally report any noncompliance which may 
endanger health or the environment, within 24 hours from the time the 
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. A written submission 
shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the permittee becomes 
aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a 
description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of 
noncompliance, including exact dates and times; and if the 
noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is 
expected to continue, and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, 
and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. The Permit Issuing 
Authority may verbally waive the written report, on a case-by-case 
basis, when the oral report is made. The following violations shall be 
included in the 24 hour report when they might endanger health or the 
environment:
    a. An unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in 
the permit.
    b. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit.

9. Other Noncompliance

    The permittee shall report in narrative form, all instances of 
noncompliance not previously reported under Section D, Paragraphs D-2, 
D-4, D-7, and D-8 at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The 
reports shall contain the information listed in Paragraph D-8.

10. Changes in Discharges of Toxic Substances

    The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority as soon as 
it knows or has reason to believe:
    a. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result 
in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of any toxic 
substance(s) (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D, Table II and III) which 
is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest 
of the following ``notification levels'':
    (1) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/l); or
    (2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/l) for acrolein and 
acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l) for 2, 4-
dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram 
per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.
    b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result 
in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis, of a toxic 
pollutant (listed at 40 CFR 122, Appendix D. Table II and III) which is 
not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of 
the following ``notification levels'':
    (1) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l); or
    (2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony.

11. Signatory Requirements

    All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Permit 
Issuing Authority shall be signed and certified.
    a. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
    (1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the 
purpose of this Section, a responsible corporate officer means:
    (1) a president, secretary, treasurer or vice president of the 
corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other 
person who performs similar policy--or decision-making functions for 
the corporation, or (2) the manager of one or more manufacturing 
production or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or 
having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in 
second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been 
assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate 
procedures.
    (2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner 
or the proprietor, respectively; or
    (3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by 
either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
    b. All reports required by the permit and other information 
requested by the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed by a person 
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. 
A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
    (1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described 
above;
    (2) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position 
having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated 
facility or activity, such as the position of plant manager, operator 
of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of equivalent 
responsibility, or an individual or position having overall 
responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly 
authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any 
individual occupying a named position.); and
    (3) The written authorization is submitted to the Permit Issuing 
Authority.
    c. Certification. Any person signing a document under paragraphs 
(a) or (b) of this section shall make the following certification:
    ``I certify under penalty of law that this document and all 
attachments were prepared under the direction or supervision in 
accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel 
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my 
inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those 
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the 
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, 
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties 
for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and 
imprisonment for knowing violations.''

12. Availability of Reports

    Except for data determined to be confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, 
all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall 
be available for public inspection at the offices of the Permit Issuing 
Authority. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and 
effluent data shall not be considered confidential.

13. Penalties for Falsification of Reports

    The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes 
any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or 
other document submitted or required to be maintained under this 
permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or 
noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more 
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 2 
years per violation, or by both.

Section E. Definitions

1. Permit Issuing Authority

    The Regional Administrator of EPA Region IV or his designee, unless 
at some time in the future the State receives the authority to 
administer the NPDES program and assumes jurisdiction over the permit; 
at which time, the Director of the State program receiving 
authorization becomes the issuing authority.

2. Act

    ``Act'' means the Clean Water Act (formerly referred to as the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act) Public Law 92-500, as amended by 
Public Laws 95-217, 95-576, 96-483, 97-117, and Public Law 100-4, 33 
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

3. Concentration Measurements

    a. The ``average monthly concentration'', is the sum of the 
concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a 
calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled and measured, 
divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured 
during such month (arithmetic mean of the daily concentration values). 
The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a 
composite sample or in the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean 
(weighted by flow value) of all the samples collected during the 
calendar day.
    b. The ``maximum daily concentration'', is the concentration of a 
pollutant discharge during a calendar day. It is identified as ``Daily 
Maximum'' under ``Other Limits'' in Part I of the permit and the 
highest such value recorded during the reporting period is reported 
under the ``Maximum'' column under ``Quality'' on the DMR.

4. Other Measurements

    a. The effluent flow expressed as MGD is the 24 hour average flow 
averaged monthly. It is the arithmetic mean of the total daily flows 
recorded during the calendar month. Where monitoring requirements for 
flow are specified in Part I of the permit the flow rate values are 
reported in the ``Average'' column under ``Quantity'' on the DMR.
    b. An ``instantaneous flow measurement'' is a measure of flow taken 
at the time of sampling, when both the sample and flow will be 
representative of the total discharge.
    c. Where monitoring requirements for pH or dissolved oxygen are 
specified in Part I of the permit, the values are generally reported in 
the ``Quality or Concentration'' column on the DMR.

5. Types of Samples

    a. Grab Sample: A ``grab sample'' is a single influent or effluent 
portion which is not a composite sample. The sample(s) shall be 
collected at the period(s) most representative of the total discharge.

6. Calendar Day

    A calendar day is defined as the period from midnight of one day 
until midnight of the next day. However, for purposes of this permit, 
any consecutive 24-hour period that reasonably represents the calendar 
day may be used for sampling.

7. Hazardous Substance

    A hazardous substance means any substance designated under 40 CFR 
Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.

8. Toxic Pollutant

    A toxic pollutant is any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 
307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.

Section F. Application Requirements

    a. For expired individual NPDES permits, dischargers desiring 
coverage under this general permit are required to submit a notice of 
intent (NOI) to the Permit Issuing Authority. The NOI shall include (1) 
the name and address of the person that the permit will be issued to 
(2) the name, and address of the operation, including county location, 
(3) the applicable individual NPDES number(s), (4) the identification 
of any new discharge location not contained in the expired permit, (5) 
evidence that the operation has obtained approval of a Remedial Action 
Plan (RAP) Order from the FDEP, (6) a map showing the facility and 
discharge location (including latitude and longitude), (7) the name of 
the receiving water, and (8) for discharges lasting over one (1) year a 
pollution prevention plan. (See Part IV.2) Operators having several 
individual permits are encouraged to consolidate requests for coverage 
into one NOI for all individual permits. The previous submission of the 
proper forms in the renewal application does not relieve the permittee 
desiring coverage under the general permit of the requirement to file a 
NOI.
    b. All facilities continued by the previous general permit, will be 
required to submit a NOI requesting continued coverage under the 
reissued general permit by [insert date 60 calendar days after the date 
of publication in the Federal Register]. The NOI shall contain the same 
information specified in paragraph a above.
    c. Dischargers with current individual NPDES permits that desire 
coverage under this general permit are required to file an NOI to the 
Permit Issuing Authority at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration 
of their current permit(s). The NOI shall contain the same information 
specified in paragraph a above. Permittees desiring to renew their 
individual permit are required to submit the appropriate application 
forms at least 180 days before expiration of their individual permit.
    d. Dischargers who have not previously obtained an individual NPDES 
permit are required to submit to EPA the FDEP approval order letter 
approving the site RAP. The RAP approval order shall be attached to an 
NOI to be covered by the general permit and shall contain the same 
information specified in paragraph (a) above. The application for 
coverage under the general permit must be made at least fourteen (14) 
days before the discharge is to commence.
    e. Dischargers seeking coverage under Part I A.3.a. will be 
required to submit to EPA the date the discharge is expected to cease, 
results of analytical data and the same information in paragraph a 
above, except items (3), (4), (5) and (8). Notification of coverage to 
discharge will be upon receipt of EPA's short-term coverage letter.
    f. Notification of coverage will be given by the Permit Issuing 
Authority by certified mail to the permittee (except for short-term 
pump tests, 8-hours in duration or less), for dischargers seeking 
coverage under Part I Sections A.1 and A.2, with the issuance date for 
each facility being the effective date of coverage by the Permit 
Issuing Authority.
    Short-term pump tests, shall be covered automatically once the 
permittee receives acceptable groundwater screening values, and the 
permittee will be responsible meeting the requirements of Parts I.A.1 
or A.2. The DMR's for these pump tests shall be submitted to within 
thirty (30) days after discharge ceases.
    g. Dischargers meeting the conditions set forth in Part I A.3.c. 
are not required to submit an detailed NOI as outlined above, but must 
submit a copy of the analytical tests and a summary of the proposed 
activity one (1) week after discharge begins. These dischargers are 
covered upon receipt of the data, unless notified otherwise by EPA.
    h. The coverage of the permit shall expire on December 6, 1999.
    i. In accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(a)(2) permittees who are 
covered by this general permit who seek to be continued under this 
general permit, shall submit an complete NOI in accordance with 
paragraph a, to EPA 180 days before the expiration of this permit.

Section G. Additional General Permit Conditions

    1. The Permit Issuing Authority may require any person authorized 
by this permit to apply for and obtain an individual NPDES permit when:
    a. The discharge(s) is a significant contributor of pollution;
    b. The discharger is not in compliance with the conditions of this 
permit;
    c. A change has occurred in the availability of the demonstrated 
technology of practices for the control or abatement of pollutants 
applicable to the point sources;
    d. Effluent limitation guidelines are promulgated for point sources 
covered by this permit;
    e. A Water Quality Management Plan containing requirements 
applicable to such point source is approved; or
    f. The point source(s) covered by this permit no longer:
    (1) Involve the same or substantially similar types of operations;
    (2) Discharge the same types of wastes;
    (3) Require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions;
    (4) Require the same or similar monitoring; and
    (5) In the opinion of the RA, are more appropriately controlled 
under an individual permit than under a general permit. The Regional 
Administrator (RA) may require any operator authorized by this permit 
to apply for an individual NPDES permit only if the operator has been 
notified in writing that a permit application is required.
    2. Any operator authorized to discharge by this permit may request 
to be excluded from the coverage of this general permit by applying for 
an individual permit. The operator shall submit an application together 
with the reasons supporting the request to the RA.
    3. When an individual NPDES permit is issued to an operator 
otherwise subject to this general permit, the applicability of this 
permit to the owner or operator is automatically terminated on the 
effective date of the individual permit.
    4. A source excluded from coverage under this general permit solely 
because it already has an individual permit may request that its 
individual permit be revoked, and that it be covered by this general 
permit. Upon revocation of the individual permit, this general permit 
shall apply to the source.
    5. A petroleum contamination recovery operation may be excluded 
from this general permit if it proposes discharges to receiving waters 
that are classified as ``Special Protection, Outstanding Florida 
Waters, Outstanding National Resource Waters'' as set forth by FAC 62-
302.700, dated April 25, 1993.
    6. The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority within 
30 days after the permanent termination of discharge from their 
facility. This letter shall include the necessary Site Rehabilitation 
Completion Order (SRCO) from Florida Bureau of Waste Cleanup which 
constitutes final action on the State level for completion of cleanup 
activities at the affected site. After review of the SRCO, EPA will 
inactivate coverage of the general NPDES permit for the facility. 
Dischargers covered under this general permit without RAP approval 
shall submit a No Discharge Certification Form to EPA, within 30 days 
after ceasing discharge.

Part III

Other Requirements

A. Reporting of Monitoring Results

    Monitoring results obtained for each calendar month shall be 
summarized and reported on a DMR Form (EPA No. 3320-1), one DMR for 
each month. Unless otherwise required in Part V, these forms shall be 
submitted after each calendar quarter and postmarked no later than the 
28th day of the month following the completed calendar quarter. (For 
example, data for January-March shall be submitted by April 28.) 
Calendar quarters are January-March, April-June, July-September and 
October-December. Signed copies of these and all other reports required 
by Section D of Part II, Reporting Requirements, and Part V shall be 
submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority at the following address: 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Enforcement Section, 
Water Permits and Enforcement Branch, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., 
Atlanta, GA 30365.
    If no discharge occurs during the reporting period, sampling 
requirements of this permit do not apply. The statement ``No 
Discharge'' shall be written on the DMR form. If, during the term of 
this permit, the facility ceases discharge to surface waters, the 
Permit Issuing Authority shall be notified immediately upon cessation 
of discharge.

B. Reopener Clause

    This permit shall be modified, or alternatively revoked and 
reissued to comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation 
issued or approved under Sections 301(b)(2)(C), and (D), 304(b)(2), and 
307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act (the Act), if the effluent standard or 
limitation so issued or approved--
    1. Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent 
than any condition in this permit; or
    2. Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit. The permit as 
modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other 
requirements of the Act then applicable.

Part IV

Best Management Practices and Pollution Prevention Conditions

Section A. General Conditions

1. BMP Plan
    Preparation of a Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan shall be 
prepared in conjunction with development of the Remedial Action Plan 
required by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (See Part 
II.F.c.). The permittee shall maintain the BMP plan at the facility and 
shall make the plan available to the permit issuing authority upon 
request. The ``NPDES Guidance Document'' can be used as a reference 
which contains technical information on BMPs and the elements of the 
BMP program. The permittee shall develop and implement a BMP plan which 
prevents, or minimizes the potential for, the release of pollutants 
from ancillary activities, including material storage areas; plant site 
runoff; in-plant transfer, process and material handling areas; loading 
and unloading operations, and sludge and waste disposal areas, to the 
waters of the United States through plant site runoff; spillage or 
leaks; sludge or waste disposal; or drainage from raw material storage. 
The term pollutants refers to any substance listed as toxic under 
Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, oil, as defined in Section 
311(a)(1) of the Act, and substance listed as hazardous under Section 
311 of the Act. Copies of the ``NPDES Guidance Document'' may be 
obtained by submitting written requests to: Director, Water Management 
Division, U.S. EPA Region IV, 345 Courtland St. N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 
30365.
2. Pollution Prevention Plan
    New permittees with long term treatment systems expected to 
discharge one (1) year or more shall develop a Pollution Prevention 
Plan for the site and submit it with the NOI. It shall contain the 
following information:
    (a) A Narrative of What Caused the Groundwater Contamination.
    (b) Methods currently being deployed at the site to prevent 
groundwater contamination from reoccurring.
    (c) Other alternative treatment options which were considered in 
reducing the groundwater contamination.
    (d) Explanation of why long term treatment of discharge to Surface 
Waters of the United States was chosen as opposed to:
    (1) Reduction-Monitor Phase I--Using a combination of techniques to 
significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be achieved 
in three (3) months or less, with the objective of reaching a monitor-
only status.
    (2) Reduction-Monitor Phase II--Using a combination of techniques 
to significantly reduce groundwater contamination that could be 
achieved in six (6) months or less, with the objective of reaching a 
monitor-only status.
    In an effort to promote pollution prevention, the Permit Issuing 
Authority may issue permits which include or require pollution 
prevention activities.

Part V

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Freshwater Language

    As required by Part I of the permit, within 30-days after 
commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to fresh waters, 
which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the 
surface is less than 1500 milligrams per liter, shall initiate the 
series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent toxicity of 
the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1) outfall exists, 
separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All test species, 
procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be in accordance 
with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to 
Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the most current 
edition. The dilution/control water used will be moderately hard water 
as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7, or the most current 
edition. A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be 
conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and 
the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR). 
Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted, 
these results must be submitted with the DMR.
    1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal 
multi-concentration toxicity tests using the daphnid (Ceriodaphnia 
dubia) and the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). All tests shall be 
conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall be 
conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution concentrations 
at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.
    b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test, 
the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated. 
A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not 
exceed 10% for either species.
    2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every 
month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once 
every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified 
otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to 
as ``routine'' tests.
    3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less 
occurs in either test species in any of the above-described tests 
within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the 
permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same 
manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable 
acute toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection 
requirements and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1 
above must be met for the test to be considered valid. The first test 
shall begin within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and 
shall be conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests 
are completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the 
toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.
    b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable 
acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the 
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test 
was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of 
completion of the second additional, valid test.

Part V

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program, Acute Saltwater Language

    As required by Part I of this permit, within 30-days after 
commencement of discharge, permittees discharging to marine waters, 
which are surface waters in which the chloride concentration at the 
surface is greater than or equal to 1500 milligrams per liter, shall 
initiate the series of tests described below to evaluate whole effluent 
toxicity of the discharge from the outfall. If more than one (1) 
outfall exists, separate tests will be performed on each outfall. All 
test species, procedures and quality assurance criteria used shall be 
in accordance with Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of 
Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, EPA/600/4-90/027F, or the 
most current edition. The dilution/control water and effluent used will 
be adjusted to a salinity of 20 parts per thousand using artificial sea 
salts as described in EPA/600/4-90/027F, Section 7 (or the most current 
edition). A standard reference toxicant quality assurance test shall be 
conducted concurrently with each species used in the toxicity tests and 
the results submitted with the discharge monitoring report (DMR). 
Alternatively, if monthly QA/QC reference toxicant tests are conducted, 
these results must be submitted with the DMR.
    1. a. The permittee shall conduct 96-hour acute static-renewal 
multi-concentration toxicity tests using the mysid shrimp (Mysidopsis 
bahia) and the inland silverside (Menidia beryllina). All tests shall 
be conducted on one grab sample of 100% final effluent. All tests shall 
be conducted on a control (0%) and the following dilution 
concentrations at a minimum: 100.0%, 50.0%, 25.0%, 12.5%, and 6.25%.
    b. If control mortality exceeds 10% for either species in any test, 
the test(s) for that species (including the control) shall be repeated. 
A test will be considered valid only if control mortality does not 
exceed 10% for either species.
    2. The toxicity tests specified above shall be conducted once every 
month until three (3) valid monthly tests have been completed, and once 
every year thereafter for the duration of the permit, unless notified 
otherwise by the permit issuing authority. These tests are referred to 
as ``routine'' tests.
    3. a. If unacceptable acute toxicity (an LC50 of 100% or less 
occurs in either test species in any of the above- described tests 
within the specified time) is found in a ``routine'' test, the 
permittee shall conduct two additional acute toxicity tests in the same 
manner as the ``routine'' test on the specie(s) indicating unacceptable 
toxicity. For each additional test, the sample collection requirements 
and test acceptability criteria specified in Section 1 above must be 
met for the test to be considered valid. The first test shall begin 
within two weeks of the end of the ``routine'' tests, and shall be 
conducted weekly thereafter until two additional, valid tests are 
completed. The additional tests will be used to determine if the 
toxicity found in the ``routine'' test is still present.
    b. Results from additional tests, required due to unacceptable 
acute toxicity in the ``routine'' test(s), must be reported on the 
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form for the month in which the test 
was begun. Such test results must be submitted within 45 days of 
completion of the second additional, valid test.

[FR Doc. 94-30952 Filed 12-15-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P