Utah Admin. Code R317-8-4 - Permit Conditions
4.1 CONDITIONS
APPLICABLE TO ALL UPDES PERMITS. The following conditions apply to all UPDES
permits. Additional conditions applicable to UPDES permits are in Subsection
R317-8-4.1(15). All conditions applicable shall be incorporated into the
permits either expressly or by reference. If incorporated by reference, a
specific citation to these rules must be given in the permit. In addition to
conditions required in all UPDES permits, the Director will establish
conditions as required on a case-by-case basis under Subsection R317-8-4.2 and
Section
R317-8-5.
(1) Duty to Comply.
(a) General requirement. The permittee must
comply with all conditions of the UPDES permit. Any permit noncompliance is a
violation of the Utah Water Quality Act, as amended and is grounds for
enforcement action; permit termination, revocation and reissuance or
modification; or denial of a permit renewal application.
(b) Specific duties.
1. The permittee shall comply with effluent
standards or prohibitions for toxic pollutants and with standards for sewage
sludge use or disposal established by the State within the time provided in the
regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if the permit
has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement ( 40 CFR, 129
).
2. The Utah Water Quality Act,
in
19-5-115,
provides that any person who violates the Act, or any permit, rule, or order
adopted under it is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per day of
such violation. Any person who willfully or with gross negligence violates the
Act, or any permit, rule or order adopted under it is subject to a fine of not
more than $25,000 per day of violation. Any person convicted under 19-5-115 a
second time shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $50,000 per
day.
(2) Duty
to Reapply. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this
permit after the expiration date of the permit, the permittee shall apply for
and obtain a new permit as required in Subsection R317-8-3.1.
(3) Need to Halt or Reduce Activity 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 conditions of this permit. (Upon
reduction, loss, or failure of the treatment facility, the permittee, to the
extent necessary to maintain compliance with the permit, shall control
production of all discharges until the facility is restored or an alternative
method of treatment is provided.)
(4) Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall
take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or
disposal in violation of the UPDES permit which has a reasonable likelihood of
adversely affecting human health or the environment.
(5) 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 the
permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory
controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires
the operation of backup 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.
(6) Permit Actions. The permit may be
modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. 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.
(7) Property Rights. This permit does not
convey any property rights of any kind, or any exclusive privilege.
(8) Duty to Provide Information. The
permittee shall furnish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any
information which the Director may request to determine whether cause exists
for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating the permit or to
determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the
Director, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by the permit.
(9) Inspection and Entry. The
permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative, including
an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director) 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 the permit;
(b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable
times, any records that must be kept under the conditions of the
permit;
(c) Inspect at reasonable
times any facilities, equipment, including monitoring and control equipment,
practices or operations regulated or required under the permit; and
(d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times for
the purposes of assuring UPDES program compliance or as otherwise authorized by
the Utah Water Quality Act any substances or parameters, or practices at any
location.
(10) Monitoring
and records.
(a) Samples and measurements
taken for the purpose of monitoring shall be representative of the monitored
activity.
(b) 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 the permit, and
records of all data used to complete the application for the permit for a
period of at least three (3) years from the date of the sample, measurement,
report or application. This period may be extended by request of the Director
at any time. Records of monitoring information required by this permit related
to the permittee's sewage sludge use and disposal activities, shall be retained
for a period of at least five years or longer as required by State promulgated
standards for sewage sludge use and disposal.
(c) Records of monitoring information shall
include:
1. The date, exact place, and time
of sampling or measurements;
2. The
individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
3. The date(s) and times analyses were
performed;
4. The individual(s) who
performed the analyses;
5. The
analytical techniques or methods used; and
6. The results of such analyses.
(d) Monitoring shall be conducted
according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or in the case of sludge
use or disposal, approved under 40 CFR 136 unless otherwise specified in State
standards for sludge use or disposal, unless other test procedures, approved by
EPA under 40 CFR 136, have been specified in the permit.
(e) Section
19-5-115(3)
of the Utah Water Quality Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers
with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required
to be maintained under the permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine
not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than six months or by
both.
(11) Signatory
Requirement. All applications, reports, or information submitted to the
Director shall be signed and certified as indicated in Subsection R317-8-3.4.
The Utah Water Quality Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any
false statements, representations, or certifications in any record or other
document submitted or required to be maintained under the permit, including
monitoring reports or reports of compliance or non-compliance shall, upon
conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or by imprisonment
for not more than six months or by both.
(12) Reporting Requirements.
(a) Planned changes. The permittee shall give
notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned physical alteration
or additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted
facility may meet one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a
new source in Section
R317-8-8;
or
2. 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
Subsection R317-8-4.1(15).
3. The
alteration or addition results in a significant change in the permittee's
sludge use or disposal practices, and such alteration, addition, or change may
justify the application of permit conditions that are different from or absent
in the existing permit, including notification of additional use or disposal
sites not reported during the permit application process or not reported
pursuant to an approved land application plan.
(b) Anticipated Noncompliance. The permittee
shall give advance notice to the Director of any planned changes in the
permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit
requirements.
(c) Transfers. The
permit is not transferable to any person except after notice to the Director.
The Director may require modification on and reissuance of the permit to change
the name of the permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be
necessary under the Utah Water Quality Act, as amended. (In some cases,
modification, revocation and reissuance is mandatory.)
(d) Monitoring reports. Monitoring results
shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere in the permit.
Monitoring results shall be reported as follows:
1. Monitoring results must be reported on a
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) or forms provided or specified by the
Director for reporting results of monitoring of sludge use or disposal
practices. Monitoring results may also be submitted electronically to the EPA's
NetDMR program, if a Subscriber Agreement is in place. See Utah Admin. Code
R317-1-9.
2. If the permittee monitors any pollutant
more frequently than required by the permit, using test procedures approved
under 40 CFR 136 or the in the case of sludge use or disposal, approved under
40 CFR 136 unless otherwise specified in State standards for sludge use and
disposal, or as specified in the permit according to procedures approved by
EPA, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and
reporting of the data submitted in the DMR or sludge reporting form specified
by the Director.
3. Calculations
for all limitations which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an
arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified in the permit.
(e) Compliance Schedules. Reports of
compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress report on, interim and final
requirements contained in any compliance schedule of the permit shall be
submitted no later than fourteen days following each scheduled date.
(f) Twenty -Four Hour Reporting. The
permittee shall (orally) report any noncompliance which may endanger health or
the environment. Any information shall be provided orally within twenty-four
hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. (The
report shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any other reporting
requirement applicable to the noncompliance.) A written submission shall also
be provided within five 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 recurrence of the noncompliance. (The Director may waive
the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received
within twenty-four hours.) The following shall be included as events which must
be reported within twenty-four hours:
1. Any
unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit, as
indicated in Subsection R317-8-4.1(13).
2. Any upset which exceeds any effluent
limitation in the permit.
3.
Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants
listed by the Director in the permit to be reported within twenty-four hours,
as indicated in R317-8-4.2(7). The Director may waive the written report on a
case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24
hours.
(g) Other
NonCompliance. The permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not
reported under Subsections R317-8-4.1(12) (d), (e), and (f) at the time
monitoring reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the information
listed in Subsection R317-8-4.1(12)(f).
(h) Other Information. Where the permittee
becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant fact in a permit
application, or submitted incorrect information in its permit application or in
any report to the Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
(13)
Occurrence of a Bypass.
(a) Definitions.
1. "Bypass" means the intentional diversion
of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility.
2. "Severe property damage" means substantial
physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes
them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural
resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass.
Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in
production.
(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 R317-8-4.1(13)(c) or (d).
(c) Prohibition of Bypass.
1. Bypass is prohibited, and the Director may
take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless:
a. Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of
human life, personal injury, or severe property damage;
b. There were no feasible alternatives to the
bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of
untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime.
This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup equipment should have been
installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgement to prevent a
bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive
maintenance, and
c. The permittee
submitted notices as required under R317-8-4.1(13)(d).
2. The Director may approve an anticipated
bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the Director determines that
it will meet the three conditions listed in R317-8-4.1(13)(c) a, b, and
c.
(d) Notice.
1. Anticipated bypass. Except as provided in
Subsections R317-8-4.1(13)(b) and R317-8-4.1(13)(d) 2, if the permittee knows
in advance of the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, at least 90
days before the date of bypass. The prior notice shall include the following
unless otherwise waived by the Director:
a.
Evaluation of alternatives to the bypass, including cost-benefit analysis
containing an assessment of anticipated resource damages;
b. A specific bypass plan describing the work
to be performed including scheduled dates and times. The permittee must notify
the Director in advance of any changes to the bypass schedule;
c. Description of specific measures to be
taken to minimize environmental and public health impacts;
d. A notification plan sufficient to alert
all downstream users, the public and others reasonably expected to be impacted
by the bypass;
e. A water quality
assessment plan to include sufficient monitoring of the receiving water before,
during and following the bypass to enable evaluation of public health risks and
environmental impacts; and
f. Any
additional information requested by the Director.
2. Emergency Bypass. Where ninety days
advance notice is not possible, the permittee must notify the Director, and the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources, as soon as it becomes aware of
the need to bypass and provide to the Director the information in Subsections
R317-8-4.1(13)(d) 1.a. through f. to the extent practicable.
3. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall
submit notice of an unanticipated bypass to the Director as required in
Subsection R317-8-4.1(12)(f). The permittee shall also immediately notify the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources, the public and downstream
users and shall implement measures to minimize impacts to public health and the
environment to the extent practicable.
(14) Occurrence of an Upset.
(a) Definition. "Upset" means an exceptional
incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
technology-based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the
reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to
the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment
facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or
careless or improper operation.
(b)
Effect of an Upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action
brought for noncompliance with such technology-based permit effluent
limitations if the requirements of Subsection R317-8-4.1(14)(c) are met. No
determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance
was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, if final
administrative action subject to judicial review.
(c) Conditions Necessary for a Demonstration
of Upset. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset
shall demonstrate through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or
other relevant evidence that:
1. An upset
occurred and that the permittee can identify the specific cause(s) of the
upset;
2. The permitted facility
was at the time being properly operated; and
3. The permittee submitted notice of the
upset as required in Subsection R317-8-4.1(12)(f) (twenty-four hour
notice).
4. The permittee complied
with any remedial measures required under Subsection R317-8-4.1(4).
(d) Burden of Proof. In any
enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an
upset has the burden of proof.
(15) Additional Conditions Applicable to
Specified Categories of UPDES Permits. The following conditions, in addition to
others set forth in these rules apply to all UPDES permits within the
categories specified below:
(a) Existing
Manufacturing, Commercial, Mining, and Silvicultural Dischargers. In addition
to the reporting requirements under Subsections R317-8-4.1(12),(13), and (14),
any existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural discharger
shall notify the Director as soon as it knows or has reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will
occur which would result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will
exceed the highest of the following "notification levels":
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100
ug/l);
b. 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;
c. Five times the maximum concentration value
reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with
Subsection R317-8-3.5(7) or (10).
d. The level established by the Director in
accordance with Subsection R317-8-4.2(6).
2. That any activity has occurred or will
occur which would result in any discharge on a non-routine or infrequent basis
of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will
exceed the highest of the following "notification levels":
a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500
ug/l).
b. One milligram per liter
(1 mg/l) for antimony.
c. Ten times
the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit
application in accordance with Subsection R317-8-3.5(9).
d. The level established by the Director in
accordance with Subsection R317-8-4.2(6).
(b) POTWs. POTWs shall provide adequate
notice to the Director of the following:
1.
Any new introduction of pollutants into that POTW from an indirect discharger
which would be subject to the UPDES rules if it were directly discharging those
pollutants; and
2. Any substantial
change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into that POTW
by a source introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time of issuance of the
permit.
3. For purposes of this
paragraph, adequate notice shall include information on the quality and
quantity of effluent introduced into the POTW; and any anticipated impact of
the change on the quantity or quality of effluent to be discharged from the
POTW.
4.2 ESTABLISHING PERMIT CONDITIONS. For the
purposes of this section, permit conditions include any statutory or regulatory
requirement which takes effect prior to the final administrative disposition of
a permit. An applicable requirement may be any requirement which takes effect
prior to the modification or revocation or reissuance of a permit, to the
extent allowed in Subsection R317-8-5.6. New or reissued permits, and to the
extent allowed under Subsection R317-8-5.6, modified or revoked and reissued
permits shall incorporate each of the applicable requirements referenced in
this section. In addition to the conditions established under Subsection
R317-8-4.1 each UPDES permit will include conditions on a case by case basis to
provide for and ensure compliance with all applicable Utah statutory and
regulatory requirements and the following, as applicable:
(1) Technology-based effluent limitations and
standards, based on effluent limitations and standards promulgated under
Section
19-5-104
of the Utah Water Quality Act or new source performance standards promulgated
under Section
19-5-104
of the Utah Water Quality Act, on case-by-case effluent limitations, or a
combination of the two in accordance with Subsection R317-8-7.1.
(2) Toxic Effluent Standards and Other
Effluent Limitations. If any applicable toxic effluent standard or prohibition,
including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or
prohibition, is promulgated under Section 307(a) of C WA for a toxic pollutant
and that standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation on the
pollutant in the permit, the Director shall institute proceedings under these
rules to modify or revoke and reissue the permit to conform to the toxic
effluent standard or prohibition.
(3) Reopener Clause. For any discharger
within a primary industry category, as listed in Subsection R317-8-3.11,
requirements will be incorporated as follows:
(a) On or before June 30, 1981:
1. If applicable standards or limitations
have not yet been promulgated, the permit shall include a condition stating
that, if an applicable standard or limitation is promulgated and that effluent
standard or limitation is more stringent than any effluent limitation in the
permit or controls a pollutant not limited in the permit, the permit shall be
promptly modified or revoked and reissued to conform to that effluent standard
or limitation.
2. If applicable
standards or limitations have been promulgated or approved, the permit shall
include those standards or limitations.
(b) On or after the statutory deadline set
forth in Sections 301(b)(2) (A), (C), and (E) of CWA, any permit issued shall
include effluent limitations to meet the requirements of Sections 301(b)(2)
(A), (C), (D), (E), (F), whether or not applicable effluent limitations
guidelines have been promulgated or approved. These permits need not
incorporate the clause required by Subsection R317-8-4.2(3)(a) 1.
(c) The Director shall promptly modify or
revoke and reissue any permit containing the clause required under Subsection
R317-8-4.2(3)(a) 1 to incorporate an applicable effluent standard or limitation
which is promulgated or approved after the permit is issued if that effluent
standard or limitation is more stringent than any effluent limitation in the
permit, or controls a pollutant not limited in the permit.
(d) For any permit issued to a treatment
works treating domestic sewage (including sludge-only facilities), the Director
shall include a reopener clause to incorporate any applicable standard for
sewage sludge use or disposal adopted by the State. The Director may promptly
modify or revoke and reissue any permit containing the reopener clause required
by this paragraph if the standard for sewage sludge use or disposal is more
stringent than any requirements for sludge use or disposal in the permit, or
controls a pollutant or practice not limited in the permit.
(4) Water quality standards and
state requirements shall be included as applicable. Any requirements in
addition to or more stringent than EPA's effluent limitation guidelines or
standards will be included, when necessary to:
(a) Achieve water quality standards
established under the Utah Water Quality Act, as amended and rules promulgated
pursuant thereto, including State narrative criteria for water quality.
1. Permit limitations must control all
pollutants or pollutant parameters (either conventional, nonconventional, or
toxic pollutants) which the Director determines are or may be discharged at a
level which will cause, have the reasonable potential to cause, or contribute
to an excursion above any State water quality standard, including State
narrative criteria for water quality.
2. When determining whether a discharge
causes, has the reasonable potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream
excursion above a narrative or numeric criteria within a State water quality
standard, the Director shall use procedures which account for existing controls
on point and nonpoint sources of pollution, the variability of the pollutant or
pollutant parameter in the effluent, the sensitivity of the species to toxicity
testing (when evaluating whole effluent toxicity), and where appropriate, the
dilution of the effluent in the receiving water.
3. When the Director determines, using the
procedures in R317-8-4.2(4)(2), that a discharge causes, has the reasonable
potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream excursion above the
allowable ambient concentration of a State numeric criteria within a State
water quality standard for an individual pollutant, the permit must contain
effluent limits for that pollutant.
4. When the Director determines, using the
procedures in Subsection R317-8-4.2(4)(2), that a discharge causes, has the
reasonable potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream excursion above
the numeric criterion for whole effluent toxicity, the permit will contain
effluent limits for whole effluent toxicity.
5. Except as provided in Subsection
R317-8-4.2, when the Director determines, using the procedures in Subsection
R317-8-4.2(4)(2), toxicity testing data, or other information, that a discharge
causes, has the reasonable potential to cause, or contributes to an in-stream
excursion above a narrative criterion within an applicable State water quality
standard, the permit will contain effluent limits for whole effluent toxicity.
Limits on whole effluent toxicity are not necessary where the Director
determines in the fact sheet or statement of basis of the UPDES permit, using
the procedures in Subsection R317-8-4.2(4)(2), that chemical specific limits
for effluent are sufficient to attain and maintain applicable numeric and
narrative State water quality standards.
6. Where the State has not established a
water quality criterion for a specific chemical pollutant that is present in an
effluent at a concentration that causes, has the reasonable potential to cause,
or contributes to an excursion above a narrative criterion within an applicable
State water quality standard the Director will establish effluent limits using
one or more of the following options:
a.
Establish effluent limits using a calculated numeric water quality criterion
for the pollutant which the Director determines will attain and maintain
applicable narrative water quality criteria and will fully protect the
designated use. Such a criterion may be derived using a proposed State
criterion, or an explicit State policy or rule interpreting its narrative water
quality criteria supplemented with other relevant information which may
include: EPA's Water Quality Standards Handbook, October 1983, risk assessment
data, exposure data, information about the pollutant from the Food and Drug
Administration, and current EPA criteria documents:
b. Establish effluent limits on a
case-by-case basis, using EPA's water quality criteria, published under section
307(a) of the CWA, supplemented where necessary by other relevant information;
or
c. Establish effluent
limitations on an indicator parameter for the pollutant of concern, provided:
(i) The permit identifies which pollutants
are intended to be controlled by the use of the effluent limitations;
(ii) The fact sheet as required by .4 sets
forth the basis for the limit, including a finding that compliance with the
effluent limit on the indicator parameter will result in controls on the
pollutant of concern which are sufficient to attain and maintain applicable
water quality standards;
(iii) The
permit requires all effluent and ambient monitoring necessary to show that
during the term of the permit the limit on the indicator parameter continues to
attain and maintain applicable water quality standards; and
(iv) The permit contains a reopener clause
allowing the Director to modify or revoke and reissue the permit if the limits
on the indicator parameter no longer attain and maintain applicable water
quality standards.
7. When developing water quality-based
effluent limits under this paragraph the Director shall ensure that:
a. The level of water quality to be achieved
by limits on point sources established under this paragraph is derived from,
and complies with all applicable water quality standards; and
b. Effluent limits developed to protect a
narrative water quality criterion, a numeric water quality criterion, or both,
are consistent with the assumptions and requirements of any available wasteload
allocation for the discharge prepared by the State and approved by EPA pursuant
to
40
CFR 130.7.
(b) Attain or maintain a specified water
quality through water quality related effluent limits established under the
Utah Water Quality Act;
(c) Conform
to applicable water quality requirements when the discharge affects a state
other than Utah;
(d) Incorporate
any more stringent limitations, treatment standards, or schedule of compliance
requirements established under federal or state law or regulations.
(e) Ensure consistency with the requirements
of any Utah Water Quality Management Plan approved by EPA.
(f) Incorporate alternative effluent
limitations or standards where warranted by "fundamentally different factors,"
under Subsection R317-8-7.3.
(5) Technology-based Controls for Toxic
Pollutants. Limitations established under Subsections R317-8-4.2(1), (2), or
(4) to control pollutants meeting the criteria listed in Subsection
R317-8-4.2(5)(a) will be included in the permit, if applicable. Limitations
will be established in accordance with Subsection R317-8-4.2(5)(6). An
explanation of the development of these limitations will be included in the
fact sheet under Subsection R317-8-6.4.
(a)
Limitations will control all toxic pollutants which:
1. The Director determines, based on
information reported in a permit application under Subsections R317-8-3.5(7)
and (10), or in a notification under Subsection R317-8-4.1(15)(a) of this rule
or on other information, are or may be discharged at a level greater than the
level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements
appropriate to the permittee under Subsections R317-8-7.1(3)(a),(b) and
(c).
2. The discharger does or may
use or manufacture as an intermediate or final product or byproduct.
(b) The requirement that the
limitations control the pollutants meeting the criteria of paragraph (a) of
this subsection will be satisfied by:
1.
Limitations on those pollutants; or
2. Limitations on other pollutants which, in
the judgment of the Director, will provide treatment of the pollutants under
paragraph (a) of this subsection to the levels required by Subsections
R317-8-7.1(3)(a), (b) and (c).
(6) Notification Level. A "notification
level" which exceeds the notification level of R317-8-4.1(15) upon a petition
from the permittee or on the Director's initiative will be incorporated as a
permit condition, if applicable. This new notification level may not exceed the
level which can be achieved by the technology-based treatment requirements
appropriate to the permittee under Subsection R317-8-7.1(3).
(7) Twenty-Four (24) Hour Reporting.
Pollutants for which the permittee will report violations of maximum daily
discharge limitations under Subsection R317-8-4.1(12)(f) shall be listed in the
permit. This list will include any toxic pollutant or hazardous substance, or
any pollutant specifically identified as the method to control a toxic
pollutant or hazardous substance.
(8) Monitoring Requirements. The permit will
incorporate, as applicable in addition to Subsection R317-8-4.1(12) the
following monitoring requirements:
(a) To
assure compliance with permit limitations, requirements to monitor;
1. The mass, or other measurement specified
in the permit, for each pollutant limited in the permit;
2. The volume of effluent discharged from
each outfall;
3. Other measurements
as appropriate, including pollutants in internal waste streams under Subsection
R317-8-4.3(8); pollutants in intake water for net limitations under Subsection
R317-8-4.3(7); frequency and rate of discharge for noncontinuous discharges
under Subsection R317-8-4.3(5); pollutants subject to notification requirements
under Subsection R317-8-4.1(15)(a); and pollutants in sewage sludge or other
monitoring as specified in State rules for sludge use or disposal or as
determined to be necessary pursuant to Subsection R317-8-2.1.
4. According to test procedures approved
under 40 CFR Part 136 for the analyses of pollutants having approved methods
under the federal regulation, and according to a test procedure specified in
the permit for pollutants with no approved methods.
(b) Except as provided in Subsections
R317-8-4.2(8)(d) and (8)(e), requirements to report monitoring results shall be
established on a case-by-case basis with a frequency dependent on the nature
and effect of the sewage sludge use or disposal practice; minimally this shall
be a specified in Subsection R317-8-1.10(8) (where applicable), but in no case
less than once a year.
(c)
Requirements to report monitoring results for storm water discharges associated
with industrial activity which are subject to an effluent limitation guideline
shall be established on a case-by-case basis with a frequency dependent on the
nature and effect of the discharge, but in no case less than once a
year.
(d) Requirements to report
monitoring results for storm water discharges associated with industrial
activity (other than those addressed in paragraph (c)above) shall be
established on a case-by-case basis with a frequency dependent on the nature
and effect of the discharge. At a minimum, a permit for such a discharge must
require;
1. The discharger to conduct an
annual inspection of the facility site to identify areas contributing to a
storm water discharge associated with industrial activity and evaluate whether
measures to reduce pollutant loadings identified in a storm water pollution
prevention plan are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with the
terms of the permit or whether additional control measures are needed;
2. The discharger to maintain for
a period of three years a record summarizing the results of the inspection and
a certification that the facility is in compliance with the plan and the
permit, and identifying any incidents of non-compliance;
3. Such report and certification be signed in
accordance with Subsection R317-8-3.4; and
4. Permits for storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity from inactivite mining operations may,
where annual inspections are impracticable, require certification once every
three years by a Registered Professional Engineer that the facility is in
compliance with the permit, or alternative requirements.
(e) Permits which do not require the
submittal of monitoring result reports at least annually shall require that the
permittee report all instances of noncompliance not reported under Subsections
R317-8-4.1(12)(a),(d),(e), and (f) at least annually.
(9) Pretreatment Program for POTWs. If
applicable to the facility the permit will incorporate as a permit condition,
requirements for POTWs to:
(a) Identify, in
terms of character and volume of pollutants, any significant indirect
dischargers into the POTW subject to pretreatment standards under the UPDES
rules.
(b) Submit a local program
when required by and in accordance with Subsection R317-8-8.10 to assure
compliance with pretreatment standards to the extent applicable in the UPDES
rules. The local program will be incorporated into the permit as described in
Subsection R317-8-8.10. The program shall require all indirect dischargers to
the POTW to comply with the applicable reporting requirements.
(c) For POTWs which are 'sludge-only
facilities", a requirement to develop a pretreatment program under Subsection
R317-8-8 when the
Director determines that a pretreatment program is necessary to assure
compliance with State rules governing sludge use or
disposal.
(10) Best
management practices shall be included as a permit condition, as applicable, to
control or abate the discharge of pollutants when:
(a) Authorized under the Utah Water Quality
Act as amended and the UPDES rule for the control of toxic pollutants and
hazardous substances from ancillary activities;
(b) Numeric effluent limitations are
infeasible, or
(c) The practices
are reasonably necessary to achieve effluent limitations and standards or to
carry out the purposes and intent of the Utah Water Quality Act, as
amended.
(11) Reissued
Permits.
(a) Except as provided in Subsection
R317-8-4.2(11)(b), when a permit is renewed or reissued, interim limitations,
standards or conditions must be at least as stringent as the final limitations,
standards, or conditions in the previous permit unless the circumstances on
which the previous permit was based have materially and substantially changed
since the time the permit was issued and would constitute cause for permit
modification or revocation and reissuance under Subsection
R317-8-5.6.
(b) In the case of
effluent limitations established on the basis of Section
19-5-104
of the Utah Water Quality Act, a permit may not be renewed, reissued, or
modified on the basis of effluent guidelines promulgated by EPA under section
304(b) of the CWA subsequent to the original issuance of such permit, to
contain effluent limitations which are less stringent than the comparable
effluent limitations in the previous permit.
(c) Exceptions--A permit with respect to
which Subsection R317-8-4.2(11)(b) applies may be renewed, reissued or modified
to contain a less stringent effluent limitation applicable to a pollutant, if--
1. Material and substantial alterations or
additions to the permitted facility occurred after permit issuance which
justify the application of a less stringent effluent limitation; and
2. either:
a. information is available which was not
available at the time of permit issuance other than revised regulations,
guidance, or test methods which would have justified the application of a less
stringent effluent limitation at the time of permit issuance; or
b. the Director determines that technical
mistakes or mistaken interpretations of law were made in issuing the
permit;
3. A less
stringent effluent limitation is necessary because of events over which the
permittee has no control and for which there is no reasonably available
remedy;
4. The permittee has
received a permit modification under Subsection R317-8-5.6; or
5. The permittee has installed the treatment
facilities required to meet the effluent limitations in the previous permit and
has properly operated and maintained the facilities but has nevertheless been
unable to achieve the previous effluent limitations, in which case the
limitations in the reviewed, reissued, or modified permit may reflect the level
of pollutant control actually achieved but shall not be less stringent than
required by effluent guidelines in effect at the time of permit renewal,
reissuance, or modification.
(d) Limitations. In no event may a permit
with respect to which Subsection R317-8-4.2(11)(b) applies be renewed, reissued
or modified to contain an effluent limitation which is less stringent than
required by effluent guidelines in effect at the time the permit is renewed,
reissued, or modified. In no event may such a permit to discharge into waters
be renewed, issued, or modified to contain a less stringent effluent limitation
if the implementation of such limitation would result in a violation of the
water quality standard applicable to such waters.
(12) Privately Owned Treatment Works. For a
privately owned treatment works, any conditions expressly applicable to any
user, as a limited co-permittee, that may be necessary in the permit issued to
the treatment works to ensure compliance with applicable requirements under
this rule will be imposed as applicable. Alternatively, the Director may issue
separate permits to the treatment works and to its users, or may require a
separate permit application from any user. The Director's decision to issue a
permit with no conditions applicable to any user, to impose conditions on one
or more users, to issue separate permits or to require separate applications,
and the basis for that decision will be stated in the fact sheet for the draft
permit for the treatment works.
(13) Grants. Any conditions imposed in grants
or loans made by the Director to POTWs which are reasonably necessary for the
achievement of federally issued effluent limitations will be required as
applicable.
(14) Sewage Sludge.
Requirements governing the disposal of sewage sludge from publicly owned
treatment works or any other treatment works treating domestic sewage for any
use for which rules have been established, in accordance with any applicable
regulations.
(15) Coast Guard. When
a permit is issued to a facility that may operate at certain times as a means
of transportation over water, the permit will be conditioned to require that
the discharge comply with any applicable federal regulation promulgated by the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating, and such
condition will establish specifications for safe transportation, handling,
carriage, and storage of pollutants, if applicable.
(16) Navigation. Any conditions that the
Secretary of the Army considers necessary to ensure that navigation and
anchorage will not be substantially impaired, in accordance with R317-8-6.9
will be included.
(17) State
standards for sewage sludge use or disposal. When there are no applicable
standards for sewage sludge use or disposal, the permit may include
requirements developed on a case-by-case basis to protect public health and the
environment from any adverse effects which may occur from toxic pollutants in
sewage sludge. If any applicable standard for sewage sludge use or disposal is
promulgated under Section 19-5-104 of the Utah Water Quality Act, and that
standard is more stringent than any limitation on the pollutant or practice in
the permit, the Director may initiate proceedings under these rules to modify
or revoke and reissue the permit to conform to the standard for sewage sludge
use or disposal.
4.3
CALCULATING UPDES PERMIT CONDITIONS. The following provisions will be used to
calculate terms and conditions of the UPDES permit.
(1) Outfalls and Discharge Points. All permit
effluent limitations, standards, and prohibitions will be established for each
outfall or discharge point of the permitted facility, except as otherwise
provided under R317-8-4.2(10) with BMPs where limitations are infeasible; and
under R317-8-4.3(8), limitations on internal waste streams.
(2) Production-Based Limitations.
(a) In the case of POTWs, permit effluent
limitations, standards, or prohibitions will be calculated based on design
flow.
(b) Except in the case of
POTWs, calculation of any permit limitations, standards, or prohibitions which
are based on production, or other measure of operation, will be based not upon
the designed production capacity but rather upon a reasonable measure of actual
production of the facility. For new sources or new dischargers, actual
production shall be estimated using projected production. The time period of
the measure of production will correspond to the time period of the calculated
permit limitations; for example, monthly production will be used to calculate
average monthly discharge limitations. The Director may include a condition
establishing alternate permit standards or prohibitions based upon anticipated
increased (not to exceed maximum production capability) or decreased production
levels.
(c) For the automotive
manufacturing industry only, the Director may establish a condition under
R317-8-4.3(2)(b) 2 if the applicant satisfactorily demonstrates to the Director
at the time the application is submitted that its actual production, as
indicated in R317-8-4.3(2)(b) 1, is substantially below maximum production
capability and that there is a reasonable potential for an increase above
actual production during the duration of the permit.
(d) If the Director establishes permit
conditions under and R317-8-4.3(2)(c):
1. The
permit shall require the permittee to notify the Director at least two business
days prior to a month in which the permittee expects to operate at a level
higher than the lowest production level identified in the permit. The notice
shall specify the anticipated level and the period during which the permittee
expects to operate at the alternate level. If the notice covers more than one
month, the notice shall specify the reasons for the anticipated production
level increase. New notice of discharge at alternate levels is required to
cover a period or production level not covered by prior notice or, if during
two consecutive months otherwise covered by a notice, the production level at
the permitted facility does not in fact meet the higher level designated in the
notice.
2. The permittee shall
comply with the limitations, standards, or prohibitions that correspond to the
lowest level of production specified in the permit, unless the permittee has
notified the Director under R317-8-4.3(2)(d) 1, in which case the permittee
shall comply with the lower of the actual level of production during each month
or the level specified in the notice.
3. The permittee shall submit with the DMR
the level of production that actually occurred during each month and the
limitations, standards, or prohibitions applicable to that level of
production.
(3)
Metals. All permit effluent limitations, standards, or prohibitions for a metal
will be expressed in terms of the total recoverable metal, that is, the sum of
the dissolved and suspended fractions of the metal, unless:
(a) An applicable effluent standard or
limitation has been promulgated by EPA and specifies the limitation for the
metal in the dissolved or valent form; or total form; or
(b) In establishing permit limitations on a
case-by-case basis under
R317-8-7,
it is necessary to express the limitation on the metal in the dissolved or
valent form in order to carry out the provisions of the Utah Water Quality Act;
or
(c) All approved analytical
methods for the metal inherently measure only its dissolved
form.
(4) Continuous
Discharges. For continuous discharges all permit effluent limitations,
standards, and prohibitions, including those necessary to achieve water quality
standards, unless impracticable will be stated as:
(a) Maximum daily and average monthly
discharge limitations for all dischargers other than publicly owned treatment
works; and
(b) Average weekly and
average monthly discharge limitations for POTWs.
(5) Non-continuous Discharges. Discharges
which are not continuous, as defined in R317-8-1.5(7), shall be particularly
described and limited, considering the following factors, as appropriate:
(a) Frequency; for example, a batch discharge
shall not occur more than once every three (3) weeks;
(b) Total mass; for example, not to exceed
100 kilograms of zinc and 200 kilograms of chromium per batch
discharge;
(c) Maximum rate of
discharge of pollutants during the discharge for example, not to exceed 2
kilograms of zinc per minute; and
(d) Prohibition or limitation of specified
pollutants by mass, concentration, or other appropriate measure, (for example,
shall not contain at any time more than 0.05 mg/l zinc or more than 250 grams
(0.25 kilogram) of zinc in any discharge).
(6) Mass Limitations.
(a) All pollutants limited in permits shall
have limitations, standards, or prohibitions expressed in terms of mass except:
1. For pH, temperature, radiation, or other
pollutants which cannot appropriately be expressed by mass;
2. When applicable standards and limitations
are expressed in terms of other units of measurement; or
3. If, in establishing permit limitations on
a case-by-case basis under R317-8-7.1, limitations expressed in terms of mass
are infeasible because the mass of the pollutant discharged cannot be related
to a measure of operation; (for example, discharges of TSS from certain mining
operations), and permit conditions ensure that dilution will not be used as a
substitute for treatment.
(b) Pollutants limited in terms of mass
additionally may be limited in terms of other units of measurement, and the
permit will require the permittee to comply with both limitations.
(7) Pollutants in Intake Water.
(a) Upon request of the discharger,
technology-based effluent limitations or standards shall be adjusted to reflect
credit for pollutants in the discharger's intake water if:
1. The applicable effluent limitations and
standards contained in effluent guidelines and standards provide that they
shall be applied on a net basis; or
2. The discharger demonstrates that the
control system it proposes or used to meet applicable technology-based
limitations and standards would, if properly installed and operated, meet the
limitations and standards in the absence of pollutants in the intake
waters.
(b) Credit for
generic pollutants such as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) or total suspended
solids (TSS) should not be granted unless the permittee demonstrates that the
constituents of the generic measure in the effluent are substantially similar
to the constituents of the generic measure in the intake water or unless
appropriate additional limits are placed on process water pollutants either at
the outfall or elsewhere.
(c)
Credit shall be granted only to the extent necessary to meet the applicable
limitation or standard, up to a maximum value equal to the influent value.
Additional monitoring may be necessary to determine eligibility for credits and
compliance with permit limits.
(d)
Credit shall be granted only if the discharger demonstrates that the intake
water is drawn from the same body of water into which the discharge is made.
The Director may waive this requirement if he finds that no environmental
degradation will result.
(e) This
section does not apply to the discharge of raw water clarifier sludge generated
from the treatment of intake water.
(8) Internal Waste Streams.
(a) When permit effluent limitations or
standards imposed at the point of discharge are impractical or infeasible,
effluent limitations or standards for discharges of pollutants may be imposed
on internal waste streams before mixing with other waste streams or cooling
water streams. In those instances, the monitoring required by R317-8-4.2(8)
shall also be applied to the internal waste streams.
(b) Limits on internal waste streams will be
imposed only when the fact sheet under R317-8-6.4 sets forth the exceptional
circumstances which make such limitations necessary, such as when the final
discharge point is inaccessible, for example, under 10 meters of water, the
wastes at the point of discharge are so diluted as to make monitoring
impracticable, or the interferences among pollutants at the point of discharge
would make detection or analysis impracticable.
(9) Disposal of Pollutants Into Wells, Into
POTWs, or by Land Application. Permit limitations and standards shall be
calculated as provided in R317-8-2.6.
(10) Secondary Treatment Information. Permit
conditions that involve secondary treatment will be written as provided in 40
CFR Part 133, except that Utah effluent limits for secondary treatment will be
used.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.