### STATE OF MAINE Department ofEnvironmental Protection

Paul 

### R. Lepage PatriciaW. Aho GOVERNOR COMMISSIONER 

### February 17, 2015 Mr. Timothy Gormley Superintendent, Milo Water District 146 Park Street Milo, ME. 04463 e-mail: milowater@myfairpoint.net RE: Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) Pe1mit #ME0100439 Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) Application#W002753-61l:-F-R 

### Final Permit Dear Mr. Gormley: Enclosedplease find a copy ofyour 

### final MEPDES permit and Maine WDL 

### renewal which was approved by the Department ofEnvironmental Protection. Please read this permit/license renewal and its attached conditions carefully. You must follow the conditions inthe order to satisfy the requirements oflaw. Any discharge not receiving adequate treatment is inviolation ofState Law and is subject to enforcement action. Any interested person aggrieved by a Department determination made pursuant to applicable regulations, may appeal the decision following the procedures described in the attached DEP FACT SHEET entitled "Appealing a Commissioner's LicensingDecision." If

### you have any questions regarding the matter, please feel free to call me at 287-7693. Sincerely,

# ~-U[)Q Gregg Wood Division ofWater Quality Management Bureau ofLand and Water Quality Enc. cc: Tanya Hovell, DEP/EMRO SandyMojica, USEPA Olga Vergara, USEPA Marelyn Vega, USEPA

AUGUSTA 17 STATE HOUSE STATION BA.t'l'GOR PORTI.AND PRESQUE ISLE AUGUSTA, i\IAINE 04333-0017 106 HOGAL'\J ROAD 312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SK't'\VAYPARK (207) 287-3901 FAX' (207) 287-3435 BANGOR, 1WNE04401 PORTI.AND, MAINE 04-103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04769-2094 RAY BLDG., HOSPITAL ST. (207) 941-4570 FA_.'{, (207) 941-4584 (207) 822-6300 FAX, (207) 822-6303 (207) 764-6477 FAX' (207) 764-1507

\VCb site: y.•ww.maine.guv/dep

### STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 17 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, ME 04333 

### DEPARTMENT ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF MILO WATERDISTRICT ) MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS ) ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT MILO, PISCATAQUIS COUNTY, MAINE ) AND ME0100439 ) WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE W002753-6C-F-R 

### APPROVAL ) RENEWAL Pursuantto the provisions ofthe Clean Water Act, Title 33 USC, Section 1251, 

### et. seq. and Maine Law 38 M.R.S.A., Section414-A 

### etseq., and applicable regulations, the Depatiment ofEnvironmental Protection (Department hereinafter) has considered the application ofthe MILO WATERDISTRICT (MWD/District/permittee hereinafter), with its supportive data, agencyreview comments, and other related material on file and finds the following facts: 

### APPLICATION SUMMARY The MWD has submitted a timely and complete application to the Departmentfor the renewal of combinationMaine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #ME0100439/ Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W002753-6C-D-R (permit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department onDecember4, 2009, for a five-year term. The 12/4/09 permit authorized the discharge of up to a monthly average flow of0.39 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Milo, Maine. 

### PERMIT SUMMARY This permitting action is canying forward all the tenns and conditions ofthe previouspermit except that this pennit is; I. Eliminating the option when calculatingpercentremoval to report the NODI 9 code onthe Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) when the average influent concentration is less than 200 mg/L based on guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2. Eliminating the monthly average water quality based mass and concentration limits for ammonia as a statistical evaluation onthe most current 60 months oftest results submitted to the Departnment indicates the discharge no longer exceeds or has a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambient water quality criteria (A WQC) for ammonia.MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 2 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 3. Incorporating previously established average and maximum technology based concentration limits for total mercury so the results can be tracked in the federal Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). 4. Eliminating Special Condition C, Disinfection, from the permit as the Departmenthas reconsidered the necessity ofsaid condition. 5. Establishing a seasonal (June I -September 30) total phosphorus monitoring requirement to obtain up-to-date test results for the discharge to assist the Department in evaluating the impact on ambient water quality in the Piscataquis River.MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 3 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R CONCLUSIONS BASED on the findings in the attached Fact Sheet dated January 13, 2015, and subject to the Conditions listed below, the Depmiment makes the following CONCLUSIONS: I. The discharge, either byitselfor in combination with other discharges, will not lowerthe quality of any classified body ofwater below such classification. 2. The discharge, either by itselfor in combinationwith other discharges, will not lowerthe quality of anyunclassified body ofwater below the classification which the Department expects to adopt in accordance with state law. 3. Theprovisions ofthe State's antidegradation policy, 38 MRSA Section 464(4)(F), will be met, in that:

a. Existing in-stream water uses and the level ofwater quality necessary to protect and maintain those existing uses will be maintained and protected; b. Where high quality waters ofthe State constitute an outstandingnational resource, that water qualitywill be maintained and protected;

c. Where the standards ofclassification ofthe receiving water body are not met, the discharge will not cause or contribute to the failure ofthe water body to meet the standards ofclassification; d. Where the actual quality ofany classified receiving water body exceeds the minimum standards ofthe next highest classification, that higher water quality will be maintained and protected; and

e. Where a discharge will result in lowering the existing quality ofany water body, the Department has made the finding, following opportunity for public participation, that this action is necessary to achieve important economic or social benefits to the State. 4. The discharges will be subject to effluent limitations that require application ofbest practicable treatment.ME0100439 PERMIT Page 4 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R ACTION THEREFORE, the Department APPROVES the application ofthe MILO WATER DISTRICT, to discharge up to a monthly average flow of0.39 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondarytreated sanitarywaste waters to the Piscataquis Rivers, Class B, in the Town ofMilo. The discharges shall be subject to the attached conditions and all applicable standards and regulations including: I. "Maine PollutantDischarge Elimination System PermitStandard ConditionsApplicable To All Permits," revised July 1, 2002, copy attached. 2. The attached Special Conditions, including any effluent limitations and monitoring requirements. 3. This permit becomes effective upon the date ofsignature below and expires at midnight five (5) after that date. Ifa renewal application is timely submitted and accepted as complete for processing prior to the expiration ofthis permit, the terms and conditions ofthis permit and all subsequent modifications and minor revisions thereto remain in effect until a final Department decision on the renewal application becomes effective. [MaineAdministrativeProcedureAct, 5 M.R.S.A. 

### § 10002 and Rules Concerning the Processing of Applications and OtherAdministrative Matters, 06-096 CMR 2(2l)(A) (effective April!, 2003)]. DONEANDDATEDATAUGUSTA,MAINE, THIS2.u!>DAYOF

# ~A_ '2015. COMMISSIONER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BY:

# ~~aegc:Y 

# .. a 

# R.qr- PatriCia**~Aha,** C

### ~missioner
PLEASENOTE ATTACHED SHEET FOR GUIDANCE ONAPPEAL PROCEDURES Date ofinitial receipt ofapplication

______,J'-'u'-'.lvl:...-"-28,..,c.=2,0'-'-1"-4---­ Date ofapplication acceptance**---------"'Ju,IJ.y-"2""9~, 2.,0"-'1"'4'-------~**  

# Filed MAR 0J 

## 2015

State of !.Iaine Date filed with Board ofEnvironmental Protection**--~-------=B=oa=rd=of:"Eo:!nv:,c;'"'o~nn~le"'n.!!:ta,_,_l.c.P!..!:ro~te:::oct!.!;io!:!Jn** This Orderprepared by GREGG WOOD, BUREAU OF LAND & WATER QUALITY ME0100439 2015 2117/15MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 5 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS 

## A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS The permittee is authorized to discharge secondarytreated waste waters to the Piscataquis River. Suchtreated waste water discharges

h 

## nb 

## r ·t d d ·t db JY th ·fi db 1 s a e liD! e 'an mom ore e permittee as speC! 1e eow. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Averaoe Average Maximum Average Average Maximum Freqnencv SampleType Flow 1500501 0.39 MGD 1011 

### -­ Report (MGD)ro37 

# -­ --­ 

# -­ Continuousl991997 Recorder IRC:7 Biochemical Oxygen 98 lbs/Day f26J 146lbs/Day 163 lbs/Dayp6J 30 mg!L fi9J 45 mg!L [19J 50 mg!L f19J 2/Month ro2130J Composite 1141 Demand (BODs) (Ia) 1003101 1261 BODs % Removal(lbJ [810101 

# --­ -­ 

# -­ 85%(237 

### - 

# -­ l!MonthroJI30I Calculate fCA/ Total Suspended Solids 98 lbs/Day f26J 1461bs!Day 163 lbs/Dayf26J 30 mg!L fi9J 45 mg!L f19J 50 mg!L fi9J 2/Month ro2130J Composite r 241 (TSS) (IaJ roos307 1267 TSS % Removal (tbJ sJoJJI 

### - 

## - -­ 85%1231


### -­ 

# --­ 11Month1owo1 Calculate1cA1 E l"B ·('J

. co z actena !316331 

# -­ - 

# -­ 64/100 ml(3J 

# -­ 236/100 ml 2/Month f02130J Grab fGRJ (May 15 -September30) /137 f/31 Total Residual Chlorine(')



## --­ --­ 

## - - -­ 0.16 mg!L 1/Day f0710IJ Grab fGRJ 150061!1 1/9/ 6.0-9.0(S) pH (Std. Units) roo4oo1 

# -­ -­ 

## - -­ -­ 5/Week /05I07J Grab [GR] (12/ 0 Total PhosQhOrus( _f0066SJ Report 

## - Report Report mg!L 

## - Report mg!L 1/WeekroJ;07J Grab fGRJ (June I- September30) lbs/Day 1261 lbs/Day 1261 1191 f/91 Copper (Total) fOIMJ 0.08 lbs/Day 

# -­ 0.13 lbs!Dayp6J 

### -­ 

# --­ - 2!Y ear f021YRJ Composite /241 1267 Mercury (Total) (7) f7J900J 

### --­ 43.7 ng!L !/Year Grab



# -­ - 29.1 ng!L



### -­ 13M! {JMI fO/IYRl {(;RIME0100439 

### PERMIT Page 6 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS 

### (coot'd)- OUTFALL #OOlA 2. SURVEILLANCE LEVEL TESTING -Beginningupon permitissuance and lastingthrough 24 months priorto permit expiration (years 1, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (year5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level testing as follows: Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements Monthly Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Sample Averaae Averaae Maximum Averaae Averaae Maximum Freauencv Dm_e Whole Effluent Toxici!;,: (WET) l'l

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia /TDA3BJ 

## - 

# -­ - - 

## - Report % [231 1/Year f011YRJ Composite [241 Salvelinus fontinalis /TDA6FJ 

## - --­ 

# -­ - - Report % [231 1/2 Years /0112YJ Compostte [241 C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3BJ 

# -­ - 

## - - - 2.1% [23] 1/Year /011YRJ Composite [241 Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6FJ 

### - 

## - - - 

## - Report % I23J 1/2 Years f0112YJ Composite [241 Analytical Chemistryl•.n> [51477] 

# -­

- - 

## - - Report ug/L [28] 1/2Years f0112YJ Compostte/ Grab [24/GRJME0100439 PERMIT Page 7 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd)- OUTFALL #OOlA 3. SCREENING LEVEL TESTING- Beginning 24months priorto permit expiration and lasting through 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below. Effluent Characteristic Dischar!le Limitations Monitorin!l Requirements Monthly Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Sample Averaqe Averaqe Maximum AveraQe Avera!le Maximum Frequency Type Whole Effluent Toxicity MIEn (S)

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia (TDA3BJ 

## - 

# -­ - - --­ Report % f23J 2!Y ear {02/YRJ Compostte 1241 Satvelinus fontinalis [TDA6FJ 

## - 

# -­ - - 

## - Report % 1231 2!Y ear {omRJ Compostte {241 C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia {TBPSBJ 

# -­ --­ 

# -­ - - 2.1% [23] 2!Y ear 102/YRJ Composite {241 Salvelinus fontinalis rraosFJ 

### - 

### --­ 

## - - - Report % 12SJ 2!Y ear [02/YRJ Composite [241 Analytical Chemistry(•.n> 

## - Report ug/L 1/Quarter Composite! [51477] 

# -­ - - - {28] {01190] Grab 124/GRI Priority Pollutants(10'11l 1500081 

### -



## - - - 

## - Report ug/L {28] 1!Year {01/YR]. Composite/ Grab {24/GR]MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 8 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: Sampling Locations: Influent sampling for BODs and TSS shall be sampled between the FerryRoad Pump Station and the first lagoon. Effluent sampling shall be sampled afterthe last treatment unit (including dechlorination) on a year-round basis. Any change in sampling location(s) must be reviewed and approved by the Department in writing. Sampling- Sampling and analysis must be conducted in accordance with; a) methods approved in 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) Part 136, b) alternative methods approved bythe Department in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFRPart 136, or c) as otherwise specifjed bythe Depatiment. Samples that are sent out for analysis shall be analyzed by a laboratory certified bythe State ofMaine's Department ofHuman Services. Samples that are sent to another POTW licensed pursuant to Waste discharge licenses, 38 M.R.S.A. 

### §413 are subjectto the provisions and restrictions ofMaine Comprehensive andLimitedEnvironmentalLaborat01y Certification Rules, 10-144 CMR 263 (last amended February 13, 2000). Laboratmy facilities that analyze compliance samples in-house are subject to the provisions and restrictions ofthe Maine Comprehensive and LimitedLaborat01y Certification Rules, I0-144 CMR263 (last amended February 13, 2000). I. BOD &TSS

a. 2/Month

- There shall be at least ten ( 10) days between sampling events. b. Percent removal- The treatment facility shall maintain a minimum of85 percent removal of I I both BODs and TSS for all flows receiving secondary treatment during all months that the facility discharges. Compliance with the limitation shall be based on a twelve-month rolling average. Calendar monthly average percent removal values shall be calculated based on influent and effluent concentrations. For the purposes ofthis permitting action, the twelvemonth rolling average calculation is based on the most recent twelve-month period. 2. E. colibacteria -Limits are seasonal and apply between May 15 1 h and September 301 h**~f** each calendaryear. There shall be at least ten (I 0) days between sampling events. The Depattment reserves the right to require disinfection on a year-round basis to protect the health and welfare of· the public.· MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 9 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: 3. E. colibacteria- The monthly average limitation is a geometric mean limitation and shall be calculated and reported as such. 4. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)- Limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable

· whenever elemental chlorine or chlorine based compounds are being used to disinfect the

discharge. The permittee shall utilized approved test methods that are capable ofbracketing the limitation of0.16 mg/L. 5. pH Range Limitation- The pH value ofthe effluent shall not be lower than 6.0 SU nor higher than 9.0 SU at any time unless these limitations are exceeded due to natural causes. 6. Phosphorus (Total)- See Attachment A ofthis permit for a Departmentprotocol for total phosphorus. 7. Mercury -All mercury sampling (INear) required to determine compliance with interim limitations established pursuant to Interim EjjluentLimitations andControls for the Discharge of Mercwy, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 200I) shall be conducted in accordance with EPA's "clean sampling techniques" found in EPA Method 1669, Sampling Ambient Water For Trace Metals AtEPA Water Quality Criteria Levels. All mercury analyses shall be conducted in accordance with EPA Method 1631E, Determination ofMercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Fluorescence Spectrometry. See Attachment B, llfjluentMercwy Test Report, ofthis permit for the Department's form for reporting mercury test results. The limitation in the monthly average column in table Special Condition A ofthis permit is defined as the arithmetic mean ofall the mercurytests ever conducted utilizing sampling Methods 1669 and analysis Method 1631E. 8. Whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing- Definitive WET testing is a multi-concentration testing event (a minimum offive dilutions bracketing the critical acute and chronic thresholds of II% and 2.1% respectively), which provides a point estimate oftoxicity interms ofNo Observed Effect Level, commonly referred to as NOEL orNOEC. A-NOEL is defined as the acute no observed effect level with survival as the end point. C-NOEL is defined as the chronic no obsetved effect level with survival, reproduction and growth as the end points. The critical acute and chronic thresholdswere derived as the mathematical inverse ofthe applicable acute and chronic dilution factors of8.7: I and 47:I, respectively. See Attachment C ofthis permit for a copy ofthe Depattment's WETreporting form.MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 10 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes:

a. Surveillance level testing- Beginninguponpermit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years I, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum frequency ofonce per year (1/Y ear) on the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and once every otheryear (1/2 Years) on the brook trout (Salvelinusfontinalis). b. Screening level testing -Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall conduct screening level WET testing at a minimum frequency oftwice peryear (2/Year) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brooktrout (Salvelinusfontinalis). WET test results must be submitted to the Department not later than the next Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) required bythe permit, provided, however, that the permittee may review the toxicity reports for up to I 0 business days oftheir availability before submitting them. Thepermittee shall evaluate test results being submitted and identifyto the Depattment possible exceedences ofthe critical acute and chronic water quality thresholds specified above. Toxicitytests must be conducted by an experienced laboratory approved bythe Depattment. The laboratorymust follow procedures as described in the following USEPA methods manuals as modified by Department protocol for the brook trout. See AttachmentE ofthis permit for the Departmentprotocol.

a. ShmtTermMethods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity ofEffluent and Receiving Water to Freshwater Organisms, Fourth Edition, October 2002, EPA-821-R-02-013. b. Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity ofEffiuent and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition, October 2002, EPA-821-R-02-012. Each time a WET test is performed, the permittee shall sample and analyze for the parameters in the WET Chemistry and the Analytical Chemistry sections ofthe Department form entitled, Maine Departmentof EnvironmentalProtection, WETand Chemical Specific Data Report Form. See Attachment D ofthis permit. 

# IME0100439 PERMIT Page 11 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENTLIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: 9. Analytical chemistry- Refers to a suite ofparameters specified in AttachmentD ofthispermit.

a. Surveillancelevel testing- Beginninguponpermit issuance and lastingthrough 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency ofonce every other year (1/2 Years). b. Screening level testing -Beginning 24 months priorto permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and everyfive years thereafter ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containingthis requirement, the permittee shall conduct analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency ofonce percalendar quarter for four consecutive calendar quarters. 10. Priority pollutanttesting- Refers to a suite ofparameters specified in AttachmentD ofthis permit.

a. Surveillance level testing is not required pursuant to Department rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 530. b. Screening level testing- Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifatimely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containingthis requirement, the permittee shall conduct screening levelprioritypollutanttesting at a minimum frequency ofonce per year, except for those analytical chemistry parameter(s) otherwise regulated in this permit. 11. Prioritypollutant and analytical chemistry- Testing shall be conducted on samples collected atthe same time as those collected for whole effluent toxicity tests when applicable. Priority pollutant and analytical chemistrytesting shall be conducted using methods that permit detection ofapollutant at existing levels in the effluent orthat achieve minimum reporting levels ofdetection as specified by the Department.ME0100439 PERMIT Page 12 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: Test results must be submitted to the Depmtment not later than the next Discharge Monitoring Repot1 (DMR) required bythe permit, provided however, that the permittee may review.the toxicity reports for up to 10 business days oftheir availabilitybefore submitting them. The permittee shall evaluate test results being submitted and identify to the Department, possible exceedences ofthe acute, chronic or human health AWQC as established in Surface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, 06-096 CMR 584 (effective October 9, 2005). Forthe purposes ofDMR reporting, enter a "1"**for~.** testing done this monitoring period or "NODI-9" monitoring not required this period. B. NARRATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS I. The effluent shall not contain a visible oil sheen, foam or floating solids at any time which would impair the uses designated for the classification ofthereceiving waters. · 2. The effluent shall not containmaterials in concentrations orcombinations which are hazardous or toxic to aquatic life, or which would impair the uses designated for the classification ofthe receiving waters. 3. The discharges shall not cause visible discoloration or turbidity in the receiving waters which would impairthe uses designated for the classification ofthe receiving waters. 4. Notwithstanding specific conditions ofthis permitthe effluent must not lower the quality ofany classified body ofwater below such classification, or lower the existing quality ofany body of water ifthe existing quality is higher than the classification. C. TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR The person who has the management responsibility overthe treatment facility must hold a Grade II certificate (or higher) or must be a Maine Registered Professional Engineerpursuant to Sewerage Treatment Operators, Title 32 M.R.S.A., Sections 4171-4182 and Regulations for Wastewater Operator Certification, 06-096 CMR 531 (effective May 8, 2006). All proposed contracts for facility operation by anyperson must be approved by the Department before the permittee may engage the services ofthe contract operator.MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 13 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS D. LIMITATIONS FORINDUSTRIAL USERS Pollutants introduced into the wastewater collection and treatment system by a non-domestic source (user) must not pass through or interfere with the operation ofthe treatment system. The permittee must conduct an Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) any time a new industrial userproposes to discharge within itsjurisdiction; an existing userproposes to make a significant change in its discharge; or at an alternative minimu·m, once everypermit cycle and submit the results to the Depatiment. The IWS must identify, in terms ofcharacter and volume ofpollutants, any Significant Industrial Users discharging into the POTW subject to Pretreatment Standards under section 307(b) ofthe federal Clean WaterAct, 40 CFR Pat1403 (general pretreatment regulations) orPretreatmentProgram, 06­ 096 CMR 528 (last amended March 17, 2008). 

### E. AUTHORIZED DISCHARGES The permittee is authorized to discharge only in accordance with: l)the permittee's General Application for Waste Discharge Permit, accepted for processing on July 29, 2014; 2) the terms and conditions ofthis permit; and 3) only from Outfall #001. Discharges ofwastewater from any otherpoint source are not authorized under this permit, and shall be reported in accordance with Standard Condition B(5)(Bypass) ofthis permit. 

### F. NOTIFICATIONREQUIREMENT In accordance with Standard Condition D, the permittee shall notifythe Department ofthe following. I. Any introduction ofpollutants into the waste water collection and treatment system from an indirect discharger in aprimary industrial category discharging process waste water; and 2. Any substantial change in the volume or character ofpollutants being introduced into the waste water collection and treatment system by a source introducing pollutants into the system at the time ofpermit issuance. For the purposes ofthis section, notice regarding substantial change shall include information on: (a) the quality and quantity ofwaste water introduced to the waste water collection and treatment system; and (b) any anticipated impact caused bythe change in the quantity or quality ofthe waste waterto be discharged from the treatment system.MEOI00439 PERMIT Page 14 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS G. WET WEATHERFLOWMANAGEMENT PLAN The treatment facility staffshall maintain a current written WetWeatherFlow Management Planto direct the staffon how to operate the facility effectively duringperiods ofhigh flow. The Department acknowledges that the existing collection system may deliver flows in excess ofthe monthly average design capacity ofthe treatmentplant duringperiods ofhigh infiltration and rainfall. Within 90 days ofcompletion ofnew and or substantial upgrades ofthe waste watertreatment facility, the permittee shall submit to the Department for review and approval, a new orrevised Wet Weather Management Plan which conforms to Depattment guidelines for such plans. The revised plan shall include operating procedures for a range ofintensities, address solids handlingprocedures (including septic waste and otherhigh strength wastes ifapplicable) and provide written operating and maintenance procedures during the events. The permittee shall review their plan annually and record any necessary changes to keep the plan up to date. 

### H. OPERATION & MAINTENANCE (O&M) PLAN This facility shall maintain a current written comprehensive Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Plan. Theplan shall provide a systematic approach bywhich the permittee shall at all times, properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems oftransport, treatment and control (and related appmtenances) which are installed orused by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions ofthis permit. ByDecember 31 ofeach year, orwithin 90 days ofany process changes or minor equipment upgrades, the permittee shall evaluate and modify the O&MPlan including site plan(s) and schematic(s) for the waste water treatment facility to ensure that 

### it is up-to-date. The O&M Plan shall be kept on-site at all times and made available to Department and EPA personnel upon request. Within 90 days ofcompletion ofnew and or substantial upgrades ofthewastewater treatment facility, the permittee shall submit the updated O&M Plan to their Department inspector for review and comment.ME0100439 W002753-6C-F-R PERMIT Page 15 of 17

SPECIAL CONDITIONS I. DISPOSAL OF TRANSPORTED WASTE INTO THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY The permittee is prohibited from acceptingtransported waste for disposal into any part orparts ofthe wastewater disposal system. "Transported wastes" means any liquid non-hazardous waste delivered to a wastewater treatment facility by a truck or other similar conveyance thathas different chemical constituents or a greater strength than the influent described on the facility's application for a waste discharge license. Such wastes may include, but are not limited to septage, industrial wastes orother wastes to which chemicals in quantities potentiallyharmful to the treatment facility orreceiving waterhave been added. 

# I I

J. 06-096 CMR 530(2)(D)(4) STATEMENT FOR REDUCED/WAIVED TOXICS TESTING 

## I ' ByDecember31 ofeach calendar year, the permittee shall provide the Department with a cettification describing any ofthe following that have occurred since the effective date ofthis permit [ICIS Code 75305]: See AttachmentF ofthe Fact Sheet ofthis permit for an acceptable cettification form to satisfy this Special Condition. 1. Changes in the number or types ofnon-domestic wastes contributed directly or indirectlyto the wastewater treatment works that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge; 2. Changes in the operation ofthe treatment works that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge; and 3. Changes in industrial manufacturing processes contributing wastewaterto the treatment works that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge. Further, the Department mayrequire that annual WET orprioritypollutanttesting be reinstituted ifit determines that there have been changes in the character ofthe discharge or ifannual cettifications described above are not submitted. (d) Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge. (e) Increases in the type orvolume ofhauled wastes accepted by the facility. The Departmentreserves the right to reinstate annual (surveillance level) testing or other toxicity testing ifnew information becomes available that indicates the discharge may cause or have a reasonable potential to cause exceedences ofambient water quality criteria/thresholds.ME0100439 PERMIT Page 16 of 17 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS K. MONITORING AND REPORTING Monitoring results obtained during the previous month shall be summarized for each month and reported on separate Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms provided by the Department and postmarked onor before the thirteenth (13th) day ofthe month or hand-delivered to a Department Regional Office such that the DMR's are received bythe Department on orbefore the fifteenth (15th) day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. A signed copy ofthe DMR and all other reports required herein shall be submitted to the following address: Department ofEnvironmental Protection Eastern Maine Regional Office Bureau ofLand and Water Quality Division ofWater Quality Management I06 Hogan Road Bangor, Maine 04401 Alternatively, ifyou are submitting an electronic DMR (eDMR), the completed eDMR must be electronically submitted to the Depattmentby a facility authorized DMR Signatory not later than close ofbusiness on the 15th day ofthe month following the completed reportingperiod. Hard Copy documentation submitted in support ofthe eDMRmust be postmarked on or before the thirteenth (13 1 h) day ofthe month or hand-delivered to the Depattment'sRegional Office such that it is received by the Department on orbefore the fifteenth (15th) day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. Electronic documentation in support ofthe eDMR must be submitted not later than close ofbusiness on the 15th day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. I L. REOPENING OF PERMIT FORMODIFICATIONS 

## I 

## I Upon evaluation ofthe tests results or monitoring requirements specified in Special Conditions of this permitting action, new site specific information, or any other pt;rtinent test results or information 

# I obtained during the term ofthis permit, the Department may, at anytime and with notice to the permittee, modify this permit to; I) include effluent limits necessaryto control specific pollutants or· 

# I whole effluent toxicity where there is a reasonable potential that the effluentmay cause water quality criteria to be exceeded, (2) require additional effluent and or ambient water quality monitoring if results on file are inconclusive; or (3) change monitoringrequirements or limitations based on new information.PERMIT Page 17 of 17 ME0100439 W002753-6C-F-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS M. SEVERABILITY In the eventthat any provision(s), orpartthereof, ofthis permit is declared to lie unlawful by a reviewing court, the remainder ofthe permit shall remain in full force and effect, and shall be construed and enforced in all aspects as ifsuch unlawful provision, orpartthereof, had been omitted, unless otherwise ordered bythe com1.MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS

CONTENTS SECTION TOPIC PAGE A GENERAL PROVISIONS I General compliance 2 2 Other materials 2 3 Duty to Comply 2 4 Duty to provide information 2 5 Permit actions 2 6 Reopener clause 2 7 Oil and hazardous substances 2 8 Propet1y rights 3 9 Confidentiality 3 10 Duty to reapply 3 II Other laws 3 12 Inspection and entry 3 B OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FACILITIES I General facility requirements 3 2 Proper operation and maintenance 4 3 Need to halt reduce not a defense 4 4 Duty to mitigate 4 5 Bypasses 4 6 Upsets 5 

## c MONITORING AND RECORDS I General requirements 6 2 Representative sampling 6 3 Monitoring and records 6 D REPORTING REQUIREMENTS I Reporting requirements 7 2 Signatory requirement 8 3 Availability ofreports 8 4 Existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers 8 5 Publicly owned treatment works 9 E OTHER PROVISIONS I Emergency action

- power failure 9 2 Spill prevention 10 3 Removed substances 10 4 Connection to municipal sewer 10 F DEFINTIONS 10

Revised July I, 2002 Page 1MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS A. GENERALPROVISIONS 1. General compliance. All discharges shall be consistent with the terms and conditions ofthis pennit; any changes in production capacity orprocess modifications which result in changes inthe quantity or the characteristics ofthe discharge must be authorized by an additional license or by modifications ofthis permit; it shall be a violation ofthe terms and conditions ofthis permit to discharge any pollutant not identified and authorized herein or to discharge in excess ofthe rates or quantities authorized herein or to violate any other conditions ofthis permit. 2. Other materials. Other materials ordinarily produced or used in the operation ofthis facility, which have been specifically identified in the application, may be discharged at the maximum frequency and maximum level identified in the application, provided: (a) They are not (i) Designated as toxic or hazardous under the provisions ofSections 307 and 311, respectively, ofthe Federal Water Pollution Control Act; Title 38, Section 420, Maine Revised Statutes; or other applicable State Law; or (ii) Known to be hazardous or toxic by the licensee. (b) The discharge ofsuch materials will not violate applicable water quality standards. 3. Duty to comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of State law and the Clean Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of a permit renewal application. (a) The permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under section 307(a) ofthe Clean Water Act, and 38 MRSA, §420 or Chapter 530.5 for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even ifthe petmithas not yetbeen modified to incorporate the requirement. (b) Any person who violates any provision of the laws administered by the Department, including without limitation, a violation of the terms of any order, rule license, permit, approval or decision ofthe Board or Commissioner is subject to the penalties set forth in 38 MRSA, §349. 

### I i

4. Duty to provide information. The permittee shall furnish to the Department, within a reasonable time, any information which the Department may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this penni! or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Department upon request, copies ofrecords required to be kept by this petmit. 5. Permit actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The filing ofa request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a notification ofplanned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit condition. 6. Reopener clause. The Department reserves the right to make appropriate revisions to this permit in order to establish any appropriate effluent limitations, schedule ofcompliance or other provisions which may be authorized under 38 MRSA, §414-A(S).

Revised July I, 2002 Page2MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS 7. Oil and hazardous substances. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution ofany legal action orrelieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities orpenalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under section 311 ofthe Federal Clean Water Act; section 106 ofthe Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980; or 38 MRSA §§ 1301, et. seq. 8. Property rights. This permit does not convey any property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privilege. 9. Confidentiality ofrecords. 38 MRSA §414(6) reads as follows. "Any records, reports or information obtained under this subchapter is available to the public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to the department by any person that any records, reports or information, or particular part or any record, report or information, other than the names and addresses of applicants, license applications, licenses, and effluent data, to which the department has access under this subchapter would, ifmade public, divulge methods or processes that are entitled to protection as trade secrets, these records, reports or information must be confidential and not available for public inspection or examination. Any records, reports or information may be disclosed to employees or authorized representatives ofthe State or the United States concerned with carrying out this subchapter or any applicable federal law, and to any party to a hearing held under this section on terms the commissioner may prescribe in order to protect these confidential records, reports and information, as long as this disclosure is material and relevant to any issue under consideration by the department." 10. Duty to reapply. Ifthe permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date ofthis permit, the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. 11. Otherlaws. The issuance ofthis permit does not authorize any injury to persons orproperty or invasion ofother property rights, nor does it relieve the permittee ifits obligation to comply with other applicable Federal, State or local laws and regulations. 12. Inspection and entry. The permittee shall allow the Department, or an authorized representative (including an authorized contractor acting as a representative of the EPA Administrator), upon presentation ofcredentials and other documents as may be required by law, to: (a) Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions ofthis permit; (b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions ofthis permit; (c) Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required nuder this permit; and (d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes ofassuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.

B. OPERATIONAND MAINTENACE OFFACILITIES 1. General facility requirements. (a) The permittee shall collect all waste flows designated by the Department as requiring treatment and discharge them into an approved waste treatment facility in such a manner as to

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 3MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS maximize removal ofpollutants unless authorization to the contrary is obtained from the Department. (b) The permittee shall at all times maintaiu in good working order and operate at maximum efficiency all waste water collection, treatment and/or control facilities. (c) All necessary waste treatment facilities will be installed and operational prior to the discharge ofany wastewaters. (d) Final plans and specifications must be submitted to the Department for review prior to the construction or modification ofany treatment facilities. (e) The permittee shall install flow measuring facilities ofa design approved by the Depatiment. (f) The permittee must provide an outfall ofa design approved by the Department which is placed in the receiving waters in such a manner that the maximum mixing and dispersion of the wastewaters will be achieved as rapidly as possible. 2. Proper operation and maintenance. The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems oftreatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are in$talled or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions ofthis 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 ofthe permit. 3. Need to halt or reduce activity not a defense. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions ofthis permit. 4. Duty to mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or disposal in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the enviromnent. 5. Bypasses. (a) Definitions. (i) Bypass means the intentional diversion ofwaste streams from any portion ofa treatment facility. (ii)Severe property damage means substantfal physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss ofnatural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property datnage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production. (b) Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only ifit also is for essential maintenanceto assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions ofparagraphs (c) and (d) ofthis section. (c) Notice. (i) Anticipated bypass. Ifthe permittee knows in advance ofthe need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, ifpossible at least ten days before the date ofthe bypass.

Revised July 

### I, 2002 Page4MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS (ii) Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an unanticipated bypass as required in paragraph D(l)(f), below. (24-hour notice). (d) Prohibition ofbypass. (i) Bypass is prohibited, and the Department may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless: (A) Bypasswas unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage; (B) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of a)Jxiliary 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 (C) The permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph (c) ofthis section. (ii) The Department may approve an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the Department determines that it will meet the three conditions listed above in paragraph (d)(i) ofthis section. 6. Upsets. (a) Definition. Upset means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation.**~** (b) Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology based permit effluent limitations ifthe requirements of paragraph (c) ofthis section are met. No determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final administrative action subject tojudicial review. (c) Conditions necessary for a demonstration ofupset. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, orother relevant evidence that: (i) Anupset occurred and that the permittee canidentity the cause(s) ofthe upset; (ii) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated; and (iii)The permittee submitted notice ofthe upset as required inparagraph D(l)(f), below. (24 hour notice). (iv)The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under paragraphB(4). (d) Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence ofan upset has the burden ofproof.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 5MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS

C. MONITORING AND RECORDS 1. General Requirements. This permit shall be subject to such monitoring requirements as may be reasonably required by the Department including the installation, use and maintenance ofmonitoring equipment or methods (including, where appropriate, biological monitoring methods). The permittee shall provide the Department with periodic reports on the proper Department reporting form of monitoring results obtained pursuant to the monitoring requirements contained herein. 2. Representative sampling. Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative ofthe volume and nature ofthe monitored discharge. Ifeffluent limitations are based wholly orpattially on quantities ofa product processed, the permittee shall ensure samples are representative oftimes when production is taking place. Where discharge monitoring is required when production is less than 50%, the resulting data shall be reported as a daily measurement but not included in computation ofaverages, unless specifically authorized by the Department. 3. Monitoring and records. (a) Samples and measurements taken for the purpose ofmonitoring shall be representative ofthe monitored activity. (b) Except for records ofmonitoring information required by this permit related to the permittee's sewage sludge use and disposal activities, which shall be retained for a period ofat least five years, 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 ofat least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request ofthe Department at any time. (c) Records ofmonitoring information shall include: (i) The date, exact place, and time ofsampling or measurements; (ii) The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; (iii) The date(s) analyses were performed; (iv) The individual(s) who performed the analyses; (v) The analytical techniques or methods used; and (vi) The results ofsuch analyses. (d) Monitoring results must be conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified in the permit. (e) State law provides that any person who tampers with or renders inaccurate any monitoring devices or method required by any provision of law, or any order, rule license, permit approval or decision is subject to the penalties set forth in 38 MRSA, §349.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 6MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS**~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-----------------------------** D. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 1. Reporting requirements. (a) Planned changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Department as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when: (i) The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a new source in40 CFR 122.29(b); or (ii) The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants which are subject neither to effluent limitations in the permit, nor to notification requirements under Section D(4). 

# I

(iii)The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the permittee's sludge use or 

# I disposal practices, and such alteration, addition, or changemayjustify the application of permit conditions that are different from or absent in the existing permit, including notification ofadditional use or disposal sites not reported during the permit application process or not reported pursuant to an approved land application plan; (b) Anticipated noncompliance. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Department of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance withpermitrequirements. (c) Transfers. This permit is not transferable to any person except upon application to and approval ofthe Department pursuantto 38 MRSA, § 344 and Chapters 2 and 522. (d) Monitoring reports. Monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere in this permit. (i) Monitoring results must be reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) or fonns provided or specified by the Department for reporting results ofmonitoring ofsludge use or disposal practices. (ii)Ifthe permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by the permit using test procedures approved under 40 CFR part 136 or as specified in the permit, the results ofthis monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting ofthe data submitted in the DMR or sludge reporting form specified by the Department. (iii)Calculations for all limitations which require averaging ofmeasurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified by the Department in the permit. 

## I (e) Compliance schedules. Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any compliance schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later than 14 days following each schedule date. (f) Twenty-four hour reporting. (i) The permittee shall report any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days ofthe time the permittee becomes aware ofthe circumstances. The written submission shall contain a description ofthe noncompliance and its cause; the period ofnoncompliance, including exact dates and times, and ifthe noncompliance

Revised July I, 2002 Page 7MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence ofthe noncompliance. (ii) The following shall be included as information which must be reported within 24 hours under this paragraph. (A) Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit. (B) Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation inthe permit. (C) Violation ofa maximum daily discharge limitation for any ofthe pollutants listed by the Department in the permitto be reported within 24 hours. (iii)The Department may waive the written repott on a case-by-case basis for reports under paragraph (f)(ii) ofthis section ifthe oral report has been received within 24 hours. (g) Other noncompliance. The pennittee shall report all instances ofnoncompliance not reported under paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) ofthis section, at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed in paragraph (f) ofthis section. (h) Other information. Where 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 in any report to the Department, it shall promptly submit such facts or information. 2. Signatory requirement. All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Department shall be signed and certified as required by Chapter 521, Section 5 of the Department's rules. State law provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation or certification in any application, record, rep01t, plan or other document filed or required to be maintained by any order, rule, permit, approval or decision of the Board or Commissioner is subject to the penalties set forth in 38 MRSA, §349. 3. Availability ofreports. Except for data determined to be confidential under A(9), above, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms ofthis permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices ofthe Department. As required by State law, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such rep01t may result in the imposition ofcriminal sanctions as provided by law. 4. Existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers. In addition to the reporting requirements under this Section, all existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers must notifY the Department as soon as they know or have reason to believe: (a) That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, ofany toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, ifthat discharge will exceed the highest ofthe following "notification levels": (i) One hundred micrograms per liter (I00 ug/1); (ii)Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (I mg/1) for antimony; (iii) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Chapter 521 Section 4(g)(7); or (iv)The level established by the Department inaccordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(f).

Revised July I, 2002 Page 8 

# IMAINE POLLUTANTDISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS (b) That any activity has occurred or. will occur which would result in any discharge, on a nonroutine or infrequent basis, of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest ofthe following "notification levels": (i) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1); (ii) One milligram per liter (I mg/1) for antimony;· (iii)Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with Chapter 521 Section 4(g)(7); or (iv) The level established bythe Department in accordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(f). 5. Publicly owned treatmentworks. (a) All POTWs must provide adequate notice to the Department ofthe following: (i) Any new introduction ofpollutants into the POTW from an indirect discharger which would be subject to section 301 or 306 of CWA or Chapter 528 if it were directly discharging those pollutants. (ii)Any substantial change inthe volume or character ofpollutants being introduced into that POTW by a source introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time of issuance of the permit. (iii) For purposes ofthis paragraph, adequate notice shall include information on (A) the quality and quantity ofeffluent introduced into the POTW, and (B) any anticipated impact ofthe change on the quantity or quality ofeffluent to be discharged from the POTW. (b) When the effluent discharged by a POTW for a period ofthree consecutive months exceeds 80 percent ofthe permitted flow, the permittee shall submit to the Department a projection of loadings up to the time when the design capacity ofthe treatment facility will be reached, and a program for maintaining satisfactory treatment levels consistent with approved water quality management plans.

E. OTHERREQUIREMENTS 1. Emergency action- power failure. Within thirty days after the effective date ofthis permit, the permittee shall notifY the Department offacilities and plans to be used in the eventthe primary source of powerto its wastewater pumping and treatment facilities fails as follows. (a) For municipal sources. During power failure, all wastewaters which are normally treated shall receive a minimum ofprimary treatment and disinfection. Unless otherwise approved, alternate power supplies shall be provided for pumping stations and treatment facilities. Alternate power supplies shall be on-site generating units or an outside power source which is separate and independent from sources used for normal operation ofthe wastewater facilities. (b) For industrial and commercial sources. The permittee shall either maintain an alternative power source sufficient to operate the wastewater pumping and treatment facilities orhalt, reduce or otherwise control production and orall discharges upon reduction or loss ofpower to the. wastewater pumping ortreatment facilities.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page9MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS 2. Spill prevention. (applicable only to industrial sources) Within sixmonths ofthe effective date of this permit, the permittee shall submit to the Department for review and approval, with or without conditions, a spill prevention plan. The plan shall delineate methods and measures to be taken to prevent and or contain any spills ofpulp, chemicals, oils or other contaminates and shall specify means of disposal and ortreatment to be used. 3. Removed substances. Solids, sludges trash rack cleanings, filter backwash, orotherpollutants removed from or resulting from the treatment orcontrol ofwastewaters shall be disposed ofin a manner approved by the Department. 4. Connection to municipal sewer. (applicable only to industrial and commercial sources) All wastewaters designated by the Department as treatable in a municipal treatment system will be cosigned to that system when it is available. This permit will expire 90 days after the municipal treatment facility becomes available, unless this time is extended by the Department in writing.

F. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes ofthis permit, the following definitions shall apply. Other definitions applicable to this permit may be found in Chapters 520 through 529 ofthe Department's rules Average means the arithmetic mean ofvalues taken at the frequency required for each parameter over the specified period. For bacteria, the average shall be the geometric mean. Average monthly discharge limitation means the highest allowable average ofdaily discharges over a calendar month, calculated as the sum ofall daily discharges measured during a calendar month divided by the number ofdaily discharges measured during that month. Except, however, bacteriological tests may be calculated as a geometric mean. Average weeldy discharge limitation means the highest allowable average ofdaily discharges over a calendar week, calculated as the sum ofall daily discharges measured during a calendar week divided by the number ofdaily discharges measured during that week. Best management practices ("BMPs") means schedules ofactivities, prohibitions ofpractices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent orreduce the pollution ofwaters of the State. BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, ordrainage from raw material storage. Compositesample means a sample consisting ofa minimum ofeight grab samples collected at equal intervals during a 24 hour period (or a lesser period as specified in the section onmonitoring and reporting) and combined proportional to the flow overthat same time period. Continuous discharge means a discharge which occurs without interruption throughout the operating hours ofthe facility, except for infrequent shutdowns for maintenance, process changes, or other similar activities. Daily discharge means the discharge ofa pollutant measured during a calendar day or any 24-hourperiod that reasonably represents the calendar day for purposes ofsampling. Forpollutants with limitations expressed in units ofmass, the daily discharge is calculated as the total mass ofthe pollutant discharged over the day. For pollutants with limitations expressed in other units ofmeasurement, the daily discharge is calculated as the average measurement ofthe pollutant over the day.

Revised July 

### I, 2002 Page 

### 10MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS Discharge Monitoring Report ("DMR") means the EPA uniform national form, including any subsequent additions, revisions, or modifications for the reporting ofself-monitoring results by permittees. DMRs must be used by approved States as well as by EPA. EPA will supply DMRs to any approved State upon request. The EPA national forms may be modified to substitute the State Agency name, address, logo, and other similar information, as appropriate, in place ofEPA's. Flowweighted composite sample means a composite sample consisting ofa mixture ofaliquots collected at a constant time interval, where the volume ofeach aliquot is proportional to the flow rate of the discharge. Grab sample means an individual sample collected in a period ofless than 15 minutes. Interference means a Discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: (I)Inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal; and (2) Therefore is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation) or of the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal in compliance with the following statutory provisions and regulations or permits issued thereunder (or more stringent State or local regulations): Section 405 ofthe Clean Water Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) (including title II, more commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and including State regulations contained in any State sludge management plan prepared pursuant to subtitle D ofthe SWDA), the Clean Air Act, th.e Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. Maximum daily discharge limitation means the highest allowable daily discharge. New source means any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be a discharge ofpollutants, the construction ofwhich commenced: (a) After promulgation ofstandards ofperformance under section 306 ofCWA which are applicable to such source, or (b) After proposal ofstandards ofperformance in accordance with section 306 ofCW A which are applicable to such source, but only ifthe standards are promulgated in accordance with section 306 within 120 days oftheir proposal. Pass through means a discharge which exits the POTW into waters of the State in quantities or concentrations which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a canse of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration ofa violation). Permit means an authorization, license, or equivalent control document issued by EPA or an approved State to implement the requirements of40 CFR parts 122, 123 and 124. Permit includes anNPDES general permit (Chapter 529). Permit does not include any permit which has not yet been the subject of final agency action, such as a draft permit or a proposed permit. Person means an individual, firm, corporation, municipality, quasi-municipal corporation, state agency, federal agency or other legal entity.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 11MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS

Point source means any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, including, but not limited to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation orvessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are ormay be discharged. Pollutant means dredged spoil, solid waste,junk, incinerator residue, sewage, refuse, effluent, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemicals, biological orradiological materials, oil, petroleum products or byproducts, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, dirt and industrial, municipal, domestic, commercial or agricultural wastes ofany kind. Process wastewater means any water which, during manufacturing orprocessing, comes into direct contact with or results from the production or use ofany raw material, intermediate product, finished product, byproduct, or waste product. Publicly owned treatment works ("POTW") means any facility for the treatment ofpollutants owned by the State or any political subdivision thereof, any municipality, district, quasi-municipal corporation or other public entity. Septage means, for the purposes ofthis permit, any waste, refuse, effluent sludge orother material removed from a septic tank, cesspool, vault privy or similar source which concentrates wastes or to which chemicals have been added. Septage does not include wastes from a holding tank. Timeweighted composite means a composite sample consisting ofa mixture ofequal volume aliquots collected over a constant time interval. Toxic pollutant includes any pollutant listed as toxic under section 307(a)(l) or, in the case ofsludge use ordisposal practices, any pollutant identified in regulations implementing section405(d) ofthe CW A. Toxic pollutant also includes those substances or combination ofsubstances, including disease causing agents, which after discharge or upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation or assimilation into any organism, including humans either directly through the environment or indirectly through ingestion through food chains, will, onthe basis ofinformation available to the board either alone or in combination with other substances already in the receiving waters or the discharge, cause death, disease, abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions, including malfunctions in reproduction, orphysical deformations in such organism ortheir offspring. Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface orground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence ofvegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Whole effluent toxicity means the aggregate toxic effect ofan effluent measured directly by a toxicity test.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 12

# ATTACHMENT A



# I I I . I



## ' I 

# f 

# I I

I 

# l I

I

### Protocol for Total Phosphorus Sample Collection and Analysis for Waste Water Effluent

Approved Analytical Methods: EPA 200.7 (Rev. 44), 365.1 (Rev. 2.0), (Lachat), 365.3, 365.4; SM 3120 B, 4500-P 8.5, 4500-P E, 4500-P F, 4500-P G, 4500-P H; ASTM D515-88(A), 0515-88(8); USGS 1-4471-97, 1-4600-85, 1-4610-91; OMAAOAC 973.55, 973.56 (laboratol)' must be certified for any methoq performed) Sample Collection: The Maine DEP is requesting that total phosphorus analysis be conducted on composite effluent samples, unless a facility's Permit specifically designates grab sampling for this parameter. Facilities can use Individual collection bottles or a single jug made out of glass or polyethylene. Bottles and/orjugs should be cleaned prior to each use with dilute HCL. This cleaning should be followed by several rinses with distilled water. Commercially purchased, pre-cleaned sample containers are an acceptable alternative. The sampler hoses should be cleaned, as needed. Sample Preservation: During compositing the sample must be at 0-6 degrees C (without freezing). Ifthe sample Is being sent to a commercial laboratory or analysis cannot be performed the day of collection then the sample must be preserved using· H2S04 to obtain a sample pH of <2 su and refrigerated at 0-6 degrees C (withqut freezing). The holding time for a preserved sample Is 28 days. Note: Ideally, Total Psamples are preserved as described above. However, If a facility· is using a commercial laboratory then that laboratol)' may choose to add acid to the sample once it arrives at the laboratol)'. The Maine DEP will accept results that use either of these preservation methods. Laboratory QA/QC: Laboratories. must follow the appropriate QA/QC procedures that are described In each of the approved methods. Sampling QA/QC: Ifa composite sample Is being collected using an automated sampler, then once per month run a blank on the composite sampler. Automatically, draw distilled water Into the sample jug using the sample collection line. Let this water set in the jug for 24 hours and then analyze for total phosphorus. Preserve this sample as described above.

Maine DEP, July 1, 2014 Page C1

# ATTACHMENT B

! 

# I

I I I 

### I 

# I 

# I

# ~

## ---

--- Maine Department of Environmental Protection



### Effluent Mercury Test Report

Name ofFacility: Federal Permit #ME 

### ----'-­ Pipe# Purpose ofthis test: §Initiallimit determination

, Compliance monitoring for: year ,...----calendarquatter Supplemental or extra test

SAMPLE COLLECTION INFORMATION Sampling Date: Sampling time:

_____AM/PM mm dd yy Sampling Location: Weather Conditions: Please describe any unusual conditions with the influent or at the facility during orpreceding the time ofsample collection:

Optional test- not required but recommended where possible to allow for the most meaningful evaluation ofmercury results: Suspended Solids



### ___mg!L Sample type:

____Grab (recommended) or Composite ANALYTICAL RESULT FOREFFLUENT MERCURY Name ofLaboratory: Date ofanalysis: Result: ng/L (PPT) Please Enter EffluentLimits for your facility Effluent Limits: Average= ng/L Maximum= ng/L Please attach any remarks or comments from the laboratory that may have a bearing on the results or their interpretation. Ifduplicate samples were taken at the same time please report the average. CERTIFICATION I certifiy that to the best ofmy knowledge the foregoing information is correct and representative of conditions at the time ofsample collection. The sample for mercury was collected and analyzed using EPA Methods 1669 (clean sampling) and 1631 (trace level analysis) in accordance with instructions from the DEP. By:

_____________________Date: Title:

PLEASEMAIL THIS FORM TO YOUR ASSIGNED INSPECTOR

DEPLW 0112-82007, Revised July 2009 Printed 7/14/2009

# ATTACHMENT C


# ' IMAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY REPORT FRESH WATERS

### !t:~~!1l!Y:il'~ili~4\ai!~# 

## +•:-**.,--,--:--::--:----c:-:----::----:-·~~!W~M¥''•'** 11·:::

### '!·,'~-:-:---.,----,.,----::.,---------­ nrsigning this form, I attest that to the best ofmy knowledge that theinformation provided is true, accurate, and complete.

water flea trout 

## A-NOEL A-NOELI C-NOEL C

-N0**EL·~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::t:::::::::::::::::::::::::j** ,, '

# . . ''

# .. .. ''"" ""'" 

## ..., . ,,,,, """"" 

## ,,.,,,.,,,,"''' .,,.,,, ''"'' 

## ,,.,.,,,,,,,,,,, '' 

## ''"' I''"'""'"''''**···o;~··survival** %survival no. young final weight (mg) QC standard A>90 C>80 >IS/female A>90 C>80 > 2% increase lab control receiving water control cone. 1 ( %) cone. 2 ( %) cone. 3 ( 0 /o) cone. 4 ( %) cone. 5 ( %) cone. 6 ( %) stat test used



### .. Illace 

### * next to values statistically dtfferent flom cont1 ols for trout show final wt and % incr for both controls 

## C-NOEL toxicant I date limits (mg!L) results (mg!L)

Laboratory conducting test**:c<1mP';\.l:i'lii'~~::i!'i!** 

### We: ::

___________**:cliilltl~liY:R~i1f'ffai\l~ct>ri11\<a\:i'#•·'----------- !M~~iili''A~4!@!3•b':ibTii** **!c\iliii~!~w;~t!i' u•m:;;~**  

### ;:i Report\VET chemistry on DEP Form "ToxShcet (Fresh \VaterVersion), March2007."**DEPLW0741~B2007,** Revised March 2007 Printed 1/22/2009

# l I
ATTACHMENT D



# I L . 

# r I I

I 

# I 

# I 

# "'Facility Name---------- MEPDES #

---- Facility Representative Signature =:::=::::;:;::-;:;::::::-:::;:::-;:-=c-::=:o::-::::;-::=::=­ Pipe#

____ To the best of my**kno~ledge** this information Is true, accurate and complete.
Licensed Flow (MGD)

# §

Flowfor Day (MGD) 1 ''._1

___-J FlowAvg. for Month (MGD)121 .J LI

___ Acute dilution factor Chronic dilution factor Date Sample Collected L'----.J Date Sample Analyzed [I

# ===]

Human health dilution factor Criteria type: M(arine) or F(resh) f Laboratory------------------**Telephone~------­** Address-----------------­ Lab Contact

__________________ Lab 10 #

------­ ERRORWARNING I Essential facility FRESH WATER VERSION information is missing. Please check Receiving required entries in bold above. Please see the footnotes on the last page. Water or (ug/L oras noted) Ambient

Revised April24, 2014 Page 1 DEPLW 0740-G2014 Printed 5/5/2014 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form This form isfor reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP.

··- ----··--­---------- - ------- Printed 515/2014 Mail')e Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. ' POLL' OTA .OT<; (4)

# ~~

, 5 I Limit A,**l=ffl,~n~** Limits Reporting ,(6) .161 I d6l I •**•~"** r-h Acute Chronic Health 2 i:::;:'

# :~·~~O~L=====+==~**c==t===+====~==~=====t========t====+====t===t=~** it**~~iE~NCO~L------~--~ ~--+-----+-------~----4-------+-----------~------f-----4-----f---~** 

# ~~~--~~~--+---+----4----+---~~------+---~----~--~~ IBN I

# ~I**~ENE**

# :-~~11.5~===t==E=E=====E===E==~

lN

# ~~**~ 1-N-~LATE**  lN lN JIE1 lN

. PHTHALATE 5 5 Revised April 24, 2014 Page2 DEPLW 0740-G2014Printed 5/5/2014 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form Thisform is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. IBN FL 5 IBN 5

lN 5 lN

# ~ ;)(AI

### ~ lN**~E**

# -~~

DT

RDANE

## ~ IN

ULFAN SL LFATE

# .--~**~OR** 

## ,..__ I 

## :.--­ ;,.-­ ).3 

## :.--­ ;,.-­ •.3 ;B-1260 1.2

# ~~ 1 1.1.**~H** 5 ,1'

# ~HANE ',1' HRICH 5 1.1· 5 11, 1·

## ~ I )ETHYLENE (1, 1· 

### iv 3 2·DICHL 3 .2·1 I 6 :HLOF<uc nYLENE (1,2­ lv 5

# ~ w**--~··** ; (1,3­ 

### lv I 5
Revised April 24, 2014 Page3 DEPLW 0740-G2014Printed 5/5/2014 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form This fonm isfor reporting laboratory data and facility infonmation. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. NA IACR NA 

# E: 5 5 5

# ~**~METHANE** 

# ;;=:**~E** YLBR< .THYLCHL I 

# It=I ETHYLENE 

### lv I I IDE 

### .,

# .,. 5 IV 5 I nYLENE 

### lv I 3 IV V1N' IUE 5 Notes: (1) Flow average for day pertains to WET/PP composite sample day. (2) Flow average for month is for month in which WET/PP sample was taken. (3) Analytical ch.emisby parameters must be done as part ofthe WET test chemistry.

·(3a) Cyanide, Available (Cyanide Amenable to Chlorination) is not an analytical chemistry parameter, but may be required by certain discharge permits

. (4) Priority**Poll~tants** should be reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L).

!\7J::,' ..;.'l1t-.•**.--~'~ff' i\Ft\'\)V'I'O!l;!,Wid'~'T!Tl'** .•**m1'"''!fj!P~~~.t-** "fW

.... \1ilTIX1\"'blrth'"''0"1'11"1!J1Gf''7f't.**-~-~-** <IO!_•,;;;.T""Ftf•l'!:)!f"ll4l\1ft!\.1iffi11Cffi'!'i\'f'"t'0jtF''1'1tlm'T\W"'rt- '1't""'1l!\'trlilr<H1"!qm>=FH!mtml111!1·m•'Sj;"<'F111.W>111]!j'"'IZ<1iW1mmmeaq"' h t**5'"\':0~';11lrlf'** .•N'./mD**ib<JJ!l,!!l~~!jJS'O. ern:•reBQu~\L•<)l:rnan09Js!IL~~C•.l**  er,ngt9' ,,1

.e!OOQ**ra~:** a.,..ra**ow;i!SO.~e:sureLO!OOnye** !O'!ffii<;!;Qilf?ffiS!perill"erton.**ul~jpJlr** S ee
. (6) Effluent Umits are calculated based on dilution factor, background allocation (10%) and water quality reserves (15%- to allow for new or changed discharges or non-point sources). (7) Possible Exceedence determinations are done for a single sample only on a mass basis using the actual pounds discharged. This analysis does not considerwatershed wide allocations for fresh water discharges. (8) These tests are optional for the receiving water. However, where possible samples ofthe receiving water should be preserved and saved for the duration ofthe WET test. In the event of questions about the receiving water's possible effect on the WET results, chemistry tests should then be conducted. (9) pH and Total Residual Chlorine must be conducted at the time of sample collection. Tests for Total Residual Chlorine need be conducted only when an effluent has been chlorinated or residual chlorine is believed to be present for any other reason•

Revised April 24, 2014 Page4 DEPLW 0740-G2014**----··~·-·**Printed 5/5/2014 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. Comments:

Revised April 24, 2014 PageS DEPLW 074Q..G2014**------~·.~~-----'-------------**

# ATTACHMENT E



# I

t 

## I

# ~ ! 

# r 

# l ' ' 

### I



# r

L 

# I

## Salmonid Survival and Growth Test The Salmonid survival and growth test must follow the procedures for the fathead minnow larval survival and growth tests detailed in USEPA's freshwater acute and chronic methods manuals with the following Depattment modifications: Species

- Brook Trout, 

### Salvelinusfontinalis, or other salmonid approved bythe Department. Age

- Less than six months old for the first test each year and less than twelve months for subsequent tests. Size

- The largest fish must not be greaterthan 150% ofthe smallest. Loading Rate- < 

### 0.5 g/1/day Feeding rate- 

### 5% ofbody weight 3 times daily (15%/day) Temperature- 12° ± 1°C Dissolved Oxygen

- 6.5 mg/1 ,aeration ifneeded with large bubbles (> 1 mm diameter) at a rate of<1 00/min Dilution Water- Receiving water upstream ofdischarge (or other ambient water approved bythe Department) Dilution Series -A minimum of

### 5 effluent concentrations (including the instream waste concentrations bracketing acute and chronic dilutions calculated pursuant to Section D); a receiving water control; and control ofknown suitable water quality Duration

- Acute= 48 hours

- Chronic = 10 days minimum Test acceptability- Acute= minimum of90% survival in 2 days

- Chronic= minimum of80% survival in 10 days; minimum growth of20 mg/gm/d dry weight in controls, (individual fish weighed, dried at 100°C to constant weight and weighed to 3 significant figures)MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEMPERMIT AND MAINE WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE FACT SHEET Date: January 13, 2015 PERMITNUMBER: ME0100439 LICENSENUMBER: W002753-6B-F-R NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: MILO WATER DISTRICT 146 Park Street Milo, Maine 04463 COUNTY: Piscataquis County NAME AND ADDRESS WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: MILO WATER DISTRICT 146 Park Street Milo, Maine 04463 RECEIVING WATER/CLASSIFICATION: Piscataquis River/Class B COGNIZANT OFFICIALAND TELEPHONENUMBER: Mr. Timothy Gormley (207) 943-2501 milowater@myfairpoint.net 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY

a. Application: The Milo Water District (MWD/District/permittee hereinafter) has submitted a timely and complete application to the Department for the renewal of combination Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #MEOI00439/Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W002753-6C-D-R (permit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department on December 4, 2009, for a five-year term. The 12/4/09permit authorized the discharge ofup to a monthly average flow of 0.39 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondarytreated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Milo, Maine. See Attachment A ofthis Fact Sheet for a location map.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 2 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY (cont'd) b. Source Description:

- The waste water treatment facility receives sanitarywaste water from approximately 740 residential and commercial users within the boundaries ofthe District. The District owns and maintains approximately 12 miles ofcollection system which is 100% separated. All former combined sewer overflows (CSOs) were eliminated in 2006. The waste treatment facility is not currently authorized to accept transported wastes from local septage haulers. Itis noted the facility accepts up to 1,500 to 2,000 gpd ofwaters from an oil/water separator from the local railroad maintenance facility locatedjustto the northeast ofthe waste water treatment facility.

c. Waste Water Treatment: Waste waters conveyed to the treatment facility during normal operations receive a secondary level oftreatment via three (3) aerated facultative lagoons that are two acres, one acre and one acre in size, respectively, providing approximately 30-days ofdetention time. Waste waters collected are conveyed to the lagoons via a force main (measuring eight inches in diameter) from the Ferry Road pumping station. Afterpassing through the lagoons it is seasonally disinfected in a chlorine contact chamber with sodium hypochlorite and then de-chlorinated using sodium bi-sulfite. The flow is measured in two locations, with a mag flow meter at the pump station nextto the lagoon and then again with an ultra-sonic meter at the chlorination building. The discharge is to the Piscataquis River via a ductile iron pipe measuring 12 inches in diameter. The end ofthe outfall pipe is fitted with a manhole base stmcture with a grate on the downstream side to enhance mixing ofthe treated waste water with the Piscataquis River. The waste water treatment facility is designed for the treatment ofan average daily flow of0.39 MGD. See Attachment B ofthe this Fact Sheet for a schematic ofthe facility. 2. PERMIT SUMMARY

a. Terms and Conditions: This permitting action is carrying forward all the terms and conditions ofthe previous permit except that this permit is; 1. Eliminatingthe option when calculatingpercent removal to report the NODI 9 code on the Discharge Monitoring Repmt (DMR) when the average influent concentration is less than 200 mg/L based on guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2. Eliminating the monthly average water quality based mass and concentration limits for ammonia as a statistical evaluation on the most current 60 months oftest results submitted to the Departnment indicates the discharge no longer exceeds or has a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambientwater quality criteria (AWQC) for ammonia.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 3 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 2. PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 3. Incorporatingpreviously established average and maximum technology based concentration limits for total mercury so the results can be tracked in the federal Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). 4. Eliminating Special Condition C, 

### Disinfection, from the permitas the Department has reconsidered the necessity ofsaid condition. 5. Establishing a seasonal (June 1- September 30) total phosphorus monitoring requirement to obtain up-to-date test results for the discharge to assist the Department in evaluating the impact on ambient water quality in the Piscataquis River. b. History: The most current relevant licensing/permitting and other regulatory actions include the following; · 

### Apri/27, 1983- The Department issued WDL#W002753 which authorized Milo to discharge 330,500 gallons perday ofuntreated waste water through nine (9) discharge locations on the Sebec, Pleasant and Piscataquis Rivers in Milo, Maine. 

### Februwy28, 1986- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit#ME0100439 for frve-year term. 

### January 1, 1991 -Anew waste water treatment facility commenced operation with a single discharge location into the Piscataquis River. 

### December 5, 1991 -The Depatimentissued renewal #W002753-59-A-R for five-year term. The licensed flow limitation was increased from 0.33 MGD to 0.39 MGD, to reflect the design capacity ofthe newfacility. 

### Februwy 5, 1995- The Department administrativelymodified WDL #W002753-59-A-R to include whole effluent toxicity (WET) and chemical specific testingpursuantto Departmentregulation Chapter 530.5, 

### Swface Water Taxies Control Program. December 11, 1996- The Department administratively modified WDL #W002753-59-A-R by suspending the limitations and monitoring requirements for bacteria and total residual chlorine bewtween May 15 1 h and September 301 h ofeach year. 

### October 15, 1998 -Milo requested a modification to require CBOD testing in lieu of BOD testing.MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 4 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 2. PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 

### Apri/27, 1999- The Department denied Milo's request to substitute carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) testing for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) testing Afterreviewing historical discharge monitoring data, the Department made the determination that 97.3% ofthe time, the Milo facility was capable ofmeeting their existing monthly average license limitation of30 mg/L for BOD. The Department's best practicable treatment (BPT) standard is based on a threshold of95%compliance with the monthly average limitations. 

### December 6, 1999- The Department issued WDL renewal #W002753-5L-B-R for fiveyear term. 

### May 25, 2000- The Depatiment unilaterally modified the 12/6/99 WDL byestablishing interim average and maximum concentration limits· for mercury. 

### January 12, 2001 -The State ofMaine received authorization from the EPA to administerthe NPDES permittingprogram in Maine. The program has since been referred to as the Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) program. 

### October 5, 2004- The Department issued combination MEPDES permit #ME0100439/WDL#W002753-6B-B-R for a five-year term. 

### April I0, 2006- The Departmentunilaterallymodified the I0/5/04 MEPDES permit/WDt by establishing whOle effluent toxicity and chemical specific testing pursuant to Department rule 06-096 CMR, Chapter 530, 

### Surface Water Taxies Control Program, promulgated on October 12, 2005. 

### September 29, 2009- The Department issued a letterto the MWD indicated they were no longer required to participate in the Department's CSO program. 

### December 4, 2009- The Department issued combination MEPDES permit #MEOI00439/WDL #W002753-6B-C-R for a five-year term. 

### Februmy 3, 2012- The Depattmentunilaterally modified the.12/4/09 MEPDES permit/WDL byreducing the monitoring frequency for mercury from 4/Year to 1/Year. 

### July 28, 2014- The MWD submitted a timely and complete application to the Department to renewthe 12/4/09 MEPDES permit/WDL.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 

### 5 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 3. CONDITIONS OF PERMITS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A. Section 414-A, requires thatthe effluent limitations prescribed for discharges, including, but not limited to, effluent toxicity, require application ofbest practicable treatment (BPT), be consistent with the U.S. Clean Water Act, and ensure that the receiving waters attain the State water quality standards as described in Maine's Surface Water Classification System. In addition, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 420 and Department rule 06­ 096 CMR Chapter 530, Surface Water Taxies ControlProgram, require the regulation of toxic substances not to exceed levels set forth in Department rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 584, Surface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, and that ensure safe levels for the discharge oftoxic pollutants such that existing and designated uses ofsurface waters are maintained and protected. 

### 4. RECEIVING WATER STANDARDS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 467(i)(E)(l) classifies the Piscataquis River at and below the discharge from the MWD facility as a Class B waterbody. Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 465(3 & 4) describes the classification standards for Class B waters as follows: Class B waters mustbe of such qualitythat they are suitable for the designateduses of drinking water supply after treatment;fishing; agriculture; recreation in andon the water; industrialprocess andcoolingwatersupply; hydroelectricpowergeneration, exceptasprohibitedunder Title 12, section 403; navigation; andas habitat for fish and other aquatic lifo. The habitat must be characterizedas unimpaired. The dissolvedoxygen content of Class B waters maynotbe less than 7partsper million or 

### 7 5% of saturation, whichever is higher, except that for theperiod from October 1st to May 14th, in order to ensure spawningandegg incubation of indigenous fish species, the 

### 7-day mean dissolvedoxygen concentration maynotbe less than 9.5partsper million andthe 1-dayminimum dissolvedoxygen concentration maynotbe less than 8.0 partspermillion in identified fish spawningareas. Between May 15th andSeptember 30th, the number of Escherichia coli bacteria of human anddomestic animalorigin in these waters maynotexceeda geometric mean of 64per 100 milliliters oran instantaneous level of236 per 100milliliters. In determining humananddomestic animal origin, the department shall assess licensedandunlicensedsources using available diagnosticprocedures. Discharges to Class B waters maynot cause adverse impact to aquatic life in that the receivingwaters must be of s1ifjicientquality to support all aquatic species indigenous to the receivingwater withoutdetrimental changes in the resident biological community.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 6 of23 W002753-6C-F-R S; RECEIVING WATER CONDITIONS The Department conducted ambientwater quality surveys in 1997, 1998 and 2001 on the Piscataquis River in an effort to assess the existing water quality and develop a water quality model to support the issuance ofa total maximum daily load (TMDL) report. Ambient water quality sampling was conducted on 23 miles ofthe Piscataquis River from Guilford to Milo. The Departmentpublished a document entitled, Piscataquis RiverData Report. 2001 Survey, January 2002. DEPLW0465, with the results ofthe sampling events. The 2012 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, published by the Depatiment (often referred to as the 305b Repm1) lists a 13.44 mile segment ofthe Piscataquis River below the Dover-Foxcroft waste watertreatment facility in a table entitled, Table 5-A: Rivers AndStreams ImpairedByPollutants Other Than Those Listedin 5-B Through 5-D (FMDL Required). The repot1 cites the cause ofthe impairment is low dissolved oygen levels. Previous 305b reports listed low dissolved oxygen levels and bacteria as a result ofmunicipal point sources, agricultural non-point sources and combined sewer overflows as being the cause ofthe impairment. The Depatiment is scheduled to perform a comprehensive ambient water quality survey during the summer of2015 andprepare a TMDL for the 13.44-mile segment during calendar year 2016. Ifthe TMDL indicates that at full permitted discharge limits, the discharge from the Milo facility is causing orcontributing to the non-attainment ofambient water quality standards, this permit will be re-opened per Special ConditionL, Reopening Of The Permit ForModifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meetwater quality standards. 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

a. Flow: The monthly average flow limitation of0.39 MGD and the daily maximum repotting requirement in the previous permitting action are being carried forward in this permitting action. The monthly average limitation is considered to be representative of the monthly average design flow forthe waste water treatment facility. A review ofthe monthly DMR data for the period January 2011- June 2014 indicates flow values have been reported as follows: Flow (42 DMRs)

Value Limit(MGD) Ran2e (MGD) Mean (MGD) Monthly Average 0.39 0.12-0.62 0.25 DailyMaximum Repot1 0.17-1.2 0.47MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 7of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) b. Dilution Factors -The Department establishes applicable dilution factors for the discharge in accordance with freshwater protocols established in Department Rule Chapter 530 Surface Water Taxies Control Program, October 2005. With a permitted flow limit of0.39 MGD, the dilution factors are as follows: Y.Acute<l): IQIO = 4.6 cfs 

### => (4.6 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.39 MGD) = 8.7:1 (0.39MGD) Acute: I Q I 0 = 18.5 cfs 

### => (18.5 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.39 MGD) = 32:I (0.39MGD) Chronic: 7QIO =27.7 cfs 

### => (27.7 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.39 MGD) = 47:1 (0.39MGD) Harmonic Mean:= 83.1 cfs(2

### ):=> (83.1 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.39 MGD) = 139: I (0.39MGD) Footnotes (I) Chapter 530.5 (D)(4)(a) states that analyses using numeric acute criteria for aquatic life must be based on 1/4 ofthe IQIO stream design flow to prevent substantial acute toxicity within any mixingzone. The 1 Q10 is the lowest one day flow over a tenyearrecurrence interval. The regulation goes on to say that where it can be demonstrated that a discharge achieves rapid and complete mixingwith the receiving water by way ofan efficient diffuser or other effective method, analyses may use a greaterproportion ofthe stream design, up to including all ofit. The previous permitting action made the determination that based on the lack of information provided by Milo as to the true mixing characteristics ofthe discharge of treated effluentwith the receiving waters, the default stream flow of

### \4 ofthe lQIO is applicable in acute statistical evaluations pursuant to Chapter 530. The MWD has notprovided any new information at the time ofthis permit renewal. As a result, the Department continues to utilize the default value of\4 ofthe I Q I 0 as being applicable in acute statistical evaluations. (2) The harmonic mean dilution factor is approximated by multiplying the 7QIO receiving water flow by three (3). This multiplying factor is based on guidelines for estimation ofhuman health dilutionpresented in the USEPA publication "Technical SupportDocument for Water Quality-based Taxies Control" (Office ofWater; EPA/505/2-90-00I, page 88), and represents an estimation ofharmonic mean flow onwhich human health dilutions are based in a riverine 7QIO flow situation.MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 8 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd)

c. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5l & Total Suspended Solids CTSS):

- The previous permitting action established monthly and weekly average BODS and TSS best practicable treatment (BPT) concentration limits of30 mg!L and 45 mg!L respectively, that were based on secondary treatmentrequirements as defined in Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(Ill). The maximum daily BODS concentration limits of 50 mg/L are based on a Depmtment bestprofessionaljudgment ofBPT. All three concentration limits are being carried forward in this permitting action. As for mass limitations, the previous permitting action established monthly average, weekly average and daily maximum limitations based on a monthly average limit of 0.39 MGD that are being carried forward inthis permitting action. The limitations were calculated as follows: Monthly average: (0.39 MGD)(8.34)(30 mg!L) = 98 lbs/day Weekly average: (0.39 MGD)(8.34)(45 mg!L) = 146lbs/day Dailymaximum: (0.39 MGD)(8.34)(50 mg/L) 

## = 163 lbs/day A review ofthe monthlyDMR data for the period January 20II

- June 2014 indicates the permittee has repmted BOD and TSS values as follows: BOD Mass {42 DMRs'

Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Averaee (lbs/day) Monthly Average 98 7-87 27 DailyMaximum 163 8- 127 43 BOD Concentration (42 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg!L) Monthly Average 30 7-26 13 Daily Maximum 50 8-35 17 TSS mass (42 DMRs)

Value Limit (lbs/day) Ranee (lbs/day) Averaee (lbs/day) MonthlyAverage 98 3 -116 28 Daily Maximum 163 3-200 45 TSS Concentration (42 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg!L) Range (mg!L) Average (mg!L) Monthly Average 30 2-25 13 DailyMaximum 50 3-39 18ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 9 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Minimum monitoring frequency requirements in MEPDES permits are prescribed by 06-096 CMR Chapter 523§5(i). The USEPA has published guidance entitled, Interim Guidance for Performance BasedReductions ofNPDESPermitMonitoring Frequencies (USEPA Guidance April 1996). In addition, the Department has supplemented the EPA guidance with its own guidance entitled, Peiformance BasedReduction of Monitoring Frequencies- Modification of EPA Guidance ReleasedApri/1996 (Maine DEP May 22, 2014). Both documents are being utilized to evaluate the compliance history for each parameterregulated bythe previous permitto determine ifa reduction in the monitoring frequencies arejustified. Although EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation ofthe most current two-years ofeffluent data for a parameter, the Department is considering 42 months ofdata (January 2011 -June 2014). A review ofthe monitoring data for BOD & TSS indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) ofthe long term effluent average to the monthly average limits can be calculated as 28%. According to Table I ofthe EPA Guidance, a 1/W eek monitoring requirement can be reduced to 2/Month. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequency for BOD & TSS to 1/Week. The previous permitting action also established a requirement of85% removal for BOD and TSS pursuant to Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(III)(a&b)(3) except in the circumstances where the influent concentration is less than 200 mg/L. Based on guidance from the USEPA, this permit·is eliminating the exception for complying with the 85% removal requirement when influent is less 200 mg/L as weak influent to a treatment facility is an indication ofexcessive inflow and infiltration that should be addressed in the collection system. Compliance with thepercentremoval requirement is based on a 12-month rolling average basis to be consistent with all otherDepartment permitting actions for lagoon systems with extended detention times. A review ofthe DMRdata for the period ofJanuary 2011 through March 2014 indicates values for BOD and TSS percentremoval have been reported as follows: BOD %Removal (DMRs = 14)



## I I Value Limit(%) Range(%) Average (%) Monthly Average 85 88-93 92 TSS % Removal (DMRs = 14)

Value Limit(%) Range(%) Average (%) Monthly Average 85 89-96 94MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 10 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) d. Escherichia coliform (E. coli.) bacteria: The previous permitting action established seasonal (between May 15th and September 30th ofeach year) monthly average and daily maximum concentration limits for 

### E. colibacteria of64 colonies/!00 ml (geometric mean) and 427 colonies/100 ml (instantaneous level), respectively, based on the State of Maine Water Classification Program criteria for Class B waters found at 38 M.R.S.A. §465(3)(B) at the time ofpermitting, and a minimum monitoring frequency requirement ofl/Week. During calendar year 2005, Maine's Legislature approved a new daily maximum water quality standards of236 colonies/100 ml for water bodies designated as Class Band Class C. In the 12/29/09permit, the Department determined that end-of-pipe limitations for the instantaneous concentration standard of427 colonies/100 mL would be achieved through available dilution ofthe effluent with the receiving waters and need not be revised in MEPDES permits for facilities with adequate dilution (at least 

### 1.1:I for facilities in Class B waters). The seasonal (May 15- September 30) bacteria limits of 64 colonies/100 ml and 236 col/100 ml are being carried fmward in this permit. The Department reserves the right to impose year-round bacteria limits, ifnecessary, to protect the health, safety and welfare ofthe public. A review ofthe seasonal monthly DMR data for the period May2011 -June 2014 indicates the permittee has reported E. coli bacteria test results as follows: E. colibacteria (17 DMRs)

Value Limit (col/100 ml) Range (col/100 ml) Mean (col/100 ml) MonthlyAverage 64 3-64 19 Daily Maximum 427 7-205 87 Although EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation ofthe most current two-years ofeffluent data for aparameter, the Department is considering 17 seasonal months of data (May 2011- June 2014). A review ofthe monitoring data for BOD & TSS indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) ofthe long term effluent average to the monthly average limits canbe calculated as 30%. According to Table I ofthe EPA Guidance, a !/Week monitoring requirement can be reduced to 2/Month. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequency for E. coli bacteria to 2/Month with at least ten ( 1 0) days between sampling events.

e. Total Residual Chlorine -The previous permitting action established a daily maximum water quality based concentration limit of0.16 mg/L for the discharge that is being carried forward in this permitting action. Limits on total residual chlorine (TRC) are specified to ensure that ambient water quality standards are maintained and that BPT technology is being applied to the discharge. The Department imposes the more stringent ofthe water quality ortechnology based limits inpermitting actions. End-of-pipe water quality based concentration thresholds maybe calculated as follows:MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page II of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Parameter Acute Criteria Chronic Criteria Acute Dilution Chronic Dilution Acute Limit Chronic Limit Chlorine 19 ug/L II ug/L 8.7:1 47:1 0.16mg!L 0.52 mg!L

Example calculation: Acute- 0.019 mg!L (8.7) = 0.16 mg/L For facilities that need to de-chlorinate the discharge to meet water quality based thresholds (as is with the case with Milo), the Department has established daily maximum and monthly average BPTlimits of0.3 mg/L and 0.1 mg!L respectively. In the case ofMilo, the acute water quality based threshold of0.16 mg!L calculated above is lower than the BPTlimit of0.3 mg/L, thus the water qualitybased limit of0.16 mg!L is being carried forward as a daily maximum limit. As for monthly average, the calculated chronic water quality based threshold of0.52 mg!L is higher than the BPT limit of 0.1 mg!L, thus the technology-based limit ofO.l mg!L is be imposed as a monthly average limitation. TRC is potentially toxic at all times ofthe year. Therefore, whenever elemental chlorine or chlorine based compounds are used to disinfectthe discharge from the waste water treatment plant, limitations and monitoring requirements are in effect and enforceable. A review ofthe DMR data for the period September 2011- June 2014 indicates the permittee has repotied values as follows: Total residual chlorine (11 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) DailyMaximum 0.16 0.06-0.16 0.12 No monitoring frequency reduction for TRC is being considered as the ratio between the long term average and monthly average limits is 75%. f. Total phosphorus- The October2004 MEPDES permit established a !/Month monitoring requirement for total phosphorus between June and Septemberofeachyear to gather a statisticallyvalid data set on phosphorus discharges. The data collected was to be utilized in any water modeling conducted bythe Department to determine if phosphorus is causing orcontributing to dissolved oxygen deficits in the Piscataquis River. A review ofthe DMRdata for the period June 2006- September 2008 indicates values have been reported as follows: Total phosphorus (Concentration) (11 DMRs)

Value Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) MonthlyAverage 1.44-4.11 2.7 Daily Maximum 1.44-4.11 2.7ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 12 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Total phosphorus (Mass (11 DMRs)

Value Range (lbs/day) Mean (lbs/day) Monthly Average 2.08-4.5 2.9 DailyMaximum 2.08-4.5 2.9 Department rule 06-096 CMR, Chapter 523 specifies that water quality based limits are necessary when it has been determined that a discharge has a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above any State water quality standard including State narrative criteria.' In addition, 06-096 CMR Chapter 523 specifies that water quality based limits maybe based upon criterion derived from a proposed State criterion, or an explicit State policy or regulation interpreting its narrative water quality criterion, supplemented with otherrelevant information which may include: EPA's Water Quality Standards Handbook, October 1983, risk assessment data, exposure data, information about the pollutant from the Food and DrugAdministration, and current EPA criteria documents. 2 USEPA's Quality Criteria for Water 1986 (Gold Book) puts fotth an in-stream phosphorus concentration recommendation ofless than 100 f!g/L (0.1 mg/L) in streams or other flowing waters not discharging directlyto lakes or impoundments, to prevent nuisance algal growth. The use ofthe 0.1 mg/L Gold Bookvalue is consistent with the requirements of06-096 CMR Chapter 523 noted above for use in a reasonable potential (RP) calculation. Based on the above rationale, the Department has chosen to utilize the Gold Bookvalue ofO.Ol mg/L.It is the Department's intent to continue to make determinations ofactual attainment or impairment based upon environmental response indicators from specific water bodies. The use ofthe Gold Book value of0.1 mg/L for use in the RP calculation will enable the Depattment to establishwater quality based limits in a manner that is reasonable and that appropriately establishes the potential for impairment, while providing an opportunityto acquire environmental response indicator data, numeric nutrient indicator data, and facility data as needed to refine the establishment ofsite specific water quality based limits for phosphorus. Therefore, this permit may be reopened during the term ofthe permit to modifY any reasonable potential calculation, phosphorus limits, or monitoring requirements based on site-specific data. The permittee conducted total phosphorus testing between June 2006 and September 2008 (n=II). The arithmetic mean concentration discharged for the period was 2.7 mg/L and 2.9 lbs/day and was considered representative ofthe discharge from the facility. For the background concentration in the Piscataquis River, 2014 data indicates the background totalphosphoms concentration is 0.012 mg/L. Using the

I Waste DischargeLicense Conditions, 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(1)(i) (effective date January 12, 2001) 2 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(I)(vi)(A) 

## I 

## I iME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 13 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) following calculation and criteria, the Milo facility does not have a·reasonable potential to exceed the EPA's Gold Bookvalue of0.100 ug/L for phosphorus but does have a reasonablepotential to exceed the Department's Chapter 583 draft criteria of 0.030 mg/L. The calculations are as follows: Cr = QeCe 

### + QsCs Qr Qe = effluent flow i.e. facility design flow = 0.39MGD Ce = effluentpollutant concentration = 2.7 mg/L Qs = 7QIO flow ofreceiving water 14.3 MGD Cs = upstream concentration = 0.012 mg/L Qr = receiving water flow = 17.9MGD Cr =receivingwater concentration Cr = (0.39 MGD x 2.7 mg/L) 

### + (17.9 MGD x 0.012 mg/L) = 0.069 mg/L 1.8.3 MGD Cr = 0.073 mg/L > 0.1 mg/L :=:> No, Reasonable Potential Cr = 0.073 mg/L >0.030 mg/L=:> Yes, ReasonablePotential Pusuant to Department guidance issued via a letterto permittee's on July I, 2014, this permit is not establishing water quality based mass limits at this time but is establishing a seasonal (June I - September 30) monitoring frequency of2/Month for the five-year term ofthe permit. The data will be taken into consideration when the Depmtment prepares its TMDL report in 2015-2016. g. pHRange- Theprevious permitting action established a technology based BPTpH range limitation of6.0 -9.0 standard units pursuant to a new·Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(IIl)(c) that is being carried forward in this permitting action. A review ofthe monthly DMRdata for the period December 20II

- June 2014 indicates the following: pH (DMRs = 12) Limit (su) Minimum (su) Maximum (su)

Value Range 6.0-9.0 8.8 6.3MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 14 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) h. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) and Chemical Specific Testing Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Sections 4 I4-A and 420, prohibit the discharge ofeffluents containing substances in amounts that would cause the surface waters ofthe State to contain toxic substances above levels set forth in Federal Water Quality Criteria as established bythe USEPA. Department Rules, 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, Surface Water Taxies Control Program, and Chapter 584, Swface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants set forth ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for toxic pollutants and procedures necessary to control levels oftoxic pollutants in surface waters. WET, prioritypollutant and analytical chemistrytesting as required by Chapter 530, is included in this permit in orderto fully characterize the effluent. This permit also provides for reconsideration ofeffluent limits and monitoring schedules after evaluation oftoxicitytesting results. The monitoring schedule includes consideration ofresults currently on file, the nature ofthe wastewater, existing treatment and receiving water characteristics. WETmonitoring is required to assess and protect against impacts upon water quality and designated uses caused bythe aggregate effect ofthe discharge on specific aquatic organisms. Acute and chronic WET tests are performed on invertebrate and vertebrate species. Prioritypollutant and analytical chemistry testing is required to assess the levels ofindividual toxic pollutants in the discharge, comparing each pollutant to acute, chronic, and human health AWQC as established in Chapter 584. Chapter 530 establishes four categories oftesting requirements based predominately on the chronic dilution factor. The categories are as follows: I) Level I - chronic dilution factor of<20: 1. 2) Level II- chronic dilution factor of::0:20: I but <I00:1. 3) Level III- chronic dilution factor ::O:IOO:l but <500:1 or>500:1 and Q ::0:1.0 MGD 4) Level N**~chronic** dilution >500:1 and Q :01.0 MGD Department rule Chapter 530 (I)(D) specifies the criteria to be used in determining the minimum monitoring frequency requirements for WET, prioritypollutant and analytical chemistry testing. Based on the Chapter 530 criteria, the permittee's facility falls into the Level II frequency category as the facility has a chronic dilution factor of>20:1 but <I00:I. Chapter 530(1)(D)(!) specifies that routine screening and surveillance level testing requirements are as follows:MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 15 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon issuance ofthepermit and lastingthrough 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years I, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit).

Level WET Testing Prioritypollutant testing Analytical chemistry II I per year None required 2 per year Screening level testing -Beginning 24 months priorto permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifa timelyrequest for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement.

Level WET Testing Prioritypollutant testing Analytical chemistry II 2 per year I per year 4 per year A review ofthe data on file with the Department indicates that to date, the permittee has fulfilled the WET and chemical-specific testingrequirements ofChapter 530. See Attachment C ofthis Fact Sheet for WETtest results and Attachment D for chemical specific testdates. Department rule Chapter 530(0)(3)( c) states in part "Dischargers in LevelIImayreduce surveillance testing to one WETorspecific chemicalseries every otheryearprovided that testing in thepreceding 60 months does not indicate any reasonablepotential for exceedence as calculatedpursuant to section 3(E)." Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "For effluent monitoringdata andthe variabilityof the pollutant in the effluent, the Departmentshallapply the statisticalapproach in Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 ofUSEPA's "Technical SupportDocument for Water Quality-Based Taxies Control"(USEPA Pziblication 505/2-90-001, March, 1991, EPA, Qffice of Water, Washington, D.C.) to data to determine whether water-quality basedeffluentlimits must be included in a waste discharge license. Where it is determined through this approach that a discharge containspollutants or WETa/levels that have a reasonablepotential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-basedlimits mustbe established in any licensingaction."ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 16 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Chapter 530 §3 states, "The Departmentshall establish appropriate discharge prohibitions, effluent limits andmonitoringrequirements in waste discharge licenses 

## if a discharge containspollutants that are ormaybe discharged at levels that cause, have reasonablepotential to cause, or contribute to an ambient excursion in excess of a numeric or narrative water quality criteria or thatmay impair existingordesignated uses. The licensee mustalso control whole effluent toxicity (WEI) when discharges cause, have a reasonablepotential to cause, orcontribute to an ambientexcursion above the narrative water quality criteria. "In determining 

## if effluent limits are required, the Departmentshall consider all information on file andeffluenttesting conductedduring thepreceding 60 months. However, testingdone in thepe1jormance of a ToxicityReduction Evaluation (IRE) approvedby the Departmentmay be excluded fi'om such evaluations. " WETEvaluation- The previous permitting action establish a C-NOEL limit of2.1% for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) as a statistical evaluation at that time indicated the discharge exceeded orhad a reasonable potential to exceed critical chronic WET threshold of2.1 %. The critical threshold is calculated as the mathematical inverse ofthe chronic dilution factor of47: I. For this permitting action, a statistical evaluation for the most current 60 months ofdata was conducted on 8/21/14 that indicates the discharge has two test results for the water flea (2.13% on 8/26/1:3 and 9/8/14) that have a reasonable potential to exceed the critical chronic water quality threshold of2.1 %. The evaluation indicates the test results for the brook trout during said period do not exceed or have a reasonable potential to exceeed critical acute or chronic thresholds. Therefore, pursuantto Chapter 530 §3, this permitting action carries forward the C-NOEL limit of2.1 %. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for test species that exceeed or have a reasonable potential to exceed critical acute or chronic tlu·esholds. The Department establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency ofthe tests ofconcern. Being that the one test ofconcern is the most recent test result submitted to the Department; this permitting action is establishing a default surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Yearfor the water flea. As for the brook trout, the MWD qualifies for the reduced testing frequency provision found at Chapter 530 §2(D)(3) that states "Dischargers in LevelIImayreduce surveillance testing to one WETor specific chemicalseries every otheryearprovided that testing in thepreceding60 months does not indicate any reasonablepotential for exceedence as calculated pursuant to section 3(E). "Therefore, this permitting action establishes a monitoring frequency of 1/2 Years for the brook trout beginningupon issuance ofthe permit.MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 17 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Chapter 530(2)(D)( 4) states; (4)Alldischargers having waivedor reducedtestingmust file statements with the Department on orbefore December 31 of eachyeardescribing thefollowing. (a) Changes in the number or types of non-domestic wastes contributed directly or indirectly to the wastewater treatmentworks that may increase the toxicity of the discharge; (b)Changes in the operation of the treatmentworks thatmay increase the toxicity of the discharge; and (c) Changes in industrialmamifacturingprocesses contributingwastewater to the treatmentworks thatmay increase the toxicity of the discharge. Given the MWD qualifies for the reduced testing frequency provision for the brook trout found at Chapter 530 §2(D)(3), Special Condition 

### J ofthis permit requires the permittee to file said statement. Therefore, beginning upon issuance ofthis permit and lasting thl·ough 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years I, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 

### 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum frequency ofonceper year (1/Year) on the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and once every otheryear (1/2 Years) on the brooktrout (Salvelinusfontinalis). Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by apermitrenewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall revert to a default screening level of2/Yem· WET testing in the Chapter 530 rule for both the water flea and brook trout. Analytical chemistty and priority pollutant testing- Chapter 530 §4(C), states "The backgroundconcentration of specific chemicals must be included in all calculations usingthefollowingprocedures. The Departmentmaypublish andperiodically update a list of default backgroundconcentrations for specificpollutants on a regional, watershedorstatewide basis. In doingso, the Departmentshall use data collectedji·om reference sites thatare measuredatpointsnotsignificantlyaffectedbypointandnonpointdischarges andbest calculatedto accuratelyrepresent ambientwater quality conditions The Departmentshall use the same general methods as those in section 4(D) to determine backgroundconcentrations. Forpollutants no/listedby the Department, an assumedconcentration of 10% of the applicable water qualitycriteria mustbe used in calculations. " The Departmenthas limited information on the background levels of metals in the water column in the Piscataquis River in the vicinity ofthepermittee's outfall. Therefore, a default background concentration of 10% ofthe applicable water ·qualitycriteria is being used in the calculations ofthispermitting action.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 18 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Chapter530 §(3)(E) states "

... 

### thata discharge containspollutants or WETat levels that have a reasonablepotential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-basedlimits mustbe establishedin any licensing 

### action., Chapter 530 §4(F) states in patt 

### "Where there is more than one discharge into the same fresh or estuarine receiving water orwatershed, the Departmentshall consider the cumulative effects of those discharges when determining the need for andestablishment of the level of effluent limits. The Departmentshall calculate the total allowable discharge quantity for specificpollutants, less the water quality reserve andbackground concentration, necessary to achieve or maintain water quality criteria at allpoints of discharge, and in the entire watershed The total allowable discharge quantity for pollutants must be allocatedconsistentwith thefollowingprinciples. Evaluations must be done for individual pollutants ofconcern in each watershed or segment to assure that water quality criteria are met at allpoints in the watershed and, 

## if

appropriate, within tributaries of a larger river. The total assimilative capacity, less the water quality reserve and background concentration, may be allocated among the discharges according to thepast discharge quantitiesfor each as a percentage ofthe total quantity ofdischarges, or another comparable method appropriatefor a specific situation andpollutant. Past discharges of pollutants must be determined using the average concentration discharged during the past jiveyears andthefacility's licensed flow. The amount ofallowable discharge quantity may be no more than the past discharge quantity calculated using the statistical approach referred to in section 3(E) [Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 ofUSEPA's "Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics. Control"] ofthe rule, but in no event may allocations cause the water quality reserve amount to fall below the minimum referred to in 4(E) [15% ofthe total assimilative capacity}. Any difference between the total allowable discharge quantity andthat allocatedto existingdischargers must be addedto the reserve. The Piscataquis River is a tributaryto the Penobscot River. Three municipal waste water treatment facilities that are subject to the Department's Chapter 530 testing requirements discharge to the Piscataquis River. The waste water treatment facilities are the Milo Water District, the Town ofDover-Foxcroft and the Guilford-Sangerville Sanitary District. The Milo Water District facility is the most downstream facility and the Guilford Sangerville facility is the most upstream facility. As previously cited, Chapter 530 requires thatAWQC must be met at the confluence ofthe Piscataquis River and the Penobscot River as well as at the individual discharge points on the Piscataquis River after taking into consideration historic discharge levels for all three facilities as well as an allocation dedicated to background (I0% ofAWQC) and a reserve (15% ofAWQC).ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 19of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS (cont'd) OnAugust 21, 2014, the Department conducted statistical evaluations based on 15% of the ambient water quality criteria reserve being withheld (Repott 10 706) and 0% ofthe reserve ofthe criteria being withheld (Report ID 705) to determine ifthe unallocated assimilative capacity would avoid an exceedance or avoid a reasonablepotential to exceed applicable ambientwater qualitycriteria for toxic pollutants. Report ID 705 indicates Dover-Foxcroftwould no longer has a reasonablepotential to exceed the chronic ambientwater quality criteria for lead. Therefore, the Department is utilizing the full 15% ofthe unallocated assimilative capacity in the statistical evaluationwhen establishing limits for toxicpollutants in waste discharge licenses for facilities in the Penobscot Riverwatershed including the Piscatquis Riverwatershed. The statistical evaluation (Report ID 705) indicates the MWD has four testresults that have a reasonable potential to exceed the AWQC for total copper and two test results that exceed the chronic AWQC for total copper. The 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates all three facilities have discharged detectable levels ofcopper; Department guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations (mass) can be found as Attachment E ofthis Fact Sheet. The guidance states that the mostprotective ofwater quality becomes the facility's allocation. According to the 8/21/14 statistical evaluation, copper is to be limited based onthe segment allocation method for chronic and the individual method for acute because the acute dilution factor is based on 

### Y. ofthe 1 Q I0. Chapter 530 §(3)(D)(1) states "For specific chemicals, effluent limits must be expressed in total quantity that maybe dischargedand in effluent concentration. In establishing concentration, the Departmentmay increase allowable values to reflectactual flows that are lower thanpermitted flows and/orprovide opportunities for flow reductions and pollutionpreventionprovidedwater quality criteria are notexceeded. With regardto concentration limits, the Departmentmayreviewpastand projected flows andset limits to reflectproper operation of the treatment facilities thatwillkeep the discharge of pollutants to the minimum levelpracticable."ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 20 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Segment allocation methodology Historical Average: Forthe segment allocation methodology, the historical average quantity (mass) for each pollutant ofconcern for each facility is calculated utilizing the arithmetic mean ofthe concentrated values reported for eachpollutant, a conversion factor of8.34 lbs/gallon and the monthly averagepermit limit for flow. For the Milo facility, the historical average for copper and has been calculated as follows: Copper Mean concentration= 18.4 ug!L or 0.0184 mg!L Permit flow limit= 0.39 MOD Historical average mass= (0.0184 ug/L)(8.34)(0.39 MOD)= 0.06lbs/day The statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass ofcopper discharged by Milo is 39.84% ofthe copper discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, Milo's segment allocation for copper is calculated as 39.84% ofthe chronic assimilative capacities ofthe river at Milo. The assimilative capacity at Milo is calculated as follows: 7Q10 = 27.7 cfs (0.6464) = 17.9 MOD Chronic AWQC = 2.36 ug/L or 0.00236 mg!L Taking into consideration 0% ofthe AWQC for reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Chronic= (0.00236 mg!L)(0.90)(8.34lbs/gal)(l7.9 MOD)= 0.317 lbs/day Monthly average (chronic) mass limitation for copper is calculated as follows: Monthly average: (Chronic assimilative capacity mass)(% oftotal ammonia discharged) (0.317 lbs/day)(0.3984) = 0.126 lbs/day or 0.13 lbs/day Individual allocation 

### In the individual allocation, the Department continites to utilize the formula it has used in permitting actions since October 2005 taking into consideration background (10% of AWQC) and a reserve (0% ofAWQC). The formula is as follows: EOP concentration= [Dilution factor x 0.90 x AWQC] 

### + [0.10 x AWQC] Mass limit= (EOP concentration in mg/L)(8.34lbs/gal)(Permit flow limit in MOD)MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 21 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Acute AWQC= 3.07 ug/L Acute dilution factor = 8.7:1 EOP concentration= [Dilution factorx 0.90 x AWQC] 

### + [O.IOxAWQC] EOP = [8.7 x 0.90 x 3.07 ug/L] 

### + [0.10 x 3.07 ug!L] = 24.3 ug!L Based on a permitted flow of0.39 MGD, EOP mass limits are as follows: Calculated EOP DailyMax. Parameter Concentrations Mass Limit Copper 24.3 ug!L 0.25 lbs/day Example Calculation: Copper- (24.3 ug/L)(8.34)(0.39 MGD) = 0.08 lbs/day 1,000 ug/mg The calculations above are correctin that the monthly average limitation is greater than the daily maximum limit. This will occur when the ratio between the acute and chronic AWQC is smallerthan the ratio between the acute (I Q I0) and chronic (7QI0) receiving water flows. In permitting actions prior to October 2009, the Department had apolicythat all toxic pollutants limited in permits be limited in both mass and concentration. Concentration limits established in permits and effluent guidelines are established as technology based limits (bestpracticable treatment) and notwater quality based limits. Water quality based limits are site specific or watershed specific. Beingthat the Department conducts statistical evaluations for toxic pollutants based on historic mass discharge levels given site specific orwatershed specific water quality concerns, establishing concentration limits by back-calculating from mass limits is deemed to be no longer appropriate. In May2012, Maine law 38 M.R.S.A. §464,**~~** K was enacted which reads as follows, "Unless otherwise requiredbyan applicable effluent limitation guideline adoptedby the department, any limitations for metals in a waste discharge license may be expressed only as mass-basedlimits." There are no applicable effluent limitation guidelines adopted by the Department orthe USEPA for metals from apublicly owned treatment works. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for parameters that exceed or have a reasonable potential to exceed AWQC. Monitoring frequencies are established on case by case basis given the timing, severity and frequency ofoccurrences ofthe exceedences or reasonable potential to exceed applicable critical water quality thresholds. Therefore, this permitting action is making a bestprofessionaljudgmentto establish the monitoring frequencies for the parameters ofconcern at the routine surveillance level frequency of2/Year specified in Chapter 530.MEOI00439 FACT SHEET Page 22 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) As for the remaining chemical specific parameters tested to date, none ofthe test results in the 60-month evaluation period exceed or have a reasonable potential to exceed

. applicable acute, chronic or human health AWQC. Therefore, this permitting action is

establishing a reduced surveillance level reporting and monitoring frequency for analytical chemistryof 1/2 Years for the first three years. and the fifth year ofthe term of the permit. As with reduced WET testing, the MWD must file an annual certification with the Departmentpursuant to Chapter 530 §2(D)(3) and Special Condition 

### J ofthis permit. It is noted Chapter 530 does not require surveillance level prioritypollutant testing during the first four years ofthe term ofthe permit. Beginning 12 months priorto the expiration date ofthe permit, the permittee shall conduct default screening level analytical chemistrytesting at l!Quatter and priority pollutant testing of 1/Year. k. Mercuty: Pursuant to Certain deposits anddischargesprohibited, Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A. § 420 and Waste discharge licenses, 38 M.R.S.A. § 413 and Interim Effluent Limitations and Controls for the Discharge ofMercury, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 200I), the Department issued a Notice ofinterim Limits for the Discharge of Mercuryto the permittee on May 25, 2000, thereby administrativelymodifying MEPDES #ME0100439/WDL # W002753-5L-C-R byestablishing interim monthly average and daily maximum effluent concentration limits of29.1 parts pertrillion (ppt) and 43.7 ppt, respectively, and a minimum monitoring frequency requirement offour (4) tests per year for mercury. On February 6, 2012, the Department issued a minor revision ofthe permit by reducing the monitoring frequency to 1/Y ear. Maine law 38 M.R.S.A., §420 1-B,(B)(l) states that a facility is not in violation ofthe AWQC for mercmy ifthe facility is in compliance with an interim discharge limit established bythe Departmentpursuant to section 413, subsection 11. A review ofthe Department's database for the previous 60-month period indicates mercury test results reported have ranged from 2.5 pptto 8.8 pptwith an arithmetic mean (n=18) of5.6 ppt. 7. DISCHARGE IMPACT ONRECEIVING WATER QUALITY The effluent limitations in this petmit are equal to or more stringent than the limits in the previous permit. The Depattment has made a bestprofessionaljudgment determination based on information gathered to date, that as permitted, the discharge will not cause or contribute the failure ofthe receiving water to meet the standards ofits ascribed classification and the designated uses ofthe river will continue to be maintained and protected. The Department is scheduled to perform a comprehensive evaluation ofmore recent data collected, calibrate an existingmodel ofthe river and prepare a TMDL for the 12-mile segment during 2015-2016. Iffuture modeling runs determine that at full permitted discharge limits, the discharge is causing or contributing to the non-attainment, this permit will be re-opened per Special Condition L, Reopeningof The License ForModifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meetwater quality standards.ME0100439 FACT SHEET Page 23 of23 W002753-6C-F-R 

### 8. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public notice ofthis application was made in the Eastern Gazette newspaper on July 24; 2014. The Depmtment receives public comments on an application until the date a final agency action is taken on that application. Those persons receiving copies ofdraft permits shall have at least 30 days in which to submit comments on the draft orto request a public hearing, pursuant to Chapter 522 ofthe Department's rules. 

### 9. DEPARTMENT CONTACTS Additional information concerning this permitting action may be obtained from and written comments should be sentto: Gregg Wood Division ofWater Quality Management Bureau ofLand and Water Quality Department ofEnvironmental Protection 17 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0017 Telephone: (207) 287-7693 E-mail: gregg.wood@maine.gov 

### 10. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS During the period ofJanuary 13, 2015, through the issuance date ofthepermit/license, the Department solicited comments on the proposed draft permit/license to be issued for the discharge(s) from the Milo facility. The Department did not receive comments from the permittee, state or federal agencies or interested parties that resulted in any substantive change(s) in the terms and conditions ofthe permit. Therefore, the Department has not prepared a Response to Comments.

# ATTACHMENT A



# I 

# l

r I I 

# I I 

# ! 

# I

I

# ATTACHMENTB



# , I I 

# I I 

# I I I I 

# I , 

# I I 

# I . I

i

## ~ ll)' 

## Lt<7oP ll 

### Lw;Pf"

## ~**~** 

## -:if?­**~** 

# #l "'**~'** 

## RerJ.**(a~)""'fl** 

# ecJ 

# "" "­ 

# " ) 

## .P:j



# C',,, tq,,

# r 

# e**ht~mbrr ~'J**  '.. ··· 

### ·.:..

# ATTACHMENT C 

# IMILO NPDES= ME010043 Effluent Umit: Acute (%) 

## = Species Test Percent Sample date TROUT A_NOEL 100 06/22/2011 TROUT A_NOEL 100 08/26/2013 TROUT C_NOEL 100 06/22/2011 TROUT C_NOEL 50 08/26/2013 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 11/02/2010 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 06/22/2011 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 01/05/2012 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 08/26/2013 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 09/08/2014 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 10 11/02/2010 WATER, FLEA C_NOEL 10 06/22/2011 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 100 01/05/2012 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 2.13 08/26/2013 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 2.13 09/08/2014 3.162 Chronic(%) 

## = 2.132 Critical 0 /o Exception RP 3.162 3.162 2.132 2.132 3.162 3.162 3.162 3.162 3.162 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 y 2.132 yf.



# ATTACHMENTD



# l

I 

# I r 1

r 

# L I I



# I kFacility Name: MILO NPDES: ME0100439 Monthly Daily Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN · P 0 A Clean Hg**_1.!-fQ~£~~~~**________**9"~~---- -~·.!-L**  

## _ _______**~~** 

## ________.!-!1

_

__

## g ___g ___!l

___**!~-- -~------** **-~--** 

## ---__

## g-­ Monthly Dally Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**_g~m£~~~1-** 

### ________**_g"~L-** 

### __ O.·J.'?

_______**---~~-** _______

### _19

___Q

___

### L _ 9

___!9**---~** 

### _______ ------

## _g__ Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**9_8{~~£~~~~-----** 

## ---!J"**!~---- -~·.!-~-**  

## --________?

__________

## !--_g---**~---** 

### !;l

____l

____ 

## o___-----**~----** 

## ___Q

__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**Q_1{Q~£~o_~~-** _______ 

### !J"!L

___0.·.!-'?

__________**!~-** 

## ________ 1_0

___

### g
___g
___

## o ____9

____ 

## o_______J

_______g
__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**9!{!~£~0.~~-** 

## _______**!J"~~-** 

## ____ 

## o_.g__________?-

__________!

___Q

___Q

___ !;!

____1

____ 

### o________F

_______ Q

__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**9'?L~ii@~~**

### _________

### 9"!L

___ 

## o_.1o

__________

## .!-

__________o_

___Q

___Q

___

### 9

____

## 1

____ o________**~----** 

## ___ 9

__ Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V· BN P o· A Clean Hg**9~m£~~1_3_** 

## ________**!1"~!:1-** 

### ____**o_.~~-** 

## __________2

__________

### !

___

## g ___g ___

## g ___**_1----~------- ~------**  

## _g__ Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**!1_8[_2(;£2.0.~~--------** 

### !J"?Q"---**_o_._?~----------~!** 

## ___-----_1_0_--g
___g
___ 

## 0

____!.!

___ 

## o_--- ---**-~** 

## ------

## _g_­ Monthly Dally Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 02/04/2014 0.17 0.15 11 10 0 0 0 1 0 F 0**------------------------------------------------------------------------~-----------------** Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD} Number M V BN P o A Clean Hg**!l~m£~0.1_'!** 

## ________9"!L

___ 

## o_._!._s

__________**~!** 

## _________19

___

## g ___g ___

## 9_

__ !!

___ 

## o________**~--** 

## _____g __ Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg**9'?LQ~£2_D_1_4_**________**O"Q~** _____ Q.Q'?

_________

## .?0.

_________!:)

___

### g
___g
___

### 9_

__ !!

___ 

## o_______ _______Q

__

## ----------------------------------------------- Facility name: MILO Permit Number: ME0100439 Parameter; COPPER Test date Result (ug/1) Lsthan 11/02/2010 11.000 N 06/22/2011 14.000 N 08/24/2011 13.000 N 01/05/2012 25.000 N 07/18/2012 23.300 N 06/12/2013 19.800 N 08/26/2013 12.700 N 02/04/2014 40.500 N 06/23/2014 . 16.400 N 09/08/2014 20.000 N

# I f



# ATTACHMENT E



# I

L 

# " 

# I

### MAINE DEPARIMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MEMORANDUM DATE: October2008 · TO: Interested Parties FROM: Dennis Merrill, DEP SUBJECT: DEP's systemfor evaluating toxicity from multiple discharges 

## ***************************************************************¥************** Following the requirements ofDEP'srules, Chapter**5~0,** 

### section 4(F), the Department is evaluating discharges oftoxicpollutants into a freshwater river system in orderto prevent cmnulative impacts from multiple discharges. This is being through the use ofa computer programknown internally as "DeTox". The enclosed package ofinfoooation is intended to introduce you to this system. Briefly, the DeTox program evaluates each wastewaterfacility within awatershed in three different ways in orderto characterizeits effluent: 1) the facility's pasthistory ofdischarges, 2) itspotential toxicity at thepoint ofdischarge on an individual basis, and 3) the facility's contribution to cumulative toxicity within ariver segmentin conjunction with otherfacilities. The value thatis mostprotective ofwaterquality becomes the value that is held in the DeTox system as an allocation for the specific facility and pollutant. The system is not static and uses afive-year "rolling" data window. This means that, overtirrie, .oldtest results drop offand newer ones are added. The intent ofthis process is to maintain current, imiform facility data to estimate contributions to ariver's total allowable pollutant loading priorto eachpermitrenewal.

·Many facilities are required to do only arelatively small amount ofpollutanttesting on their

· effluent. This means, statistically, the fewer tests done, the greaterthepossibility ofeffluent

limits being necessary based on the facility's small amount ofdata. To avoid this situation, most facilities, especially those with low dilution factors, should considerconducting more than the minimum number oftests required by the rules. Attached you will find three doctunents with**additi~nal** 

### information on the DeTox system:

• Methods for evaluating the effects ofmultiple discharges oftoxic pollutants • Working definitions ofterms used in the DeTox system • ReviewingDeTox Reports

. • Prototype facility and pollutantreports Ifyou have questions as you reviewthese, please do nothesitate to contact me at Dennis.L.Merrill@maine.gov or 287-7788. 

# I

### MaineDepartment ofEnvironmental Protection Methods for evaluating the effects ofmultiple discharges oftoxic pollutants. Reference: DEP-Rules, Chapter 530, section4(F) To evaluate discharges oftoxic pollutants into a freshwater river system and prevent cumulative impacts from multiple discharges, DEP uses a computerprogram called "DeTox thatfunctions as a mathematical evaluation tool. Itusesphysical infonnation about discharge sources and river conditions

# on file with the Department, established water quality criteria and reported effluent testinformation to perform · these evaluations. Each toxic pollutantand associated water quality criterion for acute, chronic and/orhuman health effects is evaluated separately. Each facility in ariver drainage areahas an assigned position code. This "address" is used to locate the facility on the river segment and in relation to other facilities and tributary streams. All calculations areperformed inpotmds per day to allow analysis on amass balance. Pollutants are considered to be conservative in that once inthe receiving waterthey 

### will not easily degrade and have the potential to accumulate. The process begins with establishing an assimilative capacity for e_achpollutant and water quality criterion at the most downstreampoint in the river segment. This calculation includes set-aside amounts for background and reserve quantities and assumed values for receiving water. pH, temperature and hardness. The resulting amount ofassimilative capacity is available for allocation among facilities on the river. Each facility is evaluated to characterize its past discharge quantities. The historical discharge, inpounds perday, is figured usingthe average reported concentration and thefacility's · permitted flow. As has beenpastpractice, areasonable potential (RP) 

### factor is used as a tool to estimate the largest discharge that may occurwith a certain degree ofstatistical certainty. The RP factor is multiplied by the historical average to determine an allocation based onpast discharges. The RP factor is ruso multiplied by the singlehighesttest to obtain amaximum day estimate. Finally, the direct average without RP adjustmentis used to determine the facility's percent contribution to theriver segment in comparison tothe sum ofall discharges ofthe · pollutant. This percentmultipliedby the total assimilative capacitybecomes the facility's -I discharge allocation used in evaluations ofthe segment loadings. Additionally, individual facility discharges are evaluated as single sources, as they have been in 

# I the pastto determine iflocal conditions are more limiting than a segment evaluation. 

# I

### With all ofthis information, facilities are evaluated in three ways. The methods are: 1, The facility's past history. This is the average quantity discharged duringthe past five · years multiplied by the applicable RP factor. This method is often the basis for im



### · allocation when the discharge quantity is relatively small in comparison to the water

quality based allocation. 2. An 

### individual evaluation. This assumes no other discharge sources arepresent and the allowable quantityis the total available assimilative capacity. This method may be used when'alocal condition such as river flow atthe point ofdischarge is the limiting factor. 3. A segment wide evaluation. This involves allocating the available assimilative capacity within ariver segment based on afacility's percent**oftot~l** 

### pastdischarges. This method would be used when niultiple discharges ofthe same pollutant to the same segment and the available assimilative capacity is relatively limited. The value thatis mostprotective ofwater quality becomes the facility's allocation that is held in the system for the specific facility and pollutant. It

### is importantto note thatthe method used for·

· allocation is facility and pollutant specific and different facilities on the same segtnent for the

same pollutant can have.differentmethods used depending on their individual situations. Discharge amounts are always allocated to all facilities having ahistory ofdischarging a particularpollutant. This does not mean that effluent limits will be established in apermit.

. Limits are only needed whenpast discharge amounts suggest areasonable potential to exceed a waterquality based allocation, either on an individual or segment basis. Similarto pastpractices for single discharge evaluations, the single highesttest value is multipliedbya

### Ri' factor and if product is greater than the water quality allowance, an effluentlimit is established. It

### is importantto remember an allocation is "banking" some assimilative capacity for afacility even if effluent litnits are not needed. · Evaluations are also done for each tributary segmentwith the sum ofdischarge quantities in tributaries becoming a "point source" to the next most significant segment. In cases where a facility does notuse all ofits assimilative capacity, usually due to amore limiting individual water quali.ty criterion, the unused quantity is rolled do\vnstream and made available to other facilities. The systemis not static and uses afive-year rolling data window. Overtime, old tests drop off and newer ones are added on. These changes cause the allocations and the need for effluent limits to shift overtime to remain current with presentconditions. The intent is to update a facility's data and relative contribution to ariver's total assimilative capacity priorto eachpermit renewal. Many facilities are required to do only minimal testing to characterizetheir effluents. This creates a greaterdegree ofstatistical uncertainty aboutthe true long-term quantities. Accordingly, with fewer tests the RP factor will be larger and result ina greaterpossibility of effluent limits being necessary. To avoid this situation, most facilities, especially those with relatively low dilution factors, are encouraged to conductmore that aminimuninumber oftests. lt

### is generally to afacility's long-term benefit to have more tests on file since theirRP factor will be reduced

..

### Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection Working Defmitions ofTennsUsed inthe DeTox System.



### Allocation. The amount ofpollutantloading set aside for afacility. Separate amounts are set for each

### waterquality criterion. Each pollutanthaving ahistory ofbeing dischargedwill receive an allocation, but not all allocations become 

### effluentlimits. Allocation may be made in three ways: 

### historicalallocation, Individual allocation or

### segmentallocation. Assimilative capacity. The amount of

# a pollutant thatriver segment can safely accept from point source discharges. It is determined for the most downstreampoint in ariversegmentusing the

. 

### water quality criterion and riverflow. Separate capacities are setfor acute, chronic and human health criteria as applicable for eachpollutant. Calculation ofthis capacity includes factors for 

### reserve and 

### backgroundamom;tts. 

### Background. Aconcentration ofa pollutant that is assumed to bepresentin areceiving water butnot attributable to discharges. By rule, this is set as arebuttable presumption at 10% ofthe applicable 

### water quality criterion. Effluent limit. Anumeric limit in a discharge penni! specificallyrestricting the amount ofa pollutantthat may be discharged. An effluent limitis setonly when the highest discharge, including an adjustment for 

### reasonablepotential, is greaterthan afacility's water quality based 

### allocation for apollutant. 

### Historical allocation (or 

### RP history). One ofthree ways ofdeveloping an 

### allocation. The facility's averagehistory ofdischarges, in pounds at design flow, is Ii::mltiplied bythe appropriate 

### reasonablepotentialfactor. An

### allocation using this method does not become an 

### effluentlimit. Historicaldischargepercentage. Foreachpollutant, the average discharge concentration for each facility in asegmentis multiplied by the permittedflow (withoutincluding a

### reasonable potentialfactor). The amounts for all facilities are added together and apercent ofthe total is figured for eachfacility. When afacility has no detectable concentrations, thatpollutant is assmned to be notpresent and itreceives no percentage. 

### Individual allocation. One ofthree ways ofdeveloping an 

### allocation. The facility's single · highest discharge onrecordmultiplied by the appropriate 

### reasonablepotentialfactor is comparedto awater qualitybased quantity with an assumptionthatthe facility is the only point source to thatreceiving water. Ifthe RP-adjusted arnotmtis larger, the waterquality amount

·may become an 

### effluentlimit. · Less than. A qualification on a laboratory reportindicating the concentration ofapollutantwas below a certain concentration, Such aresult is evaluated as being one halfoftheDepartment's reporting limit in most calculations.

### Reasonablepotential (RP). A statistical method to determine the highest amount ofapollutant likelyto**b~** 

### present at any time based on the available testresults. The method produces avalue orRP factorthatis multiplied by test results. The method relies on an EPA guidance document, and considers the coefficient ofvariation and the number oftests. Generally, the fewer number oftests, 1hehigher the RP factor. · 

### Reserve. An

### assumed concentration ofapollutantthat set aside to**a~count** 

### for non-point source ofapollutant and to allow new discharges ofapollutant. By rule this is set at 15% ofthe applicable 

### water quality criterion. Segmentallocation. One ofthree ways ofdeveloping an 

### allocation. The amount is setby multiplying a facility's 

### historicaldischargepercentagefor a specific pollutant bythe 

### assimilative capacity for 1hatpollutant and criterion. A 

### facility will have different allocation percentages for eachpollutant. This ·amotmt may become an 

### effluent limit. Tributary. A stream flowing into alarger one. A total pollutant lo11d is set by adding the all facilities 

### allocations on 1hetributary and treating this totaled amount as a "point source" to the next larger segment. 

### Water quality criteria. Standards for acceptable in-stream or ambientlevels ofpollutants. These are establishedin the Department's Chapter 584 and are expressed as concentrations in ug/L. There may be separate standards for acute and chronic protection aquatic life and/orhuman health. Each criterion becomes aseparate standard. Different streamflows are used in the calculation ofeach.i 

### Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"

I. Pre arntion 

### Select Watershed 

# l Select values for pH, Temp, hardness, Background 

### %, Reserve % 

### Algorithms for some po_llutants Waterquality tables Calculate water quality criteria: Acute, Chronic, Health

II. SegmentAssimilative Capacity 

### Get facility information: location, stream flows 

# !

. IdentifY lowermostfacility 

# ! Get stream flows for Acute, Chronic, Health (1Q1

### 0, 7Q10, HM)

. Calculate segrilent capaciJbypollutant and criterion: Stream flow x critetonx 

### 8.34 =pounds

Set aside Reserve and Background: Segment capacity x**(I~ background~**  

### reserve)= 

### SegmentAssimilative Capacity

Save SegmentAssimilative Capacities bypollutant and critedon 

# I Page 1 

# I IMaine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"

III. EvaluateHistorybyPollutant Select each facility effluent data for each facility Datainput and edits 

# 1
Identify "less than" results and assign at Y, ofreporting limit

.

# ~ Bypasspollutants ifall results are "less than"

. Av{lrage concentratioj and calculatepounds: Ave concentration x license flow x 8.34 

### =HistoricalAverage

DeterminereasonablepoJntial (RP) using algorithm 

# J Calculate RP adjustedpounds: Historical Ayerage x 

### R1' factor=

### RPHistoricalAllocation 

# l Savefor comparative evaluation

Calculate adjuste)maximumpounds: Highest concentration x RP factorx licenseflow x 8.34 =

### RPMaximum Value

IV. Determine Facility HistoryPercentage Bypollutant, identify facilitieS with

### HistoricalAverage 

# J Sum all Historical Averages within segment 

# ! . . Byfacility, calculatepercent oftotal: Facilitypounds 

### ITotal pounds=

### FacilityHistory%

Page2 

# I 

# II IMaine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps in "D.eTox" V. SegmentAllocation Bypollutant and criterion, selectSegmentAssimilative Capacity

# ~ Select individual FacilityHistory%

# ~ Determine facility allocation: Assimilative Capacity x Facility**History%~** SegmentAllocation

# ~ Save for comparative evaluation

VI. IndividualAllocation Select individual facility and dilution factor (DF)

# ~ Selectpollutant and waterquality criterion

# ~ Bypollutantand criterion, calculateindividual allocations: [DF x 0.75 x criterion]+ [0.25 x criterion]=Individual Concentration

# ~ Determine individual allocation: Individual Concentration 

### x license flow x 8.34**~Individual** Allocation

# ~ Save for comparative evaluation

VII; MakeinitialAllocation Byfacility, pollutantand criterion, get: IndividualAllocation, SegmentAllocation, RPHistoricalAllocation

# ~ Compare allocation and selectthe smallest 

## ) Save as FacittyAllocation

### Maine Department ofEnvirorunental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"

VIII. Evaluate Need for

### Effluent Limits Byfacility, pollutant and criterion select SegmentAllocation,IndividualAllocation andRPMaximum value 

# l

. IfRPMaximum value is greater than eitherSegmentAllocation orIndividualAllocation, use lesservalue as EffluentLimit 

# l

. Save EffluentLimit for comparison

IX. Reallocation ofAssimilative Capacity 

### Starting at top ofsegment, get SegmentAllocation, FacilityAllocation and EffluentLimit 

# ! IfSegmentAllocation equals EffluentLimit, move to next facility downstream 

# ! Ifnot, subtractFacilityAllocation from SegmentAllocation 

# ! Save difference

Selectnext facJity downstream 

# ! Figure remaining SegmentAssimilative Capacity at and below facility, less tributaries 

# ! Add saved difference to get an adjusted SegmentAssimilative Capacity 

# l ReallocateSegmentAssimilative Capacitj among downstream facilities per step V 

# l

. Repeat process for each facility downstream in turn )



### Page4

# ATTACHMENT F 

# I**~** r

# ~ . 

# r i I 

# I 

# r I

! . 

### !



# I 

# lSTATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

### CHAPTER 530.2(D)(4) CERTIFICATION

PAUL R. LEPAGE PATRICIA W.AHO 

### GOVERNOR Commissioner MEPDES#

_____FacilityName.

______________ Since the effective date ofyourpermit, have there been; NO 

### YES Describe in comments section 1 

### Increases in the number, types, and flows ofindustrial, commercial, or domestic discharges to the facility that in the judgment ofthe Departmentmay cause the receiving waterto become toxic? 

### 0 0

2 Changes in the condition or operations ofthe facility that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge? 

### 0 0 3 Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge? 

### 0 0
4 Increases in the type or volume ofhauled wastes accepted by the facility? 

### 0 0
COMMENTS:

Name (printed):**--------------~-------** 

### Signature:

__________________ Date:

_______ This document must be signed by the permittee or their legal representative. 

### This form may be used to meet the requirements ofChapter 530.2(0)(4). This Chapterrequires all dischargers having waived or reduced toxic testing to file a statementwith the Department describing changes to the waste being contributed to their system as outlined above. As an alternative, the discharger may submit a signed letter containing the same information. Scheduled Toxicity Testing for the next calendaryear 

### Test Conducted 1" Quarter· 2"" Quarter 3'" Quarter 4'" Quarter WET Testing D D D D 

### PriorityPollutant Testing D· D D D 

### Analytical Chemistty D D D D 

### Other toxic parameters 1 D D D D Pleaseplace an "X" in each of the boxes that apply to whenyouwill be conductingany one of the three test types during the next calendaryear. 1 

### This only applies to parameters where testing is required at arate less frequently than quatierly.

AUGUSTA 17 STATE HOUSE STATION BANGOR PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 106 HOGAN ROAD, SUITE 6 312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SKYWAY PARK {207) 287-7688 FAX: (207) 287-7826 BANGOR, MAINE 04401 PORTLAND, MAINE 04103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04769-2094 RAY BLDG., HOSPITAL ST. (207) 941-4570 FAX: (207) 941-4584 (207) 822-6300 FAX: {207) 822-6303 (207) 764-0477 FAX: (207)760-3143 web site: www.maine.gov/dep