[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-1004]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: January 14, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice of
Proposed General NPDES Permit for Placer Mining in Alaska
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-4826-9]
Proposed General NPDES Permit for Placer Mining in Alaska
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10.
ACTION: Notice of a proposed general permit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed general permit is intended to regulate placer
mining activities in the state of Alaska. EPA, Region 10 has issued
almost identical individual permits to these facilities in the past and
intends to relieve some of the administrative burden of issuing
individual permits by issuing this general permit. When issued, the
proposed permit will establish effluent limitations, standards,
prohibitions and other conditions on discharges from the covered
facilities. These conditions are based on existing national effluent
guidelines and material contained in the administrative record. A
description of the basis for the conditions and requirements of the
proposed general permit is given in the fact sheet published below.
DATES:
Public Comment Period: Interested persons may submit comments on
the draft general permit to EPA, Region 10 at the address below.
Comments must be received in the regional office by February 14, 1994.
Public Hearings: Public hearings on the permit conditions are
scheduled in Anchorage and Fairbanks. The Anchorage hearing will be
held on February 7, 1994, at the Federal Building, 222 W 7th, room 137,
from 6:30 pm until all persons have been heard. The Fairbanks hearing
will be held on February 9, 1994 at the Fairbanks North Star Borough
(Noel Wien) Library, 1215 Cowles Street, also from 6:30 pm until all
persons have been heard. Persons interested in obtaining information on
the hearings should contact Cindi Godsey at the address below.
Request for Coverage: Written request for coverage and
authorization to discharge under the general permit shall be provided
to EPA, Region 10, as described in Part I.E. of the draft permit.
Authorization to discharge requires written notification from EPA that
coverage has been granted and that a specific permit number has been
assigned to the operation.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed general permit should be sent to
Cindi Godsey; U.S. EPA, Region 10; 1200 Sixth Avenue WD-134; Seattle,
Washington 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindi Godsey at the Seattle address
above or by telephone at (206) 553-1755.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
the review requirements of Executive Order 12866 pursuant to section 6
of that order.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
After review of the facts presented in the notice printed above, I
hereby certify pursuant to the provision of 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
general NPDES permit will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Moreover, the permit reduces a
significant administrative burden on regulated sources.
Dated: January 7, 1994.
Charles E. Findley,
Director, Water Division.
FACT SHEET
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, WD-134, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-1214.
General Permit for Placer Miners No.: AKG-37-0000
Proposed Issuance of a General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit To Discharge Pollutants Pursuant to the
Provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for Alaska Placer Miners
(Except Those Identified in Part III of This Fact Sheet)
This fact sheet includes (a) the tentative determination of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue the permit, (b)
information on public comment, public hearings and appeal, (c) the
description of the industry and proposed discharges, (d) other
conditions and requirements.
Persons wishing to comment on the tentative determinations
contained in the proposed general permit may do so before the
expiration date of the Public Notice. All written comments should be
submitted to EPA as described in the Public Comments Section of the
attached Public Notice.
After the expiration date of the Public Notice, the Director, Water
Division, will make a final determination with respect to issuance of
the permit. The tentative determination contained in the proposed
general permit will become final conditions if no substantive comments
are received during public comment period.
The permit will become effective 30 days after the final
determination is made, unless a request for an evidentiary hearing is
submitted within 30 days after receipt of the final determination. An
evidentiary hearing request must meet all the requirements of 40 CFR
124.74 and set forth material issues of fact relevant to the permit
issuance. The proposed NPDES general permit and other related documents
are on file and may be inspected and copies made at the above address
any time between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Copies
and other information may be requested by writing to EPA at the above
address to the attention of the Water Permits Section, or by calling
(206) 553-8332. This material is also available from the EPA Alaska
Operations Office, room 537, Federal Building, 222 West 7th Avenue,
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7588 or Alaska Operations Office, 410
Willoughby Avenue, suite 100, Juneau, Alaska 99801 or the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation, Northern Regional Office, 610
University Avenue, Fairbanks, Alaska 99709.
Technical Information
I. Background Information
A. Permit Coverage
1. General Permit. a. Section 301(a) of the CWA provides that the
discharge of pollutants is unlawful except in accordance with a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
Although such permits have been issued to individual dischargers, EPA's
regulations do authorize the issuance of ``general permits'' to
categories of discharges (40 CFR 122.28) when a number of point sources
are:
(1) Located within the same geographic area and warrant similar
pollution control measures;
(2) Involve the same or substantially similar types of operations;
(3) Discharge the same types of wastes;
(4) Require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions;
(5) Require the same or similar monitoring requirements; and
(6) In the opinion of the Director, are more appropriately
controlled under a general permit than under individual permits.
b. Like individual permits, a violation of a condition contained in
a general permit constitutes a violation of the Act and subjects the
owner or operator of the permitted facility to the penalties specified
in section 309 of the Act.
c. A Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under this General Permit
is required (40 CFR 122.28(b)(2)(i)). The requirements are outlined in
Part I.E. of the permit. An Annual Placer Mining Application would be
acceptable if it contains all the items specified in the permit.
d. Coverage under this permit will expire five (5) years from the
date of issuance. It is EPA's position (40 CFR 122.28(b)(1)) that an
expired general permit continues in force and effect until a new
general permit is issued. Only those facilities authorized to discharge
under the expiring general permit and submit an NOI 90 days prior to
the expiration of this general permit are covered by the continued
permit.
2. Types of Placer Mine Operations Covered by the Permit. EPA is
proposing to issue a General NPDES permit for Alaska placer mining
operations which are facilities that mine and process gold placer ores
using gravity separation methods to recover the gold metal contained in
the ore. This permit applies to all open-cut and mechanical dredge (not
suction dredges) gold placer mines except those open-cut mines that
mine less than 1,500 cubic yards of placer ore per mining season and
dredges that remove less than 50,000 cubic yards of placer ore per
mining season. These operations are covered by the effluent guidelines
and described in 40 CFR 440.140(b). EPA has completed a literature
research project considering the environmental effects of all suction
dredge operation and potential controls that could be placed on them.
Based on this research, EPA has concluded that suction dredges with
intake hoses of greater than 4 inches will be covered by this permit.
Operations utilizing hydraulic removal of overburden are covered by
this permit.
This permit does not authorize discharges resulting from
beneficiation methods utilizing cyanidation, froth flotation, heap or
vat leaching and mercury amalgamation.
3. Limitations on Coverage. Many streams and stream reaches in
Alaska have been designated as part of the federal wild and scenic
rivers system or as a Conservation System Unit (CSU) by the federal
government. Additional conditions may be required by the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game in resident and anadromous fish streams.
``The Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important for Spawning, Rearing or
Migration of Anadromous Fish'' lists the streams in the State which
require a Habitat permit from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Because this permit does not relieve a permittee of the requirements of
other applicable federal, state or local laws, permittees should
contact the appropriate state or federal agencies to inquire about
additional permits that may be required.
4. Individual Permits. Owners or operators authorized by a general
permit may be excepted from coverage by a general permit by applying to
the Director of the NPDES program for an individual permit. This
request may be made by submitting an NPDES permit application, together
with supporting documentation for the request no later than 90 days
after publication by EPA of the final general permit in the Federal
Register, or 180 days prior to the commencement of operation of a new
source or new discharger. The Director may require any person
authorized by a general permit to apply for and obtain an individual
permit, or any interested person may petition the Director to take this
action. The Director may consider the issuance of individual permits
when:
a. The single discharge or the cumulative number of discharges is/
are a significant contributor of pollution;
b. The discharger is not in compliance with the terms and
conditions of the general permit;
c. A change has occurred in the availability of demonstrated
technology or practices for the control or abatement of pollutants
applicable to the point source;
d. Effluent limitations guidelines are subsequently promulgated for
the point sources covered by the general permit;
e. A Water Quality Management plan containing requirements
applicable to such point sources is approved; or
f. The requirements listed in the previous paragraphs are not met.
B. Description of the Industry
1. Mechanical Operations (Traditional Sluicing). Placer mining
involves the mining and extraction of gold or other heavy metals and
minerals primarily from alluvial deposits. These deposits may be in
existing stream beds or ancient often buried stream deposits, i.e.
paleo or fossil placers. Many Alaskan placer deposits consist of
unconsolidated clay, sand, gravel, cobble and boulders that contain
very small amounts of native gold or other precious metals. Most are
stream deposits and occur along present stream valleys or on benches or
terraces above existing streams. Beach placer deposits have been and
continue to be important producers in Alaska. These deposits, most
notable near Nome, include both submerged and elevated beach placer
deposits.
Essential components of placer mining include overburden removal,
mining of the gold placer gravels and processing (gold recovery).
a. Overburden Removal. Various types of overburden include barren
alluvial gravels, broken slide rock or glacial deposits. In some parts
of Alaska the pay gravels are overlaid by silty, organic-rich deposits
of barren, frozen material generally comprised of wind-blown particles
(loess). Particularly high ice content is common. Most facilities
utilize mechanical methods for removal of overburden because they
generally use the same excavating equipment for mining.
Overburden can also be removed by hydraulicking. Hydraulicking
consists of the loosening of material by water delivered under pressure
through a hydraulic giant (monitor). The material then flows, usually
by gravity, to the sluice box if the overburden is to be processed with
the mineral bearing material below. Overburden consisting of barren
material may be directed away from the sluice box so that only mineral
bearing material is processed in the sluice.
b. Mining Methods. Placer mining methods range from dredging
systems to open-cut mining. Dredging systems are classified as
hydraulic or mechanical, depending on the methods of digging. A
floating dredge consists of a supporting hull with a mining control
system, excavating and lifting mechanism, gold recovery circuits, and
waste disposal system. They are all designed to work as a unit to dig,
classify, beneficiate ores and dispose of waste. Suction dredges, the
most common hydraulic dredging system, are quite popular in Alaska with
the small or recreational gold placer miner.
A bucket-line dredge has been the traditional gold placer
mechanical dredging tool in Alaska. Excavation equipment consists of a
chain of buckets, traveling continuously around a truss or plate-girder
ladder, that scoop up a load as they are forced against the mining face
while pivoting around the lower tumbler and then dump as they pivot
around the upper tumbler. The ladder is raised or lowered as required
by a large hoisting winch through a system of cables and sheaves. About
six placer miners operate bucket-line dredges in Alaska.
c. Processing Methods. A large percentage of the present gold
placer mining operations use some type of sluice box to perform the
primary processing function, beneficiation. An increasing number of jig
plants are also being used. Many operations make use of feed size
classification which involves the physical separation of large rocks
and boulders from smaller materials such as gravel and sand. The object
of classification is to prevent the processing of large-sized material
which is unlikely to contain gold values. Commonly used classification
equipment includes: grizzlies, trommels and static or vibrating
screens. The most common gold recovery method is sluicing. A sluice is
a long, sloped trough into which water is directed to effectuate
separation of gold from ore. A slurry of water and ore flows down the
sluice and the gold, due to its relatively high density, is trapped in
riffles along the sluice.
2. Suction Dredging. A suction dredge is a mechanical device which
floats on the stream surface and which pumps stream water and stream
bed material through a suction intake conduit to a sluice box from
which gold or other minerals may be recovered.
The discharge from suction dredges consists totally of stream water
and bed material. These discharges are becoming numerous in the state.
The discharge limits and monitoring requirements are identical for the
majority of these discharges. This category of discharges meets the
qualifications of 40 CFR 122.59 for the issuance of General Discharge
Permits. This general discharge permit will expedite processing the
numerous applications and provide the same regulatory controls over the
discharges as an individual permit would.
II. Effluent Characteristics
Discharges from placer mining operations consist of water and the
naturally occurring materials found in the alluvial deposits (e.g.
sand, silt, clay, trace minerals and metals, etc.). Some of the
elements measured in placer mine effluent are derived principally from
sulfide, oxide, carbonate, and silicate mineral species, and include
antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, mercury, nickel,
silver, and zinc. Most of these parameters are found in trace amounts
and are of little significance.
Based on review of sampling data collected by EPA and upon
evaluation of Alaska Water Quality Standards (WQS), EPA has concluded
that the pollutants of primary concern are settleable solids,
turbidity, and arsenic. Arsenic is the only toxic pollutant of concern
due to its naturally occurring abundance in most Alaskan soils.
III. Basis for Effluent Limitations
A. Background
Effluent limits required in this permit for the control of
pollutants are published in 40 CFR part 440, Subpart M--Gold Placer
Mine Subcategory, which was promulgated May 24, 1988, in 53 FR 18764.
Additional information regarding the basis for establishing the
effluent limits is summarized in the EPA publication titled
``Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Ore Mining and Dressing Point
Source Category--Gold Placer Mine Subcategory'' (May 1988).
This final rule establishes effluent limitations guidelines and
standards based on the best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT), the best available technology economically achievable
(BAT), and new source performance standards (NSPS) based on the best
available demonstrated technology. The BAT and NSPS limitations
represent the minimum technology required to be in place for all placer
mining operations covered under 40 CFR part 440, subpart M.
Section 402(o) of the Act stipulates that NPDES permits may not be
reissued to contain effluent limitations that are less stringent than
comparable water quality standards and technology based effluent
limitations in the previous permit. EPA has determined that this
general permit complies with these anti-backsliding provisions of the
Act.
B. Technology-Based Limitations
1. Mechanical Operations. The CWA requires industries to apply
treatment technology representing BAT that is economically achievable.
The BAT requirements specify the use of settling ponds plus total
recirculation of process wastewater as the selected treatment
technology. However, the regulation does allow the discharge of
incidental waters (including waters that enter a mine through
precipitation, snow melt, drainage water, ground water infiltration and
the melting of permafrost) which have commingled with process waters,
provided that these incidental waters are in excess of the make-up
water required, are treated in settling ponds and do not exceed 0.2 ml/
l settleable solids prior to discharge.
For the purpose of this permit, discharged wastewater consists of
incidental waters commingled with process waters used to move the ore
to and through the beneficiation process, water used to aid in
classification, and water used in gravity separation. Pursuant to 40
CFR 440.143, BAT requirements are as follows:
a. The concentration of settleable solids in wastewater discharged
from an open-cut mine plant or a dredge plant site must not exceed an
instantaneous maximum of 0.2 ml/l.
b. The volume of wastewater which may be discharged from an open-
cut mine plant or dredge plant site must not exceed the volume of
infiltration, drainage and mine drainage waters which is in excess of
the make-up water required for operation of the beneficiation process.
These technology-based requirements are specified in Parts
II.A.1.a. and b. of the proposed permit.
The effect of requirement II.A.2. of the proposed permit is to
prohibit the discharge of any wastewater during periods when new water
is allowed to enter the plant site.
C. Water Quality Based Limits
In addition to the BAT effluent limitations, the permit includes
effluent limitations which are required to ensure compliance with WQS
(Alaska Regulations 18 AAC 70). These standards vary with the
beneficial use they are established to protect. In water bodies with
more than one designated beneficial use, the more restrictive criteria
apply.
The WQS protect most fresh water sources for use in drinking,
agriculture, aquaculture and industrial water supply, contact and
secondary recreation, and the growth and propagation of fish,
shellfish, and other aquatic life (Alaska Regulations 18 AAC 70.050).
All permits being issued in this round of permitting must protect for
all the above uses.
EPA has concluded, based on review of the WQS and available
sampling data, that the parameters of turbidity and arsenic must be
limited in order to meet the State WQS. Also, the sediment standard
must be applied to discharges from operations utilizing the hydraulic
removal of overburden. The arsenic, turbidity and sediment limits were
established pursuant to section 301(b)(1)(C) of the CWA, which requires
imposition of ``* * * any more stringent limitation, including those
necessary to meet water quality standards, * * * or required to
implement any applicable water quality standard established pursuant to
this Act.'' The NPDES regulations, at 40 CFR 122.44(d), require NPDES
permits to include conditions to ``Achieve water quality standards
established under section 303 of CWA * * *.''
1. Turbidity: a. Mechanical and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
According to the WQS, the most restrictive turbidity criteria applies
to fresh water sources classified for water contact recreation uses.
These criteria (18 AAC 70.020(b)(1)(B)(i)(4)) state that turbidity * *
* ``Shall not exceed 5 NTU above natural conditions when the natural
turbidity is 50 NTU or less; and more than 10% increase in turbidity
when the natural condition is more than 50 NTU, not to exceed a maximum
increase of 15 NTU.'' The proposed draft permit contains a turbidity
limit that would assure compliance with water quality standards under
worst case conditions. That is, the turbidity in the effluent must not
exceed 5 NTUs above the background turbidity level in the receiving
stream. This condition accounts for naturally occurring turbidity in
the receiving water and allows the effluent to contain an additional 5
NTUs of turbidity where the receiving water is naturally turbid. The
permit condition does not account for those situations where naturally
occurring turbidity would allow an increase of up to 15 NTUs, nor does
it account for the dilution effects of the receiving stream. The reason
for assuming worst case conditions is that EPA does not have current
site-specific information to establish end-of-pipe limitations for each
of the permits being processed.
Although worst case conditions are assumed in the proposed draft
permit, EPA will consider modifying the NTU limitation to account for
the dilution effects of the receiving stream. EPA's approach in setting
higher turbidity limitations is dependent upon receipt of the NOI with
information from the permittee or from the Alaska Department of Natural
Resources (ADNR) acting on behalf of the permittee demonstrating that
the dilution effect of the receiving water justifies a less stringent
limit. EPA is operating under the assumption that the permit applicant
bears the burden of providing information necessary to issue the permit
(40 CFR 124.85(a)(1)). Where the applicant does not provide the site-
specific information that would justify a less stringent turbidity
limit, the permit issued to a site will contain the turbidity limit
proposed in the draft permit.
The procedures used to calculate a higher turbidity limit are the
same as those used in the placer mining permits issued since 1986. The
turbidity limit is based on utilizing a mass balance equation which
relates upstream receiving water flow and turbidity to effluent flow
and turbidity. The basic form of this equation is:
Q1C1+Q2C2=Q3C3,
where
C1 = upstream turbidity;
C2 = effluent turbidity;
C3 = downstream turbidity after mixing where the allowable
increase is 5 NTU above background (C1+5 NTU);
Q1 = stream flow downstream from any diversion and upstream from
the discharge;
Q2 = effluent flow*; and,
Q3 = total stream flow downstream from discharge after complete
mixing.
*A default value of 10 gallons per minute (GPM) will be used if the
NOI states that zero discharge will be achieved. The information that
must be submitted by the permittee to determine the appropriate
turbidity limit for the facility is the effluent and receiving stream
flow rates. The receiving stream flow rate must be measured upstream
from the discharge point and downstream from any diversions. Receiving
stream flow values can be obtained from the ADNR, Division of Mining,
upon request by the permittee. ADNR methodology for determining
upstream flow uses equations developed by Ashton and Carlson (1984).
The maximum effluent discharge flow must be estimated by the permittee
and must account for the effects of all excess incidental waters.
Permittees requesting a higher turbidity limitation must submit the
necessary information to EPA with the NOI. This applies to all
permittees, including those who have submitted this type of information
in the past, in order to assure that all site-specific information is
up-to-date.
b. Suction Dredging. The daily visual inspection during operation
of an area downstream of the suction dredge is based on research
published in the scientific literature (Griffith and Andrews 1981,
Hassler et al. 1986, Harvey 1986, Huber and Blanchet 1992, Thomas 1985)
and on monitoring done by Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) (Ron McAlister, ADEC, personal communication). In
most cases, water quality recovered rapidly below the dredge. ADEC
found that turbidity was elevated 1 to 4.5 NTU 500 feet downstream of
an operating 10 inch dredge. The daily visual inspection during
operation should assure that the water quality standard for turbidity
is met.
2. Arsenic--Mechanical and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden. EPA has
concluded, based on available sampling data, that arsenic is commonly
associated with placer mining wastes. Locally, it is the most abundant
toxic metal present. For this reason, EPA has determined that arsenic
is a pollutant of concern. Additionally, although several studies by
EPA have indicated a reduction in levels of arsenic in placer mining
effluent as a result of reducing settleable solids to 0.2 ml/l, EPA has
concluded that these reduced levels of arsenic are not consistently
adequate to achieve WQS.
In establishing the arsenic limit, the ``Amendments to the Water
Quality Standards Regulation; Compliance with CWA section 303(c)(2)(B);
Final Rule'' (57 FR 6084, Tuesday, December 22, 1992) are used. This
rulemaking promulgated the chemical-specific numeric criteria for
priority toxic pollutants necessary to bring all States into compliance
with the requirements of the CWA section 303(c)(2)(B). The primary
focus of the rule is the inclusion of the federal water quality
criteria for pollutant(s) in State standards as necessary to support
water quality-based control programs (e.g. NPDES permits). The federal
standard of 0.18 g/l total recoverable arsenic is applicable
to Alaska and this number has been used to derive the end-of-pipe
limitation for the draft permits.
Mixing zones are allowed under the Alaska standards for some
pollutant discharges. However, 18 AAC 70.032(a) states * * * ``In
applying the water quality criteria set out in this chapter, the
department will, upon application and in its discretion, prescribe in
its permits or certifications a volume of dilution for an effluent or
substance within a receiving water unless pollutants discharged could
bioaccumulate; concentrate or persist in the environment; cause
carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic effects; or otherwise present a
risk to human health * * *'' Arsenic is a carcinogen. In a letter,
dated March 24, 1992, from the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation Commissioner, John Sandor, to EPA Water Division Director,
Charles Findley, the State has interpreted this to mean that ``* * * a
mixing zone may be prescribed where there is no reasonable expectation
of an adverse effect on human health or aquatic life, based on site-
specific, chemical, physical and biological characteristics.'' EPA is
not proposing a mixing zone for arsenic but would include a method for
determining a mixing zone in the permit if the Department determines
that such a mixing zone is appropriate and is in compliance with WQS.
Two options are given to the permittee to determine the arsenic
limit. If the ``natural'' background is not measured, the effluent
limit is set according to federal standard at 0.18 g/l. The
other option depends on the ``natural'' background levels of arsenic
present in the receiving water. The ``natural'' background is defined
as the total recoverable arsenic level upstream from all mining and
other man-made disturbances. The WQS, 18 AC 70.010(a), states that
``[n]o person may conduct an operation that * * * contributes to a
violation of the water quality standards * * *'' If the ``natural''
background levels are already above the federal standard, any discharge
at or below the ``natural'' background level will not elevate the
existing concentrations in the stream thus not contributing further to
a violation of WQS. The ``natural'' background data must be provided
with the annual Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR).
Because the effluent limitation of 0.18 g/L is not
quantifiable using the EPA approved analytical method (206.2), EPA has
set a reporting threshold to measure the highest acceptable
quantification level for this parameter. When results cannot be
quantified, values below the method detection level (1 g/L)
shall be report as zero and values above the method detection level but
below the minimum level (4 g/L) reported at \1/2\ the minimum
level or 2 g/L. This reporting threshold does not authorize
the discharge of this parameter in excess of the effluent limitation.
3. Sediment. The sediment standard (18 ACC 70.020) is a narrative
standard which reads, ``No increase in concentration of sediment,
including settleable solids, above natural conditions.'' The method
indicated for measuring sediments is the use of an Imhoff cone. The
detection limit, the lowest measurable value, of an Imhoff cone is 0.2
ml/l. Therefore the maximum limit for sediment will be 0.2 ml/l
measured as settleable solids for operations utilizing hydraulic
removal of overburden.
IV. Basis for Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
A. Monitoring: All self-monitoring requirements considered the
remoteness of the mining operations, the magnitude of the pollutants
discharged, and the practicability of maintaining a valid quality
assurance program.
1. The measurement of settleable solids is an indication of overall
treatment efficiency. The permit requires monitoring for settleable
solids once per day during periods of discharge. If there is a
discharge to waters of the United States, permittees are required to
sample for settleable solids on a daily basis, even if sluicing does
not occur. This is required because the operator is responsible at all
times for the condition of the wastewater entering the receiving
stream. Also, the results from settleable solids sampling can give the
operator an immediate indication of the overall effectiveness of the
treatment system and thus allow advanced planning for treatment system
maintenance.
2. EPA has concluded that the monitoring frequency for turbidity
and arsenic will be once per season. Monitoring for these pollutants
have been established at less frequent intervals because sampling and
analysis for these parameters are more difficult and costly. Samples
for monitoring purposes must be taken during sluicing or discharge at a
time when the operation has reached equilibrium. For example, samples
should be taken when sluice paydirt loading and effluent discharge are
fairly constant.
3. Effluent flow monitoring is also required in the proposed
permit. The purpose of this requirement is to assess the pollutant
loading discharged into the receiving water.
4. The visual inspection provision in Part II.D.1. of the proposed
permit is required to assure against discharges resulting from
structural failure of berms, dikes, dams and other water control
structures. A visual inspection is an effective tool for assuring
proper operation and maintenance.
5. Monitoring provisions for turbidity, arsenic, settleable solids,
and flow (in Parts II.D.1.c., d., e., and f., respectively) are
included in the proposed permit. These provisions are included to
explain how, when, and where to collect these samples.
B. Reporting. 1. Reporting of effluent violations is required in
writing within a reasonable time period. This is found in Permit Part
IV.G.2.c.
2. Reporting of visual violations from suction dredges is required
in writing within a reasonable time period. This is found in Permit
Part II.D.2.b.
3. The results of all monitoring or notice of no discharge must be
reported to EPA by November 30 of each year. This is found in Permit
Part IV.B.
V. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
A. Mechanical and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
1. BMP conditions in Permit Parts III.A.1. to III.A.5. of the
proposed permit were developed pursuant to section 304(e) of the CWA.
These BMPs are established in 40 CFR 440.148 and are necessary for
control and treatment of the drainage and infiltration water at gold
placer mines and to prevent solids and toxic metals from being released
to the receiving streams.
a. The intent of Permit Part III.A.1. is to avoid contamination of
nonprocess water, reduce the volume of water requiring treatment and
maximize the retention time and the settling capacity of the settling
ponds. The diversion must totally circumvent any gold recovery units,
treatment facilities, etc. Any mine drainage sources that pass through
the actual mining area and are subject to transporting pollutants must
be treated prior to discharge.
b. Permit Part III.A.2. is required to assure that water retention
devices are constructed appropriately. This may be achieved by
utilizing on-site material in a manner that the fine sealing material
(such as clays) are mixed in the berms with coarser materials. Berms
should be toed into the underlying earth, constructed in layers or
lifts and each layer thoroughly compacted to ensure mechanical and
watertight integrity of the berms. Other impermeable material such as
plastic sheets or membranes may be used inside the berms when sealing
fines are unavailable or in short supply. The side slope of berms
should not be greater than the natural angle of repose of the materials
used in the berms or a slope of 2:1, whichever is flatter.
c. The intent of Permit Part III.A.3 is to ensure that the
investment in pollution control pay the maximum benefit in terms of
reduced pollutant volumes reaching water of the United States. These
measures may include location of the storage ponds and storage areas to
assure that they will not be washed out by reasonably predictable
flooding or by the return of a relocated stream to it original stream
bed. Materials removed from settling ponds should be placed in bermed
areas where liquids from the materials cannot flow overland to waters
of the United States. It may be necessary, in some cases, to collect
such liquids and pump or divert them back to the settling pond for
treatment. This requirement applies both during the active mining
season and at all other times until reclamation is completed.
d. Permit Part III.A.4. is required to assure that the amount of
wastewater that is discharged is kept to a minimum.
e. The provisions of Permit Part III.A.5. will ensure that water
control devices are adequately maintained. This specifies that
structures should be inspected on a regular basis for any signs of
structural weakness or incipient failure. Whenever such weakness or
incipient failure becomes evident, repair or augmentation of the
structure to reasonably ensure against catastrophic failure shall be
made immediately.
2. BMP condition Permit Part III.A.6. of the proposed permit is
required pursuant to 40 CFR 122.44(k)(3). The purpose of this
requirement is to assure that all reasonable measures are taken to
decrease the amount of pollutants being discharged to waters of the
United States.
3. The same BMPs are required of operations utilizing hydraulic
removal of overburden pursuant to 40 CFR 122.44(k)(3). The purpose of
these requirements is to assure that reasonable measures are taken to
decrease the amount of pollutants being discharged to waters of the
United States.
B. Suction Dredging
The BMPs are required pursuant to 40 CFR 122.44(k)(3).
1. Dredging is permitted only in the active stream channel where
the dredging spoils are relatively clean and will cause minimum
turbidity when returned to the stream. The material that runs through a
suction dredge flows downstream and settles among gravel and rocks in
the streambed. Too much silt and sand make it difficult for the salmon
to dig suitable gravel nests (redds) and can also smother fish eggs
already deposited.
2. Wherever practicable, the dredge shall be set to discharge into
a quiet pool where settling of dredge spoils can occur more rapidly.
This will cause in-stream turbidity to be minimized and localized to
the general area of the dredging activity.
3. The purpose of this requirement is to control the potential
discharge of pollutants, resulting from fuel spills, from entering
receiving waters.
4. Dredging is not permitted during the periods that fish eggs
could be in the gravel at the dredge site. The greatest single effect a
suction dredge has on the environment is the danger it poses to fish.
The dredge pump forces water and gravel through the nozzle and hose.
Fish eggs taken up with gravel cannot survive the shock, pressure, and
battering and pounding that comes with moving through the hose and
sluice. If a fish egg should somehow survive the hose and sluice, the
chances for being buried in the gravel at the right depth and in the
correct gravel composition necessary for incubation are nonexistent.
``The Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important for Spawning, Rearing or
Migration of Anadromous Fish'' lists the streams in the State which
require a Habitat permit from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
This catalog is quite extensive but is available for viewing at many
agencies including Alaska Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the
Anchorage Operations Office of EPA.
VI. Other Requirements
A. Spill Prevention Control and Containment (SPCC) Plan
Part III.C. of the proposed permit was established in accordance
with 40 CFR 122.44(k)(3). The purpose of this requirement is to control
the potential discharge of pollutants, resulting from fuel spills, from
entering receiving waters.
B. Endangered Species
A species list was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
for the state of Alaska. The recommended protection measures for the
species of concern during the nesting period prohibits alterations of
limited, high quality habitat which could detrimentally and
significantly reduce prey availability. Since this general water
discharge permit is written to protect aquatic life or human health
criteria (whichever is more stringent), no alterations of habitat due
to water discharges authorized by this permit should occur. Because of
this, EPA has determined that formal consultation for section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act is not necessary for existing facilities.
Environmental Assessments will be completed for each new source
discharge as is stated in Part I.A.3. of the permit. Any consultation
necessary to comply with the Endangered Species Act will be performed
at this time.
VII. Storm Exemption
Part III.D. of the proposed permit establishes a storm exemption
provision which authorizes exceedences of technology-based effluent
limitations and standards provided that the permittee meets certain
design and operational criteria. This provision is required pursuant to
40 CFR 440.141(b).
This provision allows for the unavoidable exceedence of technology-
based effluent limitations during storms of intensity greater than or
equal to a 5-year, 6-hour storm event. The storm exemption will be
allowed provided that (1) the settling ponds are designed, constructed,
and maintained to contain the volume of process water generated during
four hours of normal operation plus the drainage water resulting from a
5-year, 6-hour storm event, (2) the operator takes all reasonable steps
possible to maintain treatment of the wastewater and minimize overflow
from the settling ponds, (3) the permittee must be in compliance with
the BMPs in Part III.A. of the proposed permit, and (4) the operator
complies with all the notification requirements for bypasses and upsets
as established in Parts III.G. and H. of the proposed permit. Part
III.D. of the proposed permit establishes the specific conditions which
must be met in order to be eligible for the storm exemption.
This exemption is designed to provide an affirmative defense to an
enforcement action. Therefore, the operator has the burden of
demonstrating to the appropriate authority that the above conditions
have been met.
VIII. Prohibitions
A. Part I.C. has been incorporated into the proposed permit to
further clarify the discharges that will be authorized under this
permit.
B. Part II.A.2. of the proposed permit is required to assure
compliance with the technology-based requirements established in Part
II.A.1.a. of the proposed permit.
IX. New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
Pursuant to section 301 of the CWA, NSPS (40 CFR 440.144) were
promulgated for gold placer mine facilities. NSPS apply to new mines
determined to be new sources by virtue of their activities occurring
after promulgation of the rule (May 24, 1988). The NSPS for gold placer
mining facilities are based on the same treatment technology as BAT,
which consists of simple settling plus recirculation of all process
water. Since BAT is based on the most stringent demonstrated technology
that is available for treating gold placer mine wastewater, those mines
which are new sources will not be subject to controls more stringent
than those applicable to existing mines.
In accordance with section 511(c)(1) of the CWA, NPDES permits for
new sources are subject to the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires that, prior to the issuance of an
NPDES permit to a new source facility, an Environmental Assessment (EA)
must be prepared to determine the potential for any significant impacts
on the quality of the human environment resulting from operation of the
new source. Permit part I.E.1. requires that new facilities submit a
notice of intent by January 1 of the year of discharge. This will allow
adequate time to complete EAs for each new source prior to the mining
season. If the EA indicates that significant adverse environmental
impacts may occur, then the applicant must prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS). However, if the EA indicates that significant
impacts are not anticipated, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI)
shall be issued and the facility will be covered by the existing
general permit. The FNSI may be based, in part, on required permit
conditions or mitigation measures necessary to make the recommended
alternative environmentally acceptable.
X. State Certification
Section 301(b)(1)(C) of the Act requires that an NPDES permit
contain conditions which ensure compliance with applicable State water
quality standards or limitations. The limitations for turbidity and
arsenic were established pursuant to WQS and federal standards,
respectively. Section 401 requires that States certify that Federally
issued permits are in compliance with State law. No permits can be
issued until the requirements of Section 401 are satisfied.
These are permits for operations discharging to waters (inland
waters) of the State of Alaska. EPA is requesting State officials to
review and provide appropriate certification to these draft permits
pursuant to 40 CFR 124.53.
XI. References
Ashton, W. and R. Carlson. 1984. Determinations of Seasonal
Frequency and Durational Aspects of Stream Flow With Regard to Fish
Passage Through Roadway Drainage Structures. Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities.
Griffith, J.S. and D.A. Andrews. 1981. Effects of a small suction
dredge on fishes and aquatic invertebrates in Idaho streams. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management 1:21-28.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Literature cited in literature research project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hassler, T.J., W.L. Somer and G.R. Stern. 1986. Impacts of suction
dredge mining on anadromous fish, invertebrates and habitat in
Canyon Creek, California. Calif. Coop. Fish. Res. Unit., Humboldt
State University, Arcata, California, Coop. Agreement No. 14-16-
0009-1547, Work Order No. 2. 135 pages.*
Harvey, B.C. 1986. Effects of suction gold dredging on fish and
invertebrates in two California streams. North American Journal of
Fisheries Management 6:401-409.*
Huber, C. and D. Blanchet. 1992. Water quality cumulative effects of
placer mining on the Chugach National Forest, Kenai Peninsula, 1988-
1990. U.S. Forest Service, Chugach National Forest, Alaska Region.
74 pages.*
McCleneghan, K. and R.E. Johnson. 1983. Suction dredge gold mining
in the mother lode region of California. California Department of
Fish and Game, Environmental Services Branch, Administrative Report
83-1.*
Minshall, G.W., D.A. Andrews and C.Y. Manual-Faler. 1983.
Application of island biogeographic theory to streams:
macroinvertebrate recolonization of the Teton River, Idaho. In J.R.
Barnes and G. W. Minshall editors Stream Ecology: Application and
testing of general ecological theory. Plenum Press, New York.*
Scannel, P.O. 1988. Effects of elevated sediment levels from placer
mining on survival and behavior of immature Arctic grayling.
Master's thesis. University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA. 93
pages.*
Somer, W.L. and T.J. Hassler. 1992. Effects of suction-dredge gold
mining on benthic invertebrates in a Northern California Stream.
North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:244-252.*
Thomas, V.G. 1985. Experimentally determined impacts of a small,
suction gold dredge on a Montana stream. North American Journal
Fisheries Management 5:480-488.*
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1985. Water Quality Study: Arkansas
River above Salida, Colorado. U.S Army Corps of Engineers,
Albuquerque District, P.O. Box 1580, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103.*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. Regulatory strategy for
controlling small commercial and recreational placer mining, draft.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, 2800
Crystal Drive, Crystal Station, Crystal City, Virginia 20202. EPA
Contract No. 68-C8-0066, W.A. 30. SAIC Project No. 1-833-03-630-00.
73 pages.*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. Development Document for
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards
for the Ore Mining and Dressing Point Source Category--Gold Placer
Mining Subcategory. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water Regulations and Standards, Industrial Technology Division,
Washington, DC 20460. EPA 440/1-88-061.
Finding of No Significant Impact
To all interested government agencies, public groups, and
individuals:
In accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
procedures for complying with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), 40 CFR part 6, subpart F, EPA has completed an environmental
review of the following proposed action: Issuance of a General National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. AK-G-37-0000
for Alaskan Placer Miners.
The proposed action is issuance of a General NPDES Permit covering
both existing and new source facilities in Alaska which mine and
process, using gravity separation methods, gold placer ores. The
proposed effluent limitations, monitoring provisions, and other
conditions are specified in the draft General NPDES permit. The Fact
Sheet, accompanying the draft permit, describes the basis for these
requirements. The proposed General NPDES Permit would replace the
existing individual NPDES permits.
An environmental assessment (EA) of this proposed action has been
completed (enclosed). Based on the EA, and in accordance with the
guidelines for determining the significance of proposed federal actions
(40 CFR 1508.27) and EPA criteria for initiating an environmental
impact statement (EIS) (40 CFR 6.605), EPA has concluded that the
proposed General NPDES permit will not result in a significant effect
on the human environment. The proposed permit will not significantly
affect land use patterns or population, wetlands or floodplains,
threatened or endangered species, farmlands, ecologically critical
areas, historic resources, air quality, water quality, noise levels,
fish and wildlife resources, nor will it conflict with local, regional,
or state land use plans or policies. The proposed permit conforms with
all applicable federal statutes and executive orders.
The proposed General Permit includes the same technology-based
permit limits, established by regulation (40 CFR part 440, subpart M),
as the individual permits currently do. The recirculation of process
wastewater is required and the settleable solids concentration of the
allowable discharge (i.e. excess water) is limited to 0.2 milliliters
per liter. Water quality-based limits are also included in the proposed
permit.
The proposed permit covers, in addition to conventional open-cut
placer mining operations, placer mining operations utilizing hydraulic
methods to remove overburden, and suction dredges. The proposed permit
limits for the hydraulic overburden removal operations are based on the
state sediment standard and best professional judgment and are the same
as the limits for the conventional operations. The limits for the
suction dredge operations would be based on best professional judgment.
The proposed General Permit would reduce the yearly administrative
burden of EPA associated with the processing of numerous individual
permits. Because the proposed General Permit and individual permits
include essentially the same requirements, the primary impact related
to permit type is expected to be administrative. No negative impacts to
EPA, other agencies or operators are expected.
The proposed General NPDES Permit may contribute to an improvement
in environmental conditions because it would reduce the permitting
administrative workload thus making available limited time that could
be used for higher priority activities, such as permit compliance and
inspections. The inclusion of suction dredge operations in the General
Permit will improve the monitoring and compliance of these operations.
Under the proposed action, the new source placer mining proposals
requesting coverage under the General Permit would continue to be
subject to individual NEPA reviews. This will enable EPA to evaluate
the site-specific and cumulative impacts associated with the individual
projects. Where an EA concludes that significant impacts are not
anticipated, a Finding of No Significant Impact would be issued and the
new source project would be granted coverage under the General Permit.
If EPA determines that significant impacts from a proposed new source
project may occur, an EIS would be prepared prior to EPA's final permit
decision. Therefore the site-specific impacts of those projects would
continue to be evaluated and considered prior to the permit actions. An
individual permit may also be required by EPA in lieu of coverage under
the General Permit.
For the above reasons EPA has determined that an EIS will not be
prepared for the proposed action.
Comments pertaining to this Finding of No Significant Impact may be
submitted to: Rick Seaborne, Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Review Section, 1200 Sixth Avenue, WD-126, Seattle, WA
98101.
No administrative action will be taken for at least 30 days after
the release of this Finding of No Significant Impact. EPA will fully
consider all comments before taking final action.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Findley,
Director, Water Division.
Authorization To Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System for Alaskan Placer Miners
[General Permit No.: AK-G-37-0000]
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987,
Public Law 100-4, the ``Act'', owners and operators of facilities
engaged in the processing of placer gold are authorized to discharge to
waters of the United States, in accordance with effluent limitation,
monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth herein.
A COPY OF THIS GENERAL PERMIT MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE WHERE
DISCHARGES OCCUR.
This permit shall become effective 30 days after final publication.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire 5 years
after the effective date of the permit: Director, Water Division,
Region 10, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Table of Contents
Cover Page
I. Coverage under this permit
A. Coverage and Eligibility
B. Types of Placer Mine Operations Covered
C. Limitations on Coverage
D. Prohibitions
E. Requiring an Individual Permit
F. Notification Requirements
G. Permit Expiration
II. Effluent limitations
A. Mechanical Operation (Traditional Sluicing)
B. Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
C. Suction Dredging
D. Monitoring Requirements
III. Management practices
A. Mechanical Operations and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
B. Suction Dredges
C. Other Requirements
D. Storm Exemption
IV. Monitoring and reporting requirements
A. Representative Sampling
B. Reporting of Monitoring Results
C. Monitoring Procedures
D. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
E. Records Contents
F. Retention of Records
G. Notice of Noncompliance Reporting
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting
I. Inspection and Entry
V. Compliance responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F. Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I. Toxic Pollutants
VI. General requirements
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
B. Planned Changes
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
D. Permit Actions
E. Duty to Reapply
F. Duty to Provide Information
G. Other Information
H. Signatory Requirements
I. Availability of Reports
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Property Rights
L. Severability
M. State Laws
VII. Reopener clause
VIII. Definitions
IX. Special conditions--Effluent limits below detection levels
A. Reporting Levels
B. Reporting Details
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Appendix A
I. Coverage Under This Permit
A. Coverage and Eligibility
1. Existing Facilities: Existing facilities (those facilities
having individual NPDES permits) are authorized under the terms and
conditions of this permit upon the submittal of a Notice of Intent
(NOI) to gain coverage under this permit. Coverage will be granted
according to Permit Part E.4.
2. Pending Applications: Upon submittal of an NOI all facilities
which have submitted applications in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(a)
are authorized under the terms and conditions of this permit. Coverage
will be granted according to Permit Part E.4.
3. New Facilities: New facilities that are determined to be new
sources under the CWA will be required to have an Environmental
Assessment (EA) completed pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). A finding of no significant impact (FNSI) by EPA is
necessary prior to receiving coverage under this permit. If there will
be a significant impact, the facility will be required to submit, to
EPA, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Facilities determined to
be new dischargers will be covered by the terms and conditions of this
permit if they meet all the necessary requirements of the coverage.
4. Expanding Facilities: Facilities that contemplate expanding
shall submit a new NOI that describes the new discharge. The old permit
will be terminated and a new permit issued in its place if the facility
meets all the necessary requirements of the coverage.
B. Types of Placer Mine Operations Covered
1. Facilities that mine and process gold placer ores using gravity
separation methods to recover the gold metal contained in the ore.
a. Open-cut gold placer mines except those open-cut mines that mine
less than 1,500 cubic yards of placer ore per mining season.
b. Mechanical dredge gold placer mines (not suction dredges) except
those dredges that remove less than 50,000 cubic yards of placer ore
per mining season.
2. Suction dredges with intake hoses of greater than 4 inches.
3. Operations utilizing hydraulic removal of overburden.
C. Limitations on Coverage
Many streams and stream reaches in Alaska have been designated as
part of the federal wild and scenic rivers system or as Conservation
System Units (CSUs) by the federal government. Permittees should
contact the district offices of the federal agencies that administer
the designated area for additional restrictions that may apply to
operating within the area. Many streams in Alaska where placer mining
occurs have been designated by Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADFG) as needing an ADFG Habitat permit with additional restrictions.
``The Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important for Spawning, Rearing or
Migration of Anadromous Fish'' lists the streams in the State which
require a Habitat permit.
D. Prohibitions
Discharges from the following beneficiation processes are not
authorized under this permit: Mercury amalgamation, cyanidation, froth
floatation, heap and vat leaching.
E. Requiring an Individual Permit
1. The Regional Administrator may require any person authorized by
this permit to apply for and obtain an individual National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit when:
a. The single discharge or the cumulative number of discharges is/
are a significant contributor of pollution;
b. The discharger is not in compliance with the terms and
conditions of the general permit;
c. A change has occurred in the availability of demonstrated
technology or practices for the control or abatement of pollutants
applicable to the point source;
d. Effluent limitations guidelines are subsequently promulgated for
the point sources covered by the general permit;
e. A Water Quality Management plan containing requirements
applicable to such point sources is approved; or
f. An Individual Control Strategy (ICS) is required under section
304(L) of the Act.
2. The Regional Administrator will notify the operator in writing
that a permit application is required. If an operator fails to submit
in a timely manner an individual NPDES permit application as required,
then the applicability of this general permit to the individual NPDES
permittee is automatically terminated at the end of the day specified
for application submittal.
3. Any owner or operator authorized by this permit may request to
be excluded from the coverage of this permit by applying for an
individual permit. The owner or operator shall submit an individual
application (Form 1 and Form 2C or 2D) with reasons supporting the
request to the Regional Administrator no later than 90 days after the
effective date of the permit.
4. When an individual NPDES permit is issued to an owner or
operator otherwise covered by this permit, the applicability of this
permit to the facility is automatically terminated on the effective
date of the individual permit.
5. When an individual NPDES permit is denied to an owner or
operator otherwise covered to this permit, the permittee is
automatically reinstated under this permit on the date of such denial,
unless otherwise specified by the Regional Administrator. A new
facility can receive coverage under this general permit by submitting a
NOI. See Permit Part I.A.3. for details.
6. A source excluded from a general permit solely because it
already has an individual permit may request that the individual permit
be revoked and that it be covered by the general permit. Upon
revocation of the individual permit, the general permit shall apply to
the source.
F. Notification Requirements
1. Owners or operators of facilities authorized by this permit
shall submit a NOI to be covered by this permit. The information
required for a complete NOI is in appendix A of this permit.
Notification must be made:
a. Within 90 days of issuance of this permit; or
b. By January 1 of the year of discharge from a new facility or a
facility established since 1988 that has not previously been covered by
a permit; or
c. Ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of an existing
individual permit. Authorization to discharge requires written
notification from EPA that coverage has been granted and that a
specific permit number has been assigned to the operation.
2. The NOI shall be signed by the owner or other signatory
authority in accordance with Part VI.H. (Signatory Requirements), and a
copy shall be retained on site in accordance with Part IV.F. (Retention
of Records) of this permit. The address for NOI submission to EPA is:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, WD-134, Seattle, Washington 98101.
3. A copy of the NOI must also be sent to the regional office of
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) that has
jurisdiction over the mine. The addresses are:
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, 410 Willoughby,
Suite 105, Juneau, Alaska 99801
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Northern Regional
Office, 610 University Avenue, Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Central Regional
Office, 3601 ``C'' Street, Suite 1350, Anchorage, Alaska 99503
4. A copy of the general permit will be sent to the permittee when
it is determined that the facility can be granted coverage under this
general permit. If it is determined that coverage cannot be granted
under this permit, the applicant will be informed of this in writing.
G. Permit Expiration
Coverage under this permit will expire five (5) years from the date
of issuance. For facilities submitting a new NOI 90 days prior to
expiration of this general permit, the conditions of the expired permit
continue in force until the effective date of a new permit.
II. Effluent Limitations
A. Mechanical Operation (Traditional Sluicing)
During the term of this permit, no wastewater discharges are
authorized except as specified below.
1. Effluent Limitations.
a. The volume of wastewater which may be discharged shall not
exceed the volume of infiltration, drainage and mine drainage waters
which is in excess of the make-up water required for operation of the
beneficiation process.
b. The wastewater discharged shall not exceed the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effluent characteristic Instantaneous maximum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settleable Solids.................. 0.2 ml/L.
Turbidity.......................... 5 NTUs above natural background.
Arsenic, Total Recoverable......... (1) 0.18 g/L.
(2) Natural background*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*See Part II.D.4. for details.
2. Effluent discharges are prohibited during periods when new water
is allowed to enter the plant site. Additionally, there shall be no
discharge as a result of the intake of new water.
B. Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
During the term of this permit, no wastewater discharges are
authorized except as specified below.
1. Effluent Limitations. a. The volume of wastewater which may be
discharged shall not exceed the volume of infiltration, drainage and
mine drainage waters which is in excess of the make-up water required
for operation of the hydraulicking process.
b. The wastewater discharged shall not exceed the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effluent characteristic Instantaneous maximum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settleable Solids.................. 0.2 ml/L.
Turbidity.......................... 5 NTU above natural background.
Arsenic, Total Recoverable......... (1) 0.18 g/L
(2) natural background.*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*See Part II.D.4. for details.
2. Effluent discharges are prohibited during periods when new water
is allowed to enter the plant site. Additionally, there shall be no
discharge as a result of the intake of new water.
C. Suction Dredging
1. At any point in the receiving stream 500 feet downstream of the
dredge's discharge point, the maximum allowable increase in turbidity
over the natural receiving stream turbidity while operating is 5 NTUs.
2. A visual increase in turbidity (any cloudiness or muddiness) 500
feet downstream of the suction dredge during operations would be
considered a violation of the 5 NTU limit.
3. If noticeable turbidity does occur 500 feet downstream of the
work site, operation of the suction dredge must decrease or cease so
that a violation as defined above does not exist.
D. Monitoring Requirements
1. Mechanical Operations and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden. a.
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and
lasting until the expiration date, the following monitoring shall be
conducted:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effluent Monitoring Monitoring
characteristic location frequency Sample type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settleable Solids Effluent......... Once per day Grab.
(ml/L). each day of
discharge.
Turbidity (NTU).. Effluent natural Once per season. Grab.
background.
Arsenic (g/L) Total background*.
recoverable.
Flow (gpm)....... Effluent......... (***)........... Instantaneous.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Only when choosing Option (2).
**Analyzed by EPA Method 206.2 with a detection limit of 1 g/L.
***See Part II.D.1.f. for details.
b. Visual Inspection. The Permittee shall institute a comprehensive
visual inspection program to facilitate proper operation and
maintenance of the recycle system and the wastewater treatment system.
The Permittee shall conduct an inspection of the site once per day
during the mining season. The Permittee shall maintain records of all
information resulting from any visual inspections. These records shall
include, but are not limited to, an evaluation of the condition of all
water control devices such as diversion structures and berms and all
solids retention structures such as berms, dikes, pond structures, and
dams. The records shall also include an assessment of the presence of
sediment buildup within the settling ponds. The Permittee shall examine
all ponds for the occurrence of short circuiting.
c. Turbidity Monitoring. The Permittee shall monitor the turbidity
values of the effluent stream and the background turbidity values of
the receiving stream then compare the two samples. The sample results
shall be reported on the Annual Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). The
Permittee shall take one sample at a point that is representative of
the discharge prior to entering the receiving stream. The Permittee
shall take another sample above the discharge point at a location that
is considered to be the ``natural'' background of the receiving stream
as defined in permit part V.I. Both samples shall be taken within a
reasonable time frame. Monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with
accepted analytical procedures. See attachment 1 for sampling protocol.
d. Arsenic Monitoring. Arsenic samples shall be representative of
the discharge and shall be taken at a point prior to entering the
receiving stream. Arsenic samples taken to determine ``natural''
background shall be representative of the receiving water upstream from
any man-made disturbances. Monitoring shall be conducted in accordance
with accepted analytical procedures. The Permittee shall report the
sample results on the Annual DMR. See attachment 2 for sampling
protocol.
The effluent limitation for total recoverable arsenic is not
quantifiable using the EPA approved analytical method, EPA method
206.2. Thus, EPA has set forth reporting thresholds to measure the
highest acceptable quantification level for this parameter. This
reporting threshold does not authorize the discharge of this parameter
in excess of the effluent limitation. For more information, see special
conditions in Part IX. of this permit.
e. Settleable Solids Monitoring. Settleable solids samples shall be
representative of the discharge and shall be taken at a point prior to
entering the receiving stream. Monitoring shall be conducted in
accordance with accepted analytical procedures (Standard Methods, 16th
Edition, 1985). The Permittee shall report the sample results on the
Annual DMR. See attachment 3 for sampling and analysis protocol.
f. Flow Monitoring. Effluent flow shall be measured at the
discharge prior to entering the receiving water. Effluent flow shall be
measured at least once per day, for continuous discharges, or once
during each discharge event if discharges are intermittent. The flow
shall be measured in gallons per minute (gpm). The flow measurements,
the number of discharge events, and the duration of each discharge
event shall be reported in the Annual DMR for each day of the mining
season.
2. Suction Dredges. a. Suction Dredge operations shall visually
monitor for turbidity as described in Part II.C. once per day of
operation. The Permittee shall maintain records of all information
resulting from any visual inspections.
b. The Permittee will report the period of suction dredging on the
DMR. Visual violation occurrences will also be reported on the DMR
along with the measures taken to comply with the provisions of Permit
Part II.C.3.
III. Management Practices
A. Mechanical Operations and Hydraulic Removal of Overburden
1. The flow of surface waters (i.e., creek, river, or stream) into
the plant site shall be interrupted and these waters diverted around
and away to prevent incursion into the plant site.
2. Berms, including any pond walls, dikes, low dams, and similar
water retention structures shall be constructed in a manner such that
they are reasonably expected to reject the passage of water.
3. Measures shall be taken to assure that pollutant materials
removed from the process water and wastewater streams will be retained
in storage areas and not discharged or released to the waters of the
United States.
4. The amount of new water allowed to enter the plant site for use
in material processing shall be limited to the minimum amount required
as makeup water for processing operations.
5. All water control devices such as diversion structures and berms
and all solids retention structures such as berms, dikes, pond
structures, and dams shall be maintained to continue their
effectiveness and to protect from failure.
6. The operator shall take whatever reasonable steps are
appropriate to assure that, after the mining season, all mine areas,
including ponds, are in a condition which will not cause additional
degradation to the receiving waters over those resulting from natural
causes.
B. Suction Dredges
1. Dredging in waters of the United States is permitted only within
the active stream channel.
2. Wherever practicable, the dredge shall be set to discharge into
a quiet pool, where settling of dredge spoils can occur more rapidly.
3. Care shall be taken by the operator during refueling of the
dredge to prevent spillage into public waters or to groundwater.
4. Dredging is not permitted during the periods that fish eggs
could be in the gravel at the dredge site and harassment of fish in the
stream is prohibited. ``The Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important
for Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fish'' lists the
streams in the State which require a Habitat permit from the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game.
C. Other Requirements--Mechanical Operations and Hydraulic Removal of
Overburden
The operator shall maintain fuel handling and storage facilities in
a manner which will prevent the discharge of fuel oil into the
receiving waters or on the adjoining shoreline. A Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC Plan) shall be prepared and
updated as necessary in accordance with provisions of 40 CFR part 112
for facilities storing 660 gallons in a single container above ground,
1,320 gallons in the aggregate above ground, or 42,000 gallons below
ground.
The permittee shall indicate on the DMR if an SPCC Plan is
necessary and in place at the site and if changes were made to the Plan
over the previous year.
D. Storm Exemption
The permittee may qualify for a storm exemption from the
technology-based effluent limitations in Part II.A.1.b. of this NPDES
general permit if the following conditions are met:
1. The treatment system is designed, constructed and maintained to
contain the maximum volume of untreated process wastewater which would
be discharged, stored, contained and used or recycled by the
beneficiation process into the treatment system during a 4-hour
operating period without an increase in volume from precipitation or
infiltration, plus the maximum volume of water runoff (drainage waters)
resulting from a 5-year, 6-hour precipitation event. In computing the
maximum volume of water which would result from a 5-year, 6-hour
precipitation event, the operator must include the volume which should
result from the plant site contributing runoff to the individual
treatment facility.
2. The operator takes all reasonable steps to maintain treatment of
the wastewater and minimize the amount of overflow.
3. The source is in compliance with the Best Management Practices
in Part III.A. of this permit.
4. The operator complies with the notification requirements of
Parts IV.G. and H. of this permit.
IV. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
A. Representative Sampling
All samples for monitoring purposes shall be representative of the
monitored activity, 40 CFR 122.41 (j). To determine compliance with
permit effluent limitations, ``grab'' samples shall be taken as
established under Part II.D. of this permit. Specifically, effluent
samples for settleable solids, turbidity, and arsenic shall be
collected from the settling pond or other treatment systems outlet
prior to discharge to the receiving stream. Additionally, turbidity
samples shall also be taken above the discharge point at a location
that is representative of the receiving stream. Samples for arsenic and
turbidity monitoring must be taken during sluicing at a time when the
operation has reached equilibrium. For example, samples should be taken
when sluice paydirt loading and effluent discharge are constant.
B. Reporting of Monitoring Results
Monitoring results shall be summarized each month and reported on
EPA Form 3320-1 (DMR). The DMR shall be submitted to the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Enforcement Section
WD-135, Seattle, Washington 98101-3188, no later than November 30 each
year.
If there is no mining activity during the year or no wastewater
discharge to a receiving stream, the permittee shall notify EPA of
these facts no later than November 30 of each year.
The DMR shall also be sent to the regional office of ADEC that has
jurisdiction over the mine. The addresses can be found in permit part
I.E.3.
C. 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.
D. 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
part 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 DMR. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated.
E. Records Contents.
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) 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.
F. 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 three years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or
application. This period may be extended by request of the Director or
ADEC at any time. Data collected on-site, copies of DMRs, and a copy of
this NPDES permit must be maintained on-site during the duration of
activity at the permitted location.
G. Notice of Noncompliance Reporting
1. Any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment
shall be reported as soon as the permittee becomes aware of the
circumstance. A written submission shall also be provided in the
shortest reasonable period of time after the permittee becomes aware of
the occurrence.
2. The following occurrences of noncompliance shall also be
reported in writing in the shortest reasonable period of time after the
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances:
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation
in the permit (see Part V.G., Bypass of Treatment Facilities.); or
b. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit
(see Part V.H., Upset Conditions.).
c. Any violation of the effluent limitations in Permit Parts II.A.
and II.B.
3. The written submission shall contain:
a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause;
b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times;
c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if it
has not been corrected; and
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
4. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case
basis if an oral report has been received within 24 hours by the Water
Compliance Section in Seattle, Washington, by phone, (206) 553-1213.
5. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part IV.B.,
Reporting of Monitoring Results.
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting
Instances of noncompliance not required to be reported in IV.G.
above shall be reported at the time that monitoring reports for Part
IV.B. are submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed
in Part IV.G.3.
I. Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Director, ADEC, or an authorized
representative (including an authorized contractor acting as a
representative of the Administrator), upon the presentation of
credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
1. 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;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including
monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated
or required under this permit; and
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Act, any
substances or parameters at any location.
V. Compliance Responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any
permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Act and is grounds
for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation and
reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit renewal
application. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Director
and ADEC of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity
which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements.
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
1. Administrative Penalty. The Act provides that any person who
violates a permit condition implementing sections 301, 302, 306, 307,
308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be subject to an administrative
penalty, not to exceed $10,000 per day for each violation.
2. Civil Penalty. The Act provides that any person who violates a
permit condition implementing sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or
405 of the Act shall be subject to a civil penalty, not to exceed
$25,000 per day for each violation.
3. Criminal Penalties: a. Negligent Violations. The Act provides
that any person who negligently violates a permit condition
implementing sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than
$25,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 1
year, or by both.
b. Knowing Violations. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition implementing sections 301, 302,
306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be punished by a fine of
not less than $5,000 nor more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or by both.
c. Knowing Endangerment. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition implementing sections 301, 302,
306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act, and who knows at that time that
he thereby places another person in imminent danger of death or serious
bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more
than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than 15 years, or both. A
person which is an organization shall, upon conviction of violating
this subparagraph, be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000.
d. False Statements. The Act provides that any person who knowingly
makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in
any application, record, report, plan, or other document filed or
required to be maintained under this Act or who knowingly falsifies,
tampers with, or renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method
required to be maintained under this Act, shall upon conviction, be
punished by a fine of not more that $10,000, or by imprisonment for not
more than 2 years, or by both.
Except as provided in permit conditions in Part V.G., Bypass of
Treatment Facilities and Part V.H., Upset Conditions, nothing in this
permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the civil or
criminal penalties for noncompliance.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. 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.
F. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, or other pollutants removed in the course of
treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner so
as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of
the United States.
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
1. 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 2 and 3 of this section.
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the
need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least
10 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an
unanticipated bypass as required under Part III.G., Notice of
Noncompliance Reporting.
3. Prohibition of bypass.
a. Bypass is prohibited and the Director or ADEC may take
enforcement action against a permittee for a bypass, unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal
injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the
use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes,
or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. This
condition is not satisfied if adequate 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
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph 2
of this section.
b. The Director and ADEC may approve an anticipated bypass, after
considering its adverse effects, if the Director and ADEC determine
that it will meet the three conditions listed above in paragraph 3.a.
of this section.
H. Upset Conditions
1. 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 paragraph 2 of this
section are met. An administrative review of a claim that noncompliance
was caused by an upset does not represent final administrative action
for any specific event. A determination is not final until formal
administrative action is taken for the specific violation(s).
2. 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:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required under
Part IV.G., Notice of Noncompliance Reporting; and
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under
Part V.D., Duty to Mitigate.
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of
proof.
I. Toxic Pollutants
The permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions
established under section 307(a) of the Act for toxic pollutants within
the time provided in the regulations that establish those standards or
prohibitions, even if the permit has not yet been modified to
incorporate the requirement.
VI. General Requirements
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
Notification shall be provided to the Director and ADEC as soon as
the permittee knows of, 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 g/l);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 g/l) for acrolein
and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 g/l)
for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one
milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that
pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR
122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with 40 CFR
122.44(f).
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 g/l);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/l) for antimony;
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that
pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR
122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with 40 CFR
122.44(f).
B. Planned Changes
The permittee shall give notice to the Director and ADEC as soon as
possible of any planned physical alterations 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 as
determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); 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 part VI.A.1.
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
The permittee shall also give advance notice to the Director and
ADEC of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which
may result in noncompliance with permit requirements.
D. Permit Actions
This 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.
E. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this
permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must
apply for and obtain a new permit. The application should be submitted
at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit.
F. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Director and ADEC, within a
reasonable time, any information which the Director or ADEC 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 Director or ADEC,
upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit.
G. Other Information
When the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any
relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect
information in a permit application or any report to the Director or
ADEC, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
H. Signatory Requirements
All applications, reports or information submitted to the Director
and ADEC shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner
or the proprietor, respectively.
c. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public agency: by
either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Director or ADEC 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:
a. The authorization is made in writing by a person described above
and submitted to the Director and ADEC, and
b. The authorization specified 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.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV.H.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual or
position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility,
a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph VI.H.2.
must be submitted to the Director and ADEC prior to or together with
any reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized
representative.
4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section
shall make the following certification:
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all
attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in
accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my
inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
I. 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 Director and
ADEC. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent
data shall not be considered confidential.
J. 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.
K. 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.
L. 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.
M. 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.
N. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities
in this draft general permit under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements of this
permit have already been approved by the Office of Management and
Budget in submission made for the NPDES permit program under the
provisions of the CWA.
VII. Reopener Clause
If effluent limitations or requirements are established or modified
in an approved State Water Quality Management Plan or Waste Load
Allocation and if they are more stringent that those listed in this
permit or control a pollutant not listed in this permit, this permit
may be reopened to include those more stringent limits or requirements.
VIII. Definitions
A. ``Bypass'' means the intentional diversion of waste streams
around any portion of a treatment facility.
B.``Drainage Water'' means incidental surface waters from diverse
sources such as rainfall, snow melt or permafrost melt.
C. A ``Grab'' sample is a single sample or measurement taken at a
specific time.
D. ``Infiltration Water'' means that water which permeates through
the earth into the plant site.
E. ``Instantaneous Maximum'' means the maximum value measured at
any time.
F. ``Mine Drainage'' means any water, not associated with active
sluice water, that is drained, pumped or siphoned from a mine.
G. ``Monitoring Month'' means the period consisting of the calendar
weeks which begin and end in a given calendar month.
H. ``Natural Background'' means the level upstream from all mining
and other man-made disturbances.
I. ``NTU'' (Nephelometric Turbidity Unit) is an expression of the
optical property that causes light to be scattered and absorbed rather
than transmitted in a straight line through the water.
J. ``Make-up Water'' means that volume of water needed to replace
process water lost due to evaporation and seepage in order to maintain
the quantity necessary for the operation of the beneficiation process.
K. ``New Water'' means water from any discrete source such as a
river, creek, lake or well which is deliberately allowed or brought
into the plant site.
L. ``Plant Site'' means the area occupied by the mine, necessary
haulage ways from the mine to the beneficiation process, the
beneficiation area, the area occupied by the wastewater treatment
storage facilities and the storage areas for waste materials and solids
removed from the wastewaters during treatment.
M. ``Receiving Water'' means waters such as lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, or any other surface waters which receive wastewater
discharges.
N. ``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.
O. ``Short circuiting'' means ineffective settling ponds due to
inadequate or insufficient retention characteristics, excessive
sediment deposition, embankment infiltration/percolation, lack of
maintenance, etc.
P. ``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.
Q. ``Wastewater'' means all water used in and resulting from the
beneficiation process (including but not limited to the water used to
move the ore to and through the beneficiation process, the water used
to aid in classification, and the water used in gravity separation),
mine drainage, and infiltration and drainage waters which commingle
with mine drainage or waters resulting from the beneficiation process.
IX. Special Conditions--Effluent Limits Below Detection Levels
A. Reporting Levels
1. For purpose of reporting, the permittee shall use the reporting
threshold equivalent to the minimum level (ML). The ML is defined as
the concentration in a sample equivalent to the concentration of the
lowest calibration standard analyzed in a specific analytical
procedure, assuming that all the method-specified sample weights,
volumes and processing steps have been followed. As such, the permittee
must utilize a standards equivalent to the concentration of the ML for
arsenic which is 4 g/L.
2. For the purpose of reporting on the DMR, actual analytical
results should be reported whenever possible. All analytical values at
or above the ML shall be reported as the measured value. When the
results cannot be quantified, values below the method detection limit
(1 g/L) shall be reported as zero (0 g/L) and values
above the method detection level and below the ML shall be reported as
\1/2\ the ML or 2 g/L.
B. Reporting Details
In the ``Comment'' section of the DMR, the permittee shall report
the lowest calibration standard used and the ML achieved.
Attachment 1
Turbidity Sampling Protocol
1. Grab samples shall be collected.
2. Samples shall be collected in a sterile one liter
polypropylene or glass container.
3. Samples must be cooled to 4 degrees celsius (iced).
4. Samples must be analyzed within 48 hours of sample
collection.
Attachment 2
Arsenic Sampling Protocol
1. Grab samples shall be collected.
2. Samples shall be collected in a sterile one liter
polypropylene or glass container.
3. Samples must be cooled to 4 degrees celsius (iced).
4. Samples must be sent to a laboratory for analysis as soon as
possible.
5. Samples must be acidified with nitric acid (HNO3), to a
pH less than 2, upon receipt at the laboratory.
6. Samples must be acidified for at least 16 hours prior to
analysis.
Attachment 3
Settleable Solids Sampling Protocol
1. Grab samples shall be collected.
2. Samples shall be collected in a sterile one liter
polypropylene or glass container.
3. Samples must be cooled to 4 degrees celsius (iced).
4. Samples must be analyzed within 48 hours of sample
collection.
Settleable Solids Analysis Protocol
1. Fill an Imhoff cone to the liter mark with a thoroughly mixed
sample.
2. Settle for 45 minutes, then gently stir the sides of the cone
with a rod or by gently spinning the cone.
3. Settle 15 minutes longer, then record the volume of
settleable matter in the cone as milliliters per liter. Do not
estimate any floating material. The lowest measurable level on the
Imhoff cone is 0.1 ml/l. Any settleable material below the 0.1 ml/l
mark shall be recorded as trace.
Appendix A--Notice of Intent (NOI) Information
Permittee Name
Address & Phone Number (Summer)
Address & Phone Number (Winter)
Operator Name (if different that Permittee)
Address & Phone Number (Summer)
Address & Phone Number (Winter)
Facility Name
Facility Location (Nearest Town)
Mining District
Latitude and Longitude
Township, Section, Range
Previous NPDES permit number
Receiving Water
Maximum Effluent Flow
Lowflow stream flow
Type of Operation (Traditional, Suction Dredge, Hydraulicking)
Amount of Material processed
Signature and Date (certified according to permit part VI.H.4.)
A drawing or sketch of the operation
[FR Doc. 94-1004 Filed 1-13-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P