• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520LafayetteRoad North

I St. Paul

, M inn esota 55155-4 194

I 651-296-6300 800-657-3864

I 651

- 282-5332 TTY

I www.pca.state

. m n

. u s I Eq u al Oppor tuni ty Employer February 19, 2013 Ms

. Tinka G . Hyde, Director Water Division U

. S . Environmental Protection Agency- Region

5 77 West Jackson Boulevard (W-15J) Chicago

, IL 60604-3507 Dear Ms

. Hyde: On September

7 , 2012, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)sent you a certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the general perm

i t for Commercial and Lar ge Recreational Vessels (2013 VGP) and Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP). Afte.r review of the letter we sent you

, an error was discovered.
On page
4 of the September

7 , 2012

, letter under the heading number
3, " Exchange and flushing for voyages originating beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)," the MPCA misidentified the units for salinity. The correct units should be parts-per-thousand

, not parts-per-trillion. This letter restates the MCPA's 401 certification for EPA 2013 VGP and sVGP in its entirety, with the corrected units for salinity, and should be adopted by EPA when the final2013 VGP and sVGP are issued. As requested

in your letter dated November 16, 2011, the MPCA has examined the U .S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed 2013 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit for 2013 VGP and sVGP

t o determine whether

it can certify the permits under Section 401 of the CWA

. The MPCA bases its certification upon
a n evaluation
of the information provided
in the proposed
pe rmit

, technical fact sheet, other materials contained

in Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0141

and EPA-HQ

- OW-2011-0150,
and consultation with other Great

L akes States. This lette

r is subm itted by the MPCA under authority
of Section 401 of the CWA (33 USC 1251 et seq

. ), Minn

. Stat. chs. 115 and 116

, and Minn

. R . 701.1400 through 7001.1470. The State of Minnesota takes its responsibility

to protect Lake Super

i or very seriously

. We support the spirit and practice of eliminating pollutant discharges
to Lake Superior, including pollutant discharges from vessels

. The United Nations, the Intern ational Join Commission (IJC), the Great Lakes states, the U.S. Government, Canadian provinces and federal governments agree that Lake Superior's fragility and protection are a global priority. The IJC called on the governments

to designate

" Lake Superior''
as a demonstration zone for the zero discharge concept
in 1990. Since answering that ca ll , the sates and federal governments have invested millions of dollars and thousands
of staff hours to develop policies and practices
to protect this Lake

. Minnesota was one of
t he original signatories
to the 1991 Lake Superior Binational Program.

It was also one of the first states to adopt the Great Lakes Compact,

t he Great

L akes Init ia t ive and to regulate balla st water discharges. The state has supp orted its U.S. and Canadian partners

in their effort to restore degraded areas and to designate and pe
r manentl

y protect islands

, bays, and open water areas of Lake Superior. Our Canad

i an partners recently designated 3,861 square miles of Lake Superior
as Marine Con servatio

n Area.

I sle Royale,

a national park off Minnesota's coast, has also been designated

a United Nation's Biosphere Reserve, adding further credence
to the notion that Lake superior

i s unique and internationally significan

t .Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director
Page 2 February 19, 2013 The MPCA and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR) have worked closely in assessing

the proposed federal permit. We agree that invasive species are a serious problem for Minnesota and

this permit presents an opportunity to address this threat to our waters. While the primary focus of the

federal permit is vessels that travel in salt water, the vast majority of ballast water discharged in

Minnesota comes from vessels that travel in fresh water. To adequately protect Minnesota waters from

ballast water discharged from both fresh and saltwater vessels, the MPCA has included additional

regulatory requirements to supplement the proposed federal permit. These requirements will further

protect Minnesota waters.

The 2013 VGP, as proposed by EPA in November 2011, is applicable for all vessel discharges from all

commercial and large recreational vessels, as defined in the permit, that take place within all waters of

the State. Minnesota certifies there is a reasonable assurance that discharges from vessels covered by

the 2013 VGP for discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial and non-commercial

vessels greater than or equal to 79 feet in length, and the NPDES Small Vessel General Permit (s2013

VGP), will comply with the applicable provisions of 33 U.S.C §§ 1311, 1312, 1313, 1316, 1317, and 1341

(CWA §§ 301, 302, 303, 306, 307, and 401), and that Permittees and their activities will not contravene

applicable limitations, standards and other appropriate requirements of State law, provided the

following conditions set forth in this Certification are met.

Small Vessel General Permit Certification Conditions

The conditions in the draft sVGP cannot be made less stringent without violating water quality standards

and other requirements of State law. See 40 CFR § 124.53 (e)(3). The MPCA has not identified any

additional conditions that are needed to meet the requirements of either the CWA or Minnesota Rules,

provided the conditions of the final sVGP are at least as stringent as the conditions of the draft sVGP.

The permittee shall report all instances of non-compliance with this certification as soon as possible, and

in no case longer than 30 days of the discovery of the noncompliance (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.2[K][L]).

Vessel General Permit Certification Conditiions

The MPCA conditionally grants water quality certification for the EPA 2013 VGP subject to compliance

with the conditions identified below. A summary ofthe basis for these conditions is also provided below.

1. Compliance with Minnesota State Disposal System (SDS) permit for ballast water;
Requirement The applicability of International Maritime Organization (IMO) D-2 ballast water discharge limits

for vessels in the 2013 must not relieve any person from the duty to obtain and comply with the

existing Minnesota ballast water general permit MNG300000, or subsequent modifications of

that permit issued by the MPCA. Obtaining coverage under the 2013 VGP does not release any

person from the duty to obtain a permit required by state law. Vessels covered by the EPA's

2013 VGP must obtain any permits required by the state of Minnesota for vessel discharges and

comply with all requirements in the applicable permit at the time of compliance review.

Summary of the Basis Minnesota law prohibits discharges without a permit. Minn. Stat.§ 115.07 provides:Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director Page
3 February 19, 2013 115.07 VIOLATIONS AND PROHIBITIONS. Subdivision l.Obtain permit.(a) Except as provided

in paragraph (b), it is unlawful for any person to construct, install, or operate

a disposal system, or any part thereat until plans and specifications for the disposal system have been submitted

to the agency, unless the agency waives submission
of the plans and specifications and a written permit for the disposal system

is granted by the agency. Minnesota has adopted

a General SDS permit for ballast water discharges. The MPCA's current ballast water discharge general permit MNG300000, which
is scheduled

to be considered for reissuance

in 2013, requires vessels meeting the permit's applicability criteria to comply with the following biological performance standards and implementation schedule: a. Table A Biological Performance Standards for Ballast Water Treatment Technology Parameter

Limit LimitType Sample Type Organisms >50 **~m** in <10 viable 1m 3 Daily average Composite minimum dimension Organisms 10-50 **~min** <10 viable

I ml Daily average Composite minimum dimension Escherichia coliform <250 cfu
I 100 ml Daily average Composite Intestinal enterococci <100 cfu
I 100 ml Daily average Composite b. For vessels constructed prior to January

1, 2012, and meeting the applicability criteria
in the permit, treatment shall be installed and operational

to meet the performance standards for organisms included

in Table A by January

1, 2016. c. For vessels constructed after January

1, 2012, and meeting the applicability criteria
in the permit, treatment shall be installed and operational

to meet the performance standards for organisms included

in Table A prior to commencement

of vessel operation

in the Minnesota waters of Lake Superior. The Minnesota SDS Vessel General Permit (MNG300000) currently requires the schedule above. During the drafting of the MNG30000 permit reissuance, the implementation schedule,
as well as other permit conditions, may be modified. 2. Numeric Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation (WQBEL) Determination
for Ballast Water Discharges. Requirement No additional requirements

at this time. Summary
of the Basis After careful review of the available data and studies completed
to further define the threshold at which point the introduction

of nonnative species impacts the quality of Waters of the State, MPCA
is unable to conclusively determine

a numeric standard which would definitely protect water quality and an unaltered species composition

of the ecosystem. The MPCA

is very interested

in the development

of data via ongoing monitoring, which could be used to inform the process of establishing

a water quality standard

in the future. The MPCA encourages vesselMs. Tinka G. Hyde, Director
Page 4 February 19, 2013 owners to pursue the most efficient treatment systems possible to avoid the potential need to

upgrade systems in the future when a numeric standard may be adopted.

3. Exchange and flushing for voyages originating beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) 1

.

Requirement The operator of any vessel covered under the 2013 VGP whose voyage originates outside the

exclusive economic zone and enters Minnesota waters shall not discharge ballast unless the

following conditions are met: the vessel has conducted ballast water exchange or flushing beyond

the EEZ, at least 200 nautical miles from any shore, and in water at least 2,000 meters in depth,

while in oceanic waters, resulting in a salinity level of at least 30 parts per thousand (ppt) prior to

the time the vessel enters Minnesota waters. This requirement remains in effect regardless of

whether the vessel is equipped with a ballast water treatment system. This requirement is in

addition to treatment required under the proposed 2013 VGP.

All vessels entering Minnesota waters must maintain the ability to measure salinity levels in each

tank on board the vessel so that salinities of at least 30 ppt can be ensured prior to discharge in

Minnesota Waters.
For vessels entering the Great Lakes from outside the EEZ and carrying only residual amounts of

ballast water and/or sediment, the flushing requirements are equivalent to those set forth in the

July 1, 2012, edition of the St. Lawrence Seaway regulations, 33 CFR § 401.30(f).

This requirement does not apply to:

a. Vessels that either have no ballast tanks or that carry only permanent ballast water, all of

which is in sealed tanks that are not subject to discharge, or

b. Vessels that carry only potable water that meets the requirements of section 2.2.3.5.1.3 of the

draft 2013 VGP in their ballast tanks.

This requirement does not apply if the master of the vessel determines that compliance with this

condition would threaten the safety or stability of the vessel, its crew, or its passengers because of

adverse weather, equipment failure, or any other relevant condition. If a vessel is unable to conduct

ballast water exchange or flushing due to serious safety concerns as specified above, the operator of

such vessel shall inform the MPCA and DNR prior to discharging ballast in state waters to allow a

determination of whether the discharge of the ballast presents a "high risk" as described below. No

ballast shall be discharged that does not meet the conditions in this part if the MPCA determines

that the ballast is "high risk" and that additional treatment is necessary to protect aquatic resources.

Summary of the Basis Minnesota finds that the exchange/flushing requirements set forth in this condition, including the

combination of treatment with exchange or flushing, are needed to prevent impairment of waters

and to preserve such waters for their best usage and are thus needed to comply with the Minnesota

1 "Exclusive Economic Zone" (EEZ) means the area established by Presidential Proclamation Number 5030, dated

March 10, 1983 (48 FR 10605,3 CFR, 1983 Camp., p. 22) which extends from the base line of the territorial sea of

the United States seward 200 miles, and the equivalent zone of Canada [source: 33 CFR 151.2025]Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director Page
5 February 19, 2013 State statues and rules cited above.
In accordance with 40 CFR 124.53 (e)(2), this condition cannot be made less stringent and still comply with State water quality standards. Minnesota finds that the exchange/flushing requirements
set forth in this requirement, including the combination

of treatment with exchange
or flushing, are needed to prevent impairment

of waters for their designated uses and are thus needed to comply with the Minnesota State statues and rules. In accordance with 40 CFT § 124.53 (e)(2), this condition cannot be made less stringent and still comply with State and water quality standards. This requirement adds no new requirement

or deadline for ballast water treatment. The requirements and deadlines for ballast water treatment are those specified

in the draft 2013 VGP, Section 2.2.3.5, Table 6, and the Minnesota Ballast Water General Permit. However, in addition
to meeting those requirements, vessel operators will need to continue performing exchange
or flushing prior to discharging

in Minnesota waters. This requirement, applicable
to vessels entering Minnesota waters from outside the EEZ, effectively serves as an interim WQBEL prior to a numeric WQBEL calculation that will be protective
of state water quality until the numeric WQBEL

is fully implemented. This requirement requires operation
of a treatment system that meets IMO D-2 requirements

in conjunction with ballast water exchange
or flushing. This interim WQBEL, justified partly by the known effectiveness

of exchange and flushing alone

2 and partly by recent research by Canada's Department

of Fisheries and Oceans on the benefits of combining exchang.e and flushing with treatment,' has recently undergone land-based testing at the GSI test facility
in Superior, Wisconsin.' Early results from the GSI land-based tests

5 are consistent with the goal of reducing propagule pressure,
at least for fresh and brackish receiving waters,
in order to achieve an invasion risk lower than would be achieved using ballast water treatment alone.' Minn. Stat.§ 115.03, subd.

1 (e) provides that the MPCA has the following duty: (e) ta adopt, issue, reissue, modify, dney, or revoke, enter into or enforce reasonable orders, permits, variances, standards, rules, schedules of compliance, and stipulation agreements, under such conditions
as it may prescribe,

in order to prevent, control or abate water pollution,
or for the installation
or operation of disposal systems or parts thereof, or for other equipment and facilities: 2 Most of the water and most of the organisms carried
in a vessel's ballast tanks are physically expelled during midocean exchange
or flushing and many of the remaining organisms are then killed by salinity shock (osmotic stress) from the ocean water with which the ballast tanks are refilled. See paper submitted
by Canada to the IMP, BLG 15/5/7, op. cit., paragraphs

8 and 9; S.A. Baily et al. (2022), op. cit., at 2555-56. 3 Paper submitted
by Canada to the IMO, BLG 15/5/7, op. cit. Note that, in addition
to the benefits derived from physical expulsion and salinity shock, the combined process allows treatment systems
to operate on a more uniform and more biologically sparse feed water. 4 Publication
of test results pending. 5 Sarah Baily, DFO Canada, pers. Comm. 6 Paper submitted
by Canada to the IMP, BLG 15/5/7, op. cit., paragraph 18.Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director
Page 6 February 19, 2013 (1) requiring the discontinuance of the discharge of sewage, industrial waste or

other wastes into any waters of the state resulting in pollution in excess of the

applicable pollution standard established under this chapter;

{2} prohibiting or directing the abatement of any discharge of sewage, industrial

waste, or other wastes, into any waters of the state or the deposit thereof or the

discharge into any municipal disposal system where the same is likely to get into

any waters of the state in violation of this chapter and, with respect to the

pollution of waters of the state, chapter 116, or standards or rules promulgated

or permits issued pursuant thereto, and specifying the schedule of compliance

within which such prohibition or abatement must be accomplished; ...

The MPCA has adopted the following narrative standard to protect the aquatic habitat of the

state: 7050.0150 DETERMINATION OF WATER QUALITY, BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL
CONDITIONS AND COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS.
Subpart 1. Policy and scope. The intent of the state is to protect and maintain

surface waters in a condition which allows for the maintenance of all existing

beneficial uses. The condition of a surface water body is determined by its physical,

chemical, and biological qualities. The agency shall determine an exceedance of

water quality standards or an impaired condition based on pollution of the waters of

the state from point and non point sources that has resulted in degradation of the

physical, chemical, or biological qualities of the water body to the extent that

attainable or previously existing beneficial uses are actually or potentially lost.

The narrative water quality standards in subpart 3 prescribe the qualities or

properties of surface waters that are necessary for the protection of designated

public uses and benefits. if the narrative standards in this part are exceeded, it is

considered indicative of a polluted condition which is actually or potentially

deleterious, harmful, detrimental, or injurious with respect to the designated uses of

the waters of the state. Subparts 5 to 7/ist factors the commissioner will use to determine if surface waters

are in compliance with applicable narrative standards in subpart 3. Determination of

compliance with the narrative standards will be made for individual water bodies on

a case-by-case basis. Subp. 2. Other standards preserved. The requirements of this part are in addition

to the application of other narrative or numeric water quality standards in this

chapter. If the requirements of this part conflict with any other narrative or numeric

standard in this chapter, the more stringent standard applies.

Subp. 3. Narrative standards. For all Class 2 waters, the aquatic habitat, which

includes the waters of the state and stream bed, shall not be degraded in any

material manner, there shall be no material increase in undesirable slime growths or

aquatic plants, including algae, nor shall there be any significant increase in harmfulMs.TinkaG.Hyde,DirectorPage7February19,2013pesticideorotherresiduesinthewaters,sediments,andaquaticfloraandfauna;thenormalfisheryandloweraquaticbiotauponwhichitisdependentandtheusethereofshallnotbeseriouslyimpairedorendangered,thespeciescompositionshallnotbealteredmaterially,andthepropagationormigrationofthefishandotherbiotanormallypresentshallnotbepreventedorhinderedbythedischargeofanysewage,industrialwaste,orotherwastestothewaters.7050.0210GENERALSTANDARDSFORWATERSOFTHESTATE.Subpart1.[Repealed,32SR1699]Subp.2.Nuisanceconditionsprohibited.Nosewage,industrialwaste,orotherwastesshallbedischargedfromeitherpointornonpointsourcesintoanywatersofthestatesoastocauseanynuisanceconditions,suchasthepresenceofsignificantamountsoffloatingsolids,scum,visibleoilfilm,excessivesuspendedsolids,materialdiscoloration,obnoxiousodors,gasebullition,deleterioussludgedeposits,undesirableslimesorfungusgrowths,aquatichabitatdegradation,excessivegrowthsofaquaticplants,orotheroffensiveorharmfuleffects.Inaddition totheselaws,MinnesotahasadoptedMinn.Stat.§84D.06,whichprohibitpersonsfromintroducinganunlistednonnativeaquaticplantorwildanimalspecieswithoutnoticetotheCommissioneroftheDNR:84D.06UNLISTEDNONNATIVESPECIESSubdivisionl.Process.Apersonmaynotintroduceanunlistednonnativeaquaticplantorwildanimalspeciesunless:(1)thepersonhasnotifiedthecommissionerinamannerandformprescribedbythecommissioner;(2)thecommissionerhasmadetheclassificationdeterminationrequiredinsubdivision2anddesignatedthespeciesasappropriate;and(3)theintroductionisallowedundertheapplicableprovisionsofthischapter.4.EmergencyControlofBallastWaterdischargeRequirementa.TheMPCA,incoordinationwiththeDNR,mayprohibitdischarge,requireadischargetooccurinaparticulararea,orrequireemergencytreatmentofany"highrisk"ballastwaterproposedtobedischargedinMinnesotawaterspursuanttoitsauthorityunderMinn.Stat.§116.11andMinn.R.7000.5000.b.A"highrisk"ballastwaterisonethat,intheopinionoftheMPCAinconsultationwiththeDNR,posesanimminentandsubstantialdangertothehealthandwelfareofthepeopleofthestaterelatedtotheintroductionofanonnativespeciesintoMinnesotawaters.Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director
Page 8 February 19, 2013

c. If relocation of a high risk ballast discharge is required, the MPCA, coordinating with the U.S.

Coast Guard (USCG), the DNR, and the States of Michigan and Wisconsin, as needed, will

identify alternative locations for the discharge of the high risk ballast water.

d. Nothing in this section relieves the vessel owner or operator of the responsibility for

ensuring the vessel's safety and stability or the safety of the crew and passengers.

e. As an alternative to discharging high risk ballast water, the MPCA may authorize the use of

Ballast Water Treatment Systems (BWTS) identified as promising technology by EPA, USCG,

neighboring states or a U.S. ballast water testing research facility. U.S. ballast water testing

research facilities include, but may not be limited to the Golden Bear, Great Ships Initiative

and Maritime Environmental Resource Center. Summary of the Basis
See regulatory citations in Requirement 3 Summary of Basis. In addition, this requirement is

supported by Minn. Stat.§ 116.11 and Minn. R. 7000.5000.

5. Coverage of Lakers that operate exclusively in the Great Lakes Requirement For vessels that operate exclusively in the Great Lakes, the following Best Management Practices

(BMPs) are required to be incorporated into the vessel's ballast management plan and
implemented prior to discharge of ballast in Minnesota waters:

a. Annually inspect and replace, as necessary, ballast sea chest screens. Replace screens with

the smallest openings allowed by good engineering practice. Inspections must be
documented by log entry, diver's report, video report, dry-docking report, marine inspection

note, or surveyor's report.

b. During cargo operations (while accounting for boom list, hull stress, and bending moments),

lighten the ship as much as practical to elevate water intakes before ballasting to minimize

sediment uptake and increase water flow.

c. Ballast water taken aboard shall be the minimum needed to ensure the safety of the crew

and vessel. Additional ballast water can be taken aboard, once deeper water is reached.

d. Ballast water shall always be taken aboard or discharged via the pumps and never "gravity

fed or drained." This ensures an organism that somehow makes it past the screen is

pulverized by the high speed, high pressure, and tight tolerance pump.

Summary ofthe Basis Minn. Stat.§ 115.1703 provides that vessels operating in the state waters of Lake Superior

conduct ballast water management operations according to a ballast water management plan

that is designed to minimize the discharge of invasive species. The Commissioner of the MPCA

is allowed to establish the requirements of such plans. The statue provides:

115.1703 BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. Subdivision 1. Ballast water management plan required.Ms. Tinka G. Hyde, Director Page
9 February 19, 2013 (a) The operator of a vessel that is designed, constructed,

or adapted
to carry ballast water in state waters of Lake Superior shall conduct all ballast water management operations
of the vessel according

to a ballast water management plan that is designed
to minimize the discharge of invasive species, meets the requirements prescribed
by the commissioner under subdivision

2, and is approved
by the commissioner. {b) The owner or operator of a vessel required
to have a ballast water management plan under paragraph
(a) shall maintain

a copy of the vessel's ballast water management plan on board at all times and keep the plan readily available for examination

by the commissioner. Subd. 2. Ballast water management plan approval. (a) The commissioner may not approve

a ballast water management plan unless the commissioner determines that the plan: {1} describes

in detail the actions to be taken to implement ballast water management; (2) describes

in detail the procedures

to be used for disposal of sediment
at sea and on shore; {3} describes

in detail the safety procedures for the vessel and crew associated with ballast water management; {4} designates the officer on board of the vessel in charge of ensuring that the plan is properly implemented; {5) contains the reporting requirements for vessels as prescribed
by the commissioner; and (6) meets all other requirements prescribed
by the commissioner. {b) The commissioner may approve

a ballast water management plan for a foreign vessel on the basis of a certificate of compliance with the criteria described

in paragraph
(a) issued by the vessel's country of registration according

to standards established
by the commissioner. Minnesota finds that the BMP set forth in this condition are needed to prevent impairment

of waters and to maintain such waters for their best usage and are thus needed to comply with the statues and rules cited under condition

3 above.
In accordance with 40 CFR
§ 124.53 (e)(2), this condition cannot be made less stringent and still comply with State water quality standards. 6. Monitoring Requirements Requirement: a. Monitoring for vessels required to meet the 2013 VGP (numeric limits equivalent

to IMO D-2) ballast water discharge limits:
In addition to meeting the draft 2013 VGP monitoring requirements

in section 2.2.3.5., all vessels covered under the 2013 VGP and operating

in Minnesota waters after
a Ballast Water Treatment system

is installed must sample and analyze the ballast water discharge

at least once
a year (provided appropriate facilities areMs. Tinka G. Hyde, Director
Page 10 February 19, 2013 available) using the shipboard Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) sampling protocol,

a protocol consistent with IMP G8/G9 protocols, or a compliance monitoring protocol

developed by the USCG, whichever is most advanced and available. The MPCA will be

available to interpret which method(s) are most advanced and available. This monitoring shall

include sampling, identification and enumeration of live organisms >50 11m and between 10-

50 11m in size. The monitoring results shall be submitted to EPA and the MPCA on an annual

basis, consistent with the mechanisms used in the 2013 VGP for all other submissions,

provided such electronic tools are made available by EPA. In the absence of available

submittal tools by EPA, monitoring data must be directly submitted to the MPCA. The MPCA's

point of contact is provided at the close of this letter. Such live organism monitoring shall

include the collection of representative discharge samples and the testing (counting) of live

organisms in such samples by qualified personnel in accordance with standard and/or best

available sampling and analytical methods.

b. Monitoring for vessels not required to meet numeric ballast treatment limits because of

2013 VGP condition 2.2.3.5.3.3 (currently addressing vessels operating exclusively upstream of

the Weiland Canal) or similar condition: Within 24 months affinal issuance of the 2013 VGP,

all vessels not required to meet numeric ballast treatment standards, and that discharge

ballast in Minnesota waters, shall have the capacity to collect at the request of the MPCA, EPA

or other regulatory authority representative samples of organisms in ballast water discharges.

Beginning 24 months after final issuance of the 2013 VGP, all vessels not required to meet

numeric ballast treatment limits shall complete the following ballast discharge monitoring:

1) A minimum of once annually, sample and analyze for organism density and composition

(based on broad taxonomic categories). Sampling and analysis methods shall be

consistent with protocols described above. Samples must be analyzed for total

organisms (live or dead) greater than or equal to 10 micrometers in size. The ballast

discharge subject to sampling must be taken on the ship in a Great Lakes port for

discharge into Minnesota waters. You must report the uptake locations and volumes

subject to sampling, as well as the volume you plan to discharge in Minnesota's waters,

best management practices employed, and other factors affecting the composition of

the sample; or

2) Complete, individually or in partnership with other permittees, a ballast discharge

biological study approved by the MPCA. The study must include actual discharge data

representing designated vessels that may discharge native and non-native organisms

into Minnesota waters. The purposes of the study must include an evaluation of the risk

that ballast discharges pose to Minnesota waters.
Summary of the Basis Persons discharging ballast water have a duty, when requested, to provide information

regarding that discharge to the MCPA under the following statues and rules:

Minn. Stat. § 115.04 DISPOSAL SYSTEM AND POINT SOURCES.
Subdivision 1. Information. Any person operating or installing a disposal system or

other point source, or portion thereof, when requested by the agency, or any

member, employee or agent thereof, when authorized by it, shall furnish to it any

information which that person may have or which is relevant to the subject of thisMs.TinkaG.Hyde,DirectorPage11February19,2013chapter,chapter114C,and,withrespecttothepollutionofwatersofthestate,ofchapter116.7053.0205GENERALREQUIREMENTSFORDISCHARGESTOWATERSOFTHESTATE.Subp.12.Pointsourcedischargersmustreporttoagency.Allpersonsoperatingorresponsibleforsewage,industrialwaste,orotherwastedisposalsystemsthatareadjacenttoorthatdischargeeffluentstowatersofthestateshallsubmitareporttotheagencyuponrequestontheoperationofthedisposalsystem,theeffluentflow,andthecharacteristicsoftheeffluentsandreceivingwaters.Sufficientdataonmeasurements,observations,sampling,andanalyses,andotherpertinentinformationmustbefurnishedasmayberequiredbytheagencytoadequatelyevaluatetheconditionofthedisposalsystem,theeffluent,andthewatersreceivingoraffectedbytheeffluent.MinnesotafindsthatthemonitoringrequirementssetforthinthisconditionareneededtopreventimpairmentofwatersandpreservesuchwaterfortheirbestusageandarethusneededtocomplywiththeauthoritiescitedinCondition3.Inaccordancewith40CFR§124.53(e)(2),thisconditioncannotbemadelessstringentandstillcomplywithStatewaterqualitystandards.TheprotocolforsamplingshipdischargesasdescribedintheGreatShipsInitiativeBallastDischargeMonitoringGuidebook,publishedNovember2011,(http://www.nemw.org/GSI/BallastDischargeMonitoringGuidebook.pdf)isafeasibleandcost-effectiveapproachforsamplingvesselballastdischarges.VesselswhichplytheGreatLakescouldusethisprotocolorproposeanothermethodtoassurerepresentativesamplingofballastdischarges.7.BiocideUsageRequirement:DischargesofresidualbiocidesareauthorizedasdefinedbytheSeptember24,2008,MinnesotaGeneralBallastWaterPermitorsubsequentreissuances,whicheverismostrecent.Dischargelimitationsforresidualoxidants,andproceduresforobtainingauthorizationtouseotherchemicaladditivesareestablishedbythepermit.Obtainingcoverageunderthe2013VGPdoesnotreleaseanypersonfromthedutytoobtainapermitrequiredbystatelaw.VesselscoveredbytheEPA's2013VGPmustobtainanypermitsrequiredbythestateofMinnesotaforvesseldischargesandcomplywithallrequirementsintheapplicablepermitatthetimeofcompliancereview.SummaryoftheBasisMinnesotalawprohibitsdischargeswithoutapermit.Minn.Stat.§115.07provides:115.07VIOLATIONSANDPROHIBITIONS.Subdivision1.0btainpermit.(a)Exceptasprovidedinparagraph(b),itisunlawfulforanypersontoconstruct,install,oroperateadisposalsystem,oranypartthereof,untilplansandspecificationsforthedisposalsystemhavebeensubmittedtotheagency,unlesstheagencywaivessubmissionoftheplansandspecificationsandawrittenpermitforthedisposalsystemisgrantedbytheagency.Ms . Tinka G . Hyde, Director
Page 12 February 19, 2013

8. Other State Regulations Requirement :
All vessels must comply with the requirements of Minn. Stat . 115 . 1703 and an y o ther app li cab l e

state law, statue or rule. Summary of the Basis Obtaining co v erage under the 2013 V GP does not relea s e any p e r s on from t he d u t y t o comply

with state laws, statues and rules .

The contact for compliance submittal questions is John Thomas , WQ Complian c e Speciali s t , MPCA ,

Suite 400, 525 Lake A v enue South , Duluth , Minnesota 55 8 02 (e-mail john . thomas@state . mn.us).

Should you require further information regarding this Certification, please c o n tact K ate Frantz a t

651 - 757-2370 , or you may contact me.

Si ] J 11

Da v id Richfield **~** Supervisor, Agency Rules U
SSTS , Land Treatment, and Rules Section Municipal Division

DR /K F : rm