STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

PAUL R LEPAGE AVERY T. DAY GOVERNOR ACTING COMMISSIONER 

### September 11, 2015 Mr. Frank Ruksznis Superintendent Guilford-Sangerville Sanitary District P.O. Box 370 Guilford, Maine 04443 e-mail: fprgssd@myfairpoint.net RE: Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) Application #W006792-6C-K-R Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) Permit #ME0102032 Final Permit Dear Mr. Ruksznis: Enclosed please find a copy of your final MEPDES permit and Maine WDL renewal which was approved by the Department of Environmental Protection. Please read this permit/license renewal and its attached conditions carefully. You must follow the conditions in the order to satisfy the requirements of law. Any discharge not receiving adequate treatment is in violation 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 Licensing Decision." If you have any questions regarding the matter, please feel free to call me at 287-7693. Sincerely,

Gregg Wood Division of Water Quality Management Bureau of Water Quality Enc. cc: Clarissa Trasko, DEP/EMRO Lori Mitchell, DEP/CMRO Sandy Mojica, USEPA Marelyn Vega, USEPA Olga Vergara, USEPA

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

PAUL R. LEPAGE AVERYT. DAY

GOVERNOR ACTING COMMISSIONER 

### September 11, 2015 Mr. Frank Ruksznis Superintendent Guilford-Sangerville Sanitary District P.O. Box 370 Guilford, Maine 04443 e-mail: fprgssd@myfairpoint.net RE: Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) Application #W006792-6C-K-R Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) Permit #ME0102032 FinalPermit Dear Mr. Ruksznis: Enclosed please 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 in the 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 detetmination made pursuantto applicable regulations, may appeal the decision following the procedures described in the attached DEP FACT SHEET entitled "Appealing a Commissioner'sLicensingDecision." Ifyou have any questions regarding the matter, please feel free to call me at 287-7693. Sincerely,

# ~-~ '--' 

### Gregg Wood Division ofWater Quality Management Bureau ofWater Quality En

### c. cc: Clarissa Trasko, DEP/EMRO Lori Mitchell, DEP/CMRO Sandy Mojica, USEPA Marelyn Vega, USEPA Olga Vergara, USEPA

AUGUSTA BANGOR PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE 17 STATE HOUSE STATION 106 HOGAN ROAD, SUITE 6 312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SKYWAY PARK AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 BAL'IGOR, MAINE 04401 PORTl-AND, .MAINE 04103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04769 (207) 287-7688 FAX: (207) 287-7826 {207) 941-4570 FAX: (207) 941-4584 (207) 822-6300 FAX: (207) 822-6303 (207) 764-0477 FAX: (207) 760-3143 website: www.maine.goy/Jep

### STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

17 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, ME 04333 DEPARTMENT ORDER IN THE MATTER OF GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT GUILFORD, PISCATAQUIS COUNTY, MAINE PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS ME0102032 W006792-6C-K-R APPROVAL ) MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ) ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT

AND ) WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE

RENEWAL Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Title 33 USC, Section 1251, etc. seq. and Maine Law 38 M.R.S.A., Section 414-A et seq., and applicable regulations, the-Department of Environmental Protection (the Department hereinafter) has considered the application of the GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT (GSSDipermittee hereinafter), with its supportive data, agency review comments, and other related materials on file and FINDS THE FOLLOWING FACTS: APPLICATION SUMMARY The GSSD has filed a timely and complete application with the Department for the renewal of combination Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #ME0102032/Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W006792-6C-H-R {permit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department on on June 11, 2010, for a five-year term. The 6/11/10 permit authorized the discharge of up to a monthly average flow of 0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) of secondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine. PERMIT SUMMARY This permitting action is carving forward all the terms and conditions of the 6/11/10 permit except that this permit; Eliminating water quality based concentration limits for ammonia and total copper pursuant to Maine law 38 M.R.S.A. §464, ¶¶ K, 2, Reducing the monthly average mass limit for ammonia and increasing the daily maximum mass limit for total copper based on a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department and taking into consideration guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations when there are multiple dischargers in a watershed. 3. Eliminating monthly average and daily maximum mass and concentration limitations for total cadmium and total lead and the monthly average mass and concentration limits for total copper as a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department indicates there is no longer a reasonable potential for these parameters to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria (AWQC). STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 17 STATEHOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, ME 04333 DEPARTMENT ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF 

### GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE ) MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE SANITARY DISTRICT ) ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT GUILFORD, PISCATAQUIS COUNTY, MAINE ) AND PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS ) WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE ME0102032 ) 

### W006792-6C-K-R APPROVAL ) RENEWAL 

### Pursuant to the provisions ofthe Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Title 33 USC, Section 1251, etc. seq. 

### and Maine Law 38 M.R.S.A., Section 414-A etseq., 

### and applicable regulations, the·Depat1ment of Environmental Protection (the Depattment hereinafter) has considered the application ofthe GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT (GSSD/permittee hereinafter), with its supp011ive data, agency review comments, and other related materials on file and FINDS THE FOLLOWING FACTS: APPLICATION SUMMARY 

### The GSSD has filed a timely and complete application with the Depattment for the renewal ofcombination Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #ME0102032/Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W006792-6C-H-R (petmit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department on on June II, 2010, for a five-year term. The 6/11/10 permit authorized the discharge ofup to a monthly average flow of0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine.
PERMIT SUMMARY 

### This petmitting action is carrying f01ward all the terms and conditions ofthe 6/11/10 permit except that this permit; 1. Eliminating water quality based concentration limits for ammonia and total copper pursuant to Maine law 38 M.R.S.A. §464,**~~** 

### K. 2. Reducing the monthly average mass limit for ammonia and increasing the daily maximum mass limit for total copper based on a statistical evaluation ofthe most current 60 months ofanalytical chemistty and priority pollutants on file at the Department and taking into consideration guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations when there are multiple dischargers in a watershed. 3. Eliminating monthly average and daily maximum mass and concentration limitations for total cadmium and total lead and the monthly average mass and concentration limits for total copper as a statistical evaluation ofthe most current 60 months ofanalytical chemistry and prioritypollutants on file at the Department indicates there is no longer a reasonable potential for these parameters to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria (AWQC).ME0102032 PERMIT Page 2 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 4. Establishing a monitoring requirement for total phosphorus as the discharge from the permittee's facility has a reasonable potential to exceed the Department's draft ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) of 30 ug/L. 5. Establishing a monthly average mass limit for total antimony as a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department indicates there are test results for total antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria AWQC.
6. Reducing the monitoring requirements for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), chemical oxygen demand (COD), settleable solids and E. coil bacteria from 2/Week to 1/Week and pH from 3/Week to 2/Week for Tier IA (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD) as a result of a statistical evaluation of test results for said parameters during the term of the previous permit. CONCLUSIONS BASED on the findings in the attached Fact Sheet dated July 10, 2015, and subject to the Conditions listed below, the Department makes the following CONCLUSIONS: 1. The discharge, either by itself or in combination with other discharges, will not lower the quality of any classified body of water below such classification. 2. The discharge, either by itself or in combination with other discharges, will not lower the quality of any unclassified body of water below the classification which the Department expects to adopt in accordance with state law. 3. The provisions of the State's antidegradation policy, 38 MRSA Section 464(4)(F), will be met, in that:

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

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

e. Where a discharge will result in lowering the existing quality of any 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 discharge will be subject to effluent limitations that require application of best practicable treatment.

ME0102032 PERMIT Page 2 of27 W006792-6C-K-R PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 4. Establishing a monitoring requirement for total phosphorus as the discharge from the permittee's facility has a reasonable potential to exceed the Department's draft ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) of 30 ug/L. 5. Establishing a monthly average mass limit for total antimony as a statistical evaluation ofthe most current 60 months ofanalytical chemistry and prioritypollutants on file at the Department indicates there are test results for total antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria AWQC.
6. Reducing the monitoring requirements for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), chemical oxygen demand (COD), settleable solids and E. 

### coli bacteria from 2/Week to 1/Week and pH from 3/Week to 2/Week for Tier IA (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are :S0.465 MGD) as a result ofa statistical evaluation oftest results for said parameters during the term ofthe previous permit. CONCLUSIONS BASED on the findings in the attached Fact Sheet dated July 10,2015, and subject to the Conditions listed below, the Department makes the following CONCLUSIONS: 1. The discharge, either by itselfor in combination with other discharges, will not lower the quality ofany classified body ofwater below such classification. 2. The discharge, either by itselfor in combination with other discharges, will not lower the quality ofany unclassified body ofwater belowthe classification which the Depatiment expects to adopt in accordance with state law. 3. The provisions 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 outstanding natural resource, that water quality will 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 Depatiment has made the finding, following opportunity for public patiicipation, that this action is necessary to achieve impmiant economic or social benefits to the State. 4. The discharge will be subjectto effluent limitations that require application ofbest practicable treatment.

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 3 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R ACTION THEREFORE, the Department APPROVES the application of the GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT, to discharge up to a monthly average flow of 0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) of secondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine. The discharges shall be subject to the attached conditions and all applicable standards and regulations: 1. "Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Standard Conditions Applicable 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 of signature below and expires at midnight five (5) years after that date. If a renewal application is timely submitted and accepted as complete for processing prior to the expiration of this permit, the terms and conditions of this permit and all subsequent modifications and minor revisions thereto remain in effect until a final Department decision on the renewal application becomes effective. [Maine Administrative Procedure Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 10002 and Rules Concerning the Processing of Applications and Other Administrative Matters, 06-096 CMR 2(21)(A) (effective April 1, 2003)]. DONE AND DATED AT AUGUSTA, MAINE, THIS AY OF COMMISSIONER OF ENVI ONMENTAL PROTECTION BY: Avery T\ Day, Acting Commissioner

PLEASE NOTE ATTACHED SHEET FOR GUIDANCE ON APPEAL PROCEDURES Date of initial receipt of application February 9, 2015 Date of application acceptance February 10, 2015


# Filed SEP 1 4 2015
State of Maine Board of Environmental Protection 

### Date filed with Board of Environmental Protection This Order prepared by GREGG WOOD, BUREAU WATER QUALITY ME0102032 2015 9/9/15

ME0102032 PERMIT Page 3 of27 W006792-6C-K-R ACTION THEREFORE, the Department APPROVES the application ofthe GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT, to discharge up to a monthly average flow of0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine. The discharges shall be subject to the attached conditions and all applicable standards and regulations: 

### I. "Maine PollutantDischarge Elimination System PermitStandard ConditionsApplicable To AllPermits," revised July I, 2002, copy attached. 2. The attached Special Conditions, including any effluent limitations and monitoring requirements. 3. This permitbecomes effective upon the date ofsignature below and expires at midnight five (5) years 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 onthe renewal application becomes effective. 

### [Maine AdministrativeProcedureAct, 5 M.R.S.A. 

### § 10002 and 

### Rules Concerning the Processing of Applications andOtherAdministrativeMatters, 06-096 CMR2(21)(A) (effective April1, 2003)]. DONE AND DATED AT AUGUSTA, MAINE, THIS _tbAY OF

# ~~ '2015.

PLEASE NOTE ATTACHED SHEET FOR GUIDANCE ON APPEAL PROCEDURES
Date ofinitial receipt ofapplication------'-F-"e,br"'u"'a"-'ryL9"-','-'2"-'0'-'1-"5

_____ Date ofapplication acceptance

________,F"'e"'b"'ru"'a"'ty;:.,-=-1"'0,'-'2"'0'"1'""5'--------'


# Filed SEP 1 4 2015

State of Maine Board of Environm!'nlal Protection 

### Date filed with Board ofEnvironmental Protection

___________ This Order prepared by GREGG WOOD, BUREAU WATER QUALITY ME0102032 2015 9/9/15ME0102032 PERMIT Page 4 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 1. The permittee is authorized to discharge treated waste waters via OUTFALL #001 to the Piscataquis River. Such treated waste water discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below.

## TIER #1A -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows (flow in a sewerage system that occurs as a result of non-storm events or are caused solely by ound water infiltration) are <0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type Flow 150050] 0.465 MGD/031 -- Report MGD[03] — -- -- Continuous 190/99i Recorder 112Cf Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) 1003161 258 lbs/Day 1 ,6] -- 478 lbs/Day 1261 66 mg/L 1157 --- 123 mg/L 119

.1 1/Week /01/07

. / Composite [24/
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) [005301 441 lbs/Day [251 -- 845 lbsiDaypo y 1 14 ingil,

/iv --- 218 mg/L [19] 1/Week [01/07] Composite 1'41 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) /Row 1,817 lbs/Day [261 — 4,394 lbs/Day [261 468 mg/L /iv --- 1,133 mg/L 1191 1/Week 101/07.1 Composite /24 j

E. coli Bacteria (1)/3/633/ ___ --- — 64/100 m1(2) [151 --- 427/100 ml 1131 1/Week [01,

07 j Grab /GRJ (May 15 — September 30) Total Residual Chlorine(3) 150060,1 — — --- 0.1 mg/L 1191 -- 0.3 mga- [19] 1/Day 101 / 011 Grab J

UR] pH (Std. Units) 1004001 - -- -- --- 6.0-9.0(11) 1121 2/Week 102/071 Grab /GR/ MEOI02032 PERMIT Page 4 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS
I. The permittee is authorized to discharge treated waste waters via OUTFALL #001 to the Piscataquis River. Such treated waste water discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below. 

### TIER #lA- Applicablewhen 40 

### CFR, Part410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 Ibs/day and dry weather flows (flow in a sewerage system that occurs as a result ofnon-storm events or are caused solely by ground water infiltration) are <0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Avera!!e Weekly Avera!!e Daily Maximum Monthly Avera!!e Weekly Averaae Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv SamnleTvoe Flow £50050J 0.465 MGD£03J 

## -­ Report MGD£031 

# -­ -­ 

# -­ Continuous !99199! Recorder [RCJ

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODs) roo310 258 lbs/Day f26J 

# -­ 478lbs/Day
!26 66 mg!L f19J 

## --­ 123 mg!L 1191 1/Week £OII07J Composite fNJ

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) roo53ol Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) rsoiORI 441 lbs/Day £26J 

## -­ 845 Ibs/Day£26J 114 mg!L 1191 

# --­ 218 mg!L f19f !/Week rouo7J Composite £NJ
1,817lbs/Day !261 

## -­ 4,394 lbs/Day !26/ 468 mg!L f19J 

## --­ 1,133 mg!L !19{ 1/Week fOII07J Composite £24J

E I" B t . (I)

. co z ac ena {31633] (May 

### 15

­ September 30) 

## -­ 

# -­ - 64/100 ml(2) {131 

## --­ 427/100 ml (13{ !/Week f01I07J Grab fGRJ

Total Residual Chlorine(3) !500601 

# -­ - --­ 0.1 mg!L f19J 

## -­ 0.3 mg!L f19J 1/Day £01J01J Grab fGRJ
pH (Std. Units) roo4oo7 

# --­ -­ 

# -­ -­ 

# --­ 6.0-9.0(1l) {12/ 2/Week rovo7r Grab fGRJME0102032 PERMIT Page 5 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EF14LUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER #1A— Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Measurement Frequency Sample Type Monthly Average Weekly

Avera Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Ammonia (as N) fo0610] 13 lbs/Day [261 -- --- Report ug/L[281 --- -- 2/Year [02/YRI Composite /24) (June 1— September 30) Antimony /010977 3.4 lbs/Day 1267 — --- Report ug/Lps l --- — 2/Year /927yR1 Composite r24/ Composite [2 Chromium (Total) foio34/ 2.1 lbs/Day [26/ — 4.1 lbs/Day 1261 Report ug/L

1281 Report ug/L E-81 1/Year foilyRi
Copper (Total) 1010421 — -- 0.09 lbs/Day pq Report ug/L 1281 - Report ug/L RN 2/Year [02/m] Composite [24

.1
Mercury (Total)(5)

/Toe] -- - -- 25.8 ng/L ismi 38.7 ng/L /36v 1/Year

romyRi Grab

Kiwi Phenol (Total) 146000f 2.1 lbs/Day 126] — 4.1 lbs/Day 1261 Report ug/L

/281 - Report ug/L L

- 281 1/Year follyRi Composite [241
Total Phosphorus

(4) 100665] Report

lbs/Day 1261 — Report lbs/Day 1251 Report mg/L 1191 --- Report mg/L /191 1/Month101130i Composite [2.0 (June 1 —Se tember 30) MEOI02032 

### PERMIT Page 5 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. 

### EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
TIER

### #lA- Applicablewhen 40 CFR, Part410, Subpart G (Stock & 

### Yam finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weatherflows are :::;0.465 

### MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Avera!'e Weekly

**Avera~**



### ·­ Daily Maximum Monthly Average Report ug/L

### r-s1 Weekly Avera!'e Daily Maximum Measurement Frequencv 2N ear f021YRJ SampleTVPe Composite 1241 Ammonia (as Nl f006JOJ 13 lbs/Day f26J ··­ 

### --­ 

## -­ (June 1- September 30) Antimony rolo977 Chromium (Total) fOJ034f 3.4 lbs/Day 1261. 2.1 lbs/Day 1261



# -­ - --­ Report ug!L1287 Reportug/L 1281 Report ug/L 1281 

### --­ - 2N ear !021YR7 INear [OJIYR] Composite 1241 Composite 1241 

### - 4.llbs/Day 1261 0.09 lbs/Day f26f 

# --­ Report ug/L {28} Report ug/L 118! Copper (Total) f01042J 

## -­ 

# --­ 2N ear ro21YRJ Composite f24J

(5) Mercury (Total) f71900J 

## -­ 

# --­ -­ 25.8 ng/L 13M/ 

# -­ 38.7 ng/L 13M/ INear 101/YR! Grab IGRI Phenol (Total) f46000J 2.llbs/Day _[2§1 

## - 4.1lbs/Day {26{ Reportug/L
128 

# --­ Reportug/L

1281 JNear [OJIYR) Composite 124 1

Total PhosQhorus(4)

_ 1oo66SJ (June ]-September30) Report lbs/Day !26! 

## - Report lbs/Day !26/ Reportmg/L f/97 

## --­ Reportmg/L {19/ l!Month1o1130J Composite 1241

·- .... -----·----­ME0102032 PERMIT Page 6 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 

### TIER NIA — Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD.
Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Avera . e Weekly

Avera!e Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Avera • e Daily

Maximum Measurement

Fre i uenc Sam ale T Ai e
Flow [50050] 0.465 MGD/031 --- Report MGD103/ --- --- — Continuous [99/99/ Recorder [Rc/
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOW 1003101 305 lbs/Day [24] --- 582 lbs/Day 1261 79 mg/L figi - 150 mg/L fly 2/Week [02/ 07/ Composite [24]
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) r005301 617 lbs/Day [26

.1 - 1,206

lbs/Day[2.61 159 mg/L / 79 / -- 311 mg/L 1191 2/Week [02/071 Composite [2-//
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 180108/ 2,752 lbs/Day 1267 5,443 lbs/Day 1261 710 mg/L fin 

### --- 1,404 mg/L [791 2/Week [01/07

.7 Composite 1241

E. coli Bacteria (1)

[31633] --- - - 64/100 m1(2) 1131 -- 427/100 ml 031 2/Week [02/071 Grab /my Way 15 — September 30) Total Residual Chlorine(3) [500607 --- -- -- 0.1 mg/L //91 _ 0.3 mg/L 110i 1/Day [01/017 Grab [GR1
pH (Std. Units) /004001 -- --- - --- 6 .0-9 .0(11)112! 3/Week 103/071 Grab (GR.' 

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 6 of27 

### VV006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS 

### TIER#IIA- Applicablewhen 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart

### G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is :::;42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are ::;0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Avera2:e Avera2:e Maximum Averaae Average Maximum Frequencv SampleTvoe
Flow f50050J 0.465 MGDro11 

## --­ Report MODf03J 

## --­ --­ - Continuous Recorder fRCJ !991997 Biochemical Oxygen 305 lbs/Day f26J 

## --­ 582lbs/Day 79 mg!L f19J 

## --­ 150 mg!L J19J 2/Week f02I07J Composite ru1 Demand (BOD5) roo3101 {261 Total Suspended Solids 617 lbs/Day f26J 

# -­ 1,206 159 mg!L J19J 

# --­ 311 mg!L J19J 2/Week f02I07J Composite !2'1 (TSS) roos1o1 lbs/Day!267 Chemical Oxygen Demand 2,752lbs/Day 

## - 5,443 lbs/Day 710 mg!L /19! 

### ·-­ 1,404 mg!L 2/Week f02I07J Composite f2'l (COD) rRo1os7 {267 {267 f191
E !" B . (l)

. co z actena f3I633J 

### -·· - 

# -­ 64/100 ml(2) 

## -­ 4271100 ml 2/Week ro21o7 1 Grab fGRJ (May15 -September30) rm fl3j Total Residual Chlorine<3) 

## --­ -­ -­ 0.1 mg/L !191 

# --­ 0.3 mg!L f19J !/Day f01I01J Grab fGRJ _150060{ pH (Std. Units) roo4oo1 

# -­ --­ - 

# --­ -­ 6.0-9.0(1l) f/21 3/Week f03I07J Grab !GR/ME0102032 PERMIT Page 7 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

## TIER NIA -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations 7 Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type Ammonia (as NI [00610] 13 lbs/Day 1261 - - Report ug/Lf2si - — 2/Year 102/YR1 Composite (241 Composite (24/ Composite 124] (June 1— September 30) Antimony room 3.4 lbs/Day (26/ - - Report ug/L1 2si --- --- 2/Year /02(YR) Chromium (Total) 101034] 3.4 lbs/Day 1

.261 — 6.9 lbs/Day 1.167 Report ug/L

1281 --- Report ug/L 1281 1/Year 101/YR]
Copper (Total) [01097j — --- 0.09 lbs/Day [26] Report ug/L 1281 --- Report ug/L 1281 2/Year [02,7N Composite 12.4J
Mercury (Total)(5)

171900] -- -- -- 25.8 ng/L 1

.3M7 — 38.7 ng/L 13M1 1/Year

f01/YR1 Grab 1C;R1 Phenol (Total) How 3_4 lbs/Day 1261 -- 6.9 lbs/Day 1261 Report ug/L

1281 --- Report ug/L
I28 1 1/Year follyRi Composite (24]
Total Phosphorus(4)_100665] Report lbs/Day 1261 Report lbs/Day 1261 Report mg/L /197 --- Report mg/L 1197 1/Month101/301 Composite [24i (June 1— September 30) ME0102032 PERMIT Page 7 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER#IIA- Applicablewhen 40 CFR, Part410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is :::;42,000 lbs/day and dry weatherflows are :;:0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitorina Requirements Monthly Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Avera(!e Averal!e Maximum Averal!e Average Maximum Frequencv Sample Type Ammonia (as N) roo6IOJ (June I- September 30) 13 lbs/Day !261 

# -­ -­ Report ug/Lm 1 

# --­ -­ 2N ear JOVY8L Composite 1241 Antimony roro977 3.4 lbs/Day f26t 

# -­ -­

**Report~,** 

## --­ --­ 2N ear _[J!2lY!iJ. COl!lJlOSiteJHL Chromium (Total) fOIONJ 3.4lbs/Day 

# -­ 6.9lbs/Day Report ug/L

--­ Report ug/L IN ear roiiYRJ Composite f24J !i61 /26/ _128/ f1!1L Copper (Total) fOI097J 

## -­ --­ 0.09 lbs/Day £ 26

1 Report ug/L


### --­ Report ug/L 2N ear f021YRJ Composite f24J .1lJiL f1!1L (5) Mercury (Total) £71900! 

# -­ -­ -­ 25.8 ng/L 

# -­ 38.7 ng!L !Near Grab ]3M/ {3Nfl. JfJIIYBl. _ffi!Q_

. Phenol (Total) f46000J 3.4lbs/Day


## -­ 6.9lbs/Day Reportug/L


## --­ Report ug!L !Near [OIIYR] Composite /24J {26/ !261 {18/ {1E_ (4) Report 

## - Report Reportmg!L


## --­ Report mg!L l!Month 1 oiiJOJ Composite f24J Total PhosQhorus .f0066SJ (June 1- September 30) lbs/Day !26/ lbs/Day !267 JJ.2L _fl.91MEO I 02032 PERMIT Page 8 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (enure') — OUTFALL #001 SURVEILLANCE TESTING — Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level testing as follows:
TIER 1A and TIER IIA Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)(6)

-

-

___ Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B] --

-

___ __ 4.0

_

-

___ Report % 123]

Report % [23]

% [23] 4.0 % [23] 1/Year [01/YR]

1/Year (01/YR]

1/Year [01/YR] 1/Year [01/YR] Composite 124]

Composite 124]

Composite [24] Composite [24] A-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia (TDA3B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis/TDA6F] (Brook trout) C-NOEL (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [773Q6F] (Brook trout)
Analytical ChemistryR8) [514777 - Report ug/L (28] 2/Year [02/YR] Composite/ Grab [24/GR] MEOI02032 PERMIT Page 8 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. 

### EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS (cont'd)- OUTFALL #001 SURVEILLANCE TESTING- Beginning upon permit issuance and lastingthrough 24 months priorto permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 oftheterm ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level testing as follows: 

### TIER lAand TIERIIA Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Averaoe Daily Maximum Monthly Avera!!e Daily Maximum Measurement Frequencv Sample**~** Whole Effluent Toxicitv (WET)c•>

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TDA3B]

(Water Flea) Salvelinus fontiiwlis [TDA6FJ (Brook trout) C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3BJ

(Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] (Brooktrout) 

# -­

-­

-

--­ 

# --­

-­

-­

--­ 

# -­

-­

--­

--­ Report% [23] Report % [231

4.0% [23] 4.0% [23] !/Year [01/YR] !/Year [01/YR]

!/Year [01/YR} !/Year [01/YR} Composite [24] Composite [24}

Composite [24} Composite [24]

Analytical Chemistry( 7'8) (51477/ 

# -­ -­ -­ Report ug!L [28] 2/Year [02/YR] Composite/ Grab [24/GR]

----·--­ME0102032 PERMIT Page 9 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) — OUTFALL #001 SCREENING LEVEL TESTING — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 testing as follows:
TIER 1A and TIER IIA Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum MonitoringRequirements Sample Type Monthly Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)(6)

---

_

--

--- -

---

-

—

— ---

--

-- Report % [23]

Report % [23]

4.0 % 123] 4.0 % [23] 2/Year [02/YR]

2/Year [02/YR]

2/Year [02/YR] 2/Year [02/YR] Composite [24]

Composite [24]

Composite [24] Composite [24] A-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia 1TD43B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TDA6F] (Brook trout) C-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] (Brook trout)
Analytical Chemistry(7' 8) 1514777 - - - Report ug/L [28] 1/Quarter[01/90] Composite/ Grab [24/GR] Priority Pollutants(8) 1500087 --- ___ Report ug/L 1 281 1/Year

[01/YR] Composite/Grab [24/GR] ME0102032 

### PERMIT Page 9 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. 

### EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS (cont'd)- OUTFALL #001 SCREENING LEVEL TESTING- Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lastingthrough 12 months priorto 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 permitrenewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall conduct screening level testing as follows: 

### TIER lAand TIER IIA Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv Sample**T~** Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)

### <•)

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [I'DA3B1

(WaterFlea) Salvelinusfontina/is [l'DA6F1

(Brooktrout) C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [I'BP3B1

(WaterFlea) Salvelinusfontinalis [I'BQ6F1

(Brooktrout) 

## --­



# -­



# -­

--­ --­

-­



## -

- --­



# -­

-­

-­ Report % [231 Report % [231

4.0% [231 4.0% [231 2Near [021YR1 2N ear [021YR1

2Near [021YR1 2N ear [021YR1 Composite [241 Composite [241

Composite [241 Composite [241

Analytical Chemistry ( 7'8) (51477/ 

# -­ -­ 

# -­ Report ugiL [28 1 1/Quarter[011901 Composite/ Grab [24/GR1 Priority Pollutants(&) (50008/ 

# -­ --­ 

# --­ Report ugiL [281 lNear [011YR1 Composite/Grab [24!GR1ME0102032 PERMIT Page 10 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER #1B Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock Si Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements
as specified Monthly Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type as specified as specified as specified as specified as specified as specified as specified
Flow isoosoi 0.93 MGD[03] --- Report MGDf03/ --- --- — Continuous /99/997 Recorder iRcj
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) /003101 258 lbs/Day r261 --- 478 lbs/Day [261 33 mg/L 119I -- 62 mg/f.. )791 2/Week [02/07/ Composite [2 4 ]
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) [005301 441 lbs/Day ,j --- 845 lbs/Dayi26] 57 mg/L 119,1 -- 109 mg/L p9i 2/Week [02/071 Composite [247
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) [801087 1,817 lbs/Day 1261 .... 4,394 lbs/Day [261 234 mg/L [191 --- 567 mg/L i m 2/Week favov Composite /24/

E. coli Bacteria (1)/31633] — --- -- 64/100 m1(2) /131 --- 427/100 ml [131 2/Week [02/07j Grab [OR] (May 15 — September 30) Total Residual Chlorine [500601 — 0.1 mg/L [iv -- 0.17 mg/L 1 .191 1/Day fovoli Grab [GR]
pH (Std. Units) /004001 „, ...- --- -- -- 6.0-9.01) 1121 3/Week /03

,07/ Grab /OR/

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

### MEOI02032 PERMIT Page 

### 10 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER#lB- Applicable when 

### 40 CFR, Part

### 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is 

### <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are 

### >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic DischargeLimitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average as specified Weekly Average as specified Daily Maximum as specified Monthly Average as specified Weekly Average as specified Daily Maximum as specified Measurement Freguenc:y as specified SamJ!Ie TYJ!e as specified
Flow [5ooso; 0.93 MODroJJ 

## --­ Report MOD f03J --­ --­ 

## - Continuous {991997 Recorder fRCJ

Biochemical Olc-ygen Demand (BODs) roo3101 258 lbs/Day 12a 1 

### --­ 478lbs/Day !261 33 mg!L /19! 

### --­ 62 mg!L !191 2/Week ro21o7; Composite ru 1

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) roo5301 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) r&owsT 441 lbs/Day f26J 

# --­ 845 lbs/Day[261 57 mg!L f19J 

### --­ I09 mg!L f19f 2/Week f02I07J Composite !241

I,817 lbs/Day {26/ 

# -­ 4,394 lbs/Day {26/ 234 mg!L f19f 

### --­ 567 mg!L !19! 2/Week ro21o7; Composite f2'l

E l" B . (I)

. co z actena f3I633J (May 15-September 30) 

## - --­ 

# -­ 64/100 ml (Z) {131 

## --­ 427/100 ml [13/ 2/Week f02I07J Grab [GR]

Total Residual Chlorine<3l {50060/ 

## - 

# -­ -­ 0.1 mg!L f19J 

### -­ 0.17 mg!L (19/ !/Day f01I01J Grab fGRJ

pH (Std. Units) ro04oo1 

# -­ - --­ -­ -­ 6.0-9.0(II) (/21 3/Week roY07/ Grab fGR/IVIE0102032 PERMIT Page I I of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER #1B -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type Ammonia (as N) 100610J 13 lbs/Day [26] — -- Report ug/Lf281 - — 2/Year [02/yR/ Composite [24/ Composite_124/ Composite 1241 (June 1 — September 30) Antimony (010977 3.4 lbs/Day /267 — — Report ug/L/28/ -- --- 2/Year favyRi Chromium (Total) /01034j 2.1 lbs/Day [261 — 4.1 lbs/Day [261 Report ug/L

r281 -- Report ug/L 1281 1/Year pil

y iv
Copper (Total) [0.1097] -- — 0.09 lbs/Day 126

.1 Report ug/I-128 --- Report ug/L [281 2/Year 102/yRi Composite 124j
Mercury (Total)(5)

1719001 ___ -- — 25.8 ng/L. [3.4,17 — 38.7 ng/L I3M7 1/Year

MYR] Grab fORI Phenol (Total) (46000] 2.1 lbs/Day [267 --- 4.1 lbs/Day 1267 Report ug/L

1 28 1 --- Report ug/L

- 1281 1/Year [01/YR] Composite 1 2$]
Total Phosphorus(4) [00665] Report

lbs/Day 1267 --- Report lbs/Day f261 Report mg/L 1191 — Report mg/L [191 1/Month/01/30] Composite [ 247 (June 1— September 30) ME0102032 PERMIT Page 11 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS (cont'd)


### TIER#lB- Applicable when 

### 40 CFR,Part 

### 410, SubpartG (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is 

### <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Averal!e Weekly Averal!e Daily Maximum Monthly Averal!e Weekly Averal!e Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv SamnleTvne Ammonia (as N) f006IOJ _Gfune I- September 30) 13 lbs/Day !261 

### - 

## -­ Report ug/Lf2BI 

# --­ -­ 2N ear f021YRI Composite rw Antimony ro1om Chromium {Total) f01034J 3.4 lbs/Day 116, 2.1 lbs/Day !261 

## - - Report ugfL1281 Report ugfL
128/ 

### --­ 

## --­ 2N ear romRr Composite m r IN ear f011YRJ Composite f24J 

### - 4.llbs/Day
/261 

### --­ Report ugfL

rm Copper (Total) f01097J 

## -­ - 0.09 lbs/Day f26J Report ugfLf2B 

## --­ Report ugfL {281 2N ear f021YRJ Composite f24J

(5) Mercury {Total) !71900J 

### --­ 

## -­ - 25.8 ngfL
3.W 

## - 38.7 ngfL
13M! INear Grab fOJIYRI /GRf Phenol (Total) f46000J 2.llbs/Day
/26/ 

# --­ 4.1lbs/Day {26/ Report ugfL
!28! 

### --­ Report ugfL
!28! !Near fOIIYRJ Composite f24J

Total PhosQhorus(4)_f00665J (June !-September30) Report lbs/Day !26! 

# --­ Report lbs/Day !26/ ReportmgfL f/9/_ 

### - ReportmgfL f/91 !IMonthroii30J Composite f24J

---------· ·-------- 

### -­

### ME0I02032 PERMIT Page 12 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 

## TIER RIB Applicable when 

### 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements 

### Monthly Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Weekly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Fre i uencv Sample Type
Flow /50050] 

### 0.93 MGD/o3/ — Report MGD[ay --- --- -- Continuous
199/99f 

### Recorder [Rci
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODO 1003101 305 lbs/Day 1261 -- 582 lbs/Day [2.6/ 39 mg/L 1191 - 75 mg/L 119j, 2/Week paw/ Composite 1241
Total Suspended Solids 

### (TSS) 1005307 617 lbs/Day [261 -- 1,206 

### Ibs/Day/261 80 mg/L figi --- 155 mg/L im 2/Week [02/071 

### Composite [24]
Chemical Oxygen Demand 

### (COD) 1801087 2,752 Ibs/Day 1267 -- 5,443 Ibs/Day [261 355 mg/L /By --- 

### 702 mg/L 1191 2/Week 102/07J 

### Composite 124]



### E. taliBacteria(1)/3/633/ --- -- -- 64/100 m1(2) 1131 — 427/100 ml /137 2/Week 102/071 

### Grab [GR1 May 15 —September 30 Total Residual Chlorine(3) 1500601 

### --- --- -- 0.1 mg/L pw 

### --- 0.17 mg/L, [191 

### 1 /Day 101/01] 

### Grab [GR]


### pH (Std. 

### Units) 1004001 — -- — 

### 6.0-9.0(11) 1127 3/Week /03/071 

### Grab imzi ME0102032 PERMIT Page 12 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS 

### A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 

### AND MONITORING REQIDREMENTS
TIER

## #liB- Applicable when 40 CFR, Part410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is :;::42,000 lbs/day and dry weatherflows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum MonitoringRequirements Monthly Average Weekly Avera(Te Daily Maximum Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum Measurement Frequencv Sample Tvoe
Flow f5oo5oJ 0.93 MGD 1 ,,1 

# -­ Report MGDro3J 

## --­ --­ -­ Continuous J99/99f 2/W eek £02I07J Recorder £RCJ

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODs) 10 o3JOf Total Suspended Solids (TSS) roo530! Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) rso1os1 305lbs/Day m1 617lbs/Day {161 2,752lbs/Day !161 

# -­ 582lbs/Day {16/ 1,206 lbs/Dayr261 5,443 lbs/Day !161 39 mg!L f19f 

## --­ 75 mg!L f19J Composite f2•J



# --­ 80 mg!L /19/ 

## --­ 155 mg!L f19f 2/W eek ro210,1 Composite f2•J



# -­ 355 mg!L f19f 

## --­ 702 mg!L f19J 2/W eek f02I07J Composite /Hi

E l'B

. (!)

. co z actena f31633J 

## --­ -­ -­ 64/100 ml12> !13/ 

## -­ 427/100 ml {131 2/Week f02107J Grab fGRJ May 15 -September30 Total Residual Chlorine(3) /500601 

## --­ ' 

## --­ -­ 0.1 mg!L fi9J 

## --­ 0.17 mg!L f/9) ]/Day fOliO/] Grab [GR]
pH (Std. Units) roo4oor 

# -­ 

# -­ - -­ --­ 6.0-9.0(1!) !121 3/Week /03107/ Grab /GR/ME0102032 PERMIT Page 13 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LB/MATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

## TIER #IIB -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are >0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Measurement Fre • uenc Sam • le T e Monthly Avera . e Weekly

Avera 1 e Daily

Maximum Monthly

Avera . e Weekly

Avera le Daily

Maximum Ammonia (asN) [00610] 13 lbs/Day [28/ --- — Report ug/L128/ -- 2/Year 102/YR1 Composite 7247 (June I — September 30) Antimony 701097/ 3.4 lbs/Day [261 -- -- Report ug/Lf28f --- --- 2/Year 102)yR Composite 041 Composite [24] Chromium (Total) [01034] 3.4 lbs/Day [26/ - 6.9 lbs/Day 1261 Report ug/L 1281 --- Report ug/L /281 1/Year iouriv
Copper (Total) [0[0971 -- --- 0.09 lbs/Day 126] Report ug/L[28 — Report 

### uga,j28,1 2/Year 102/YR1 Composite [24]
Mercury (Total)(5) 1719001 — — — 25.8 ng/L 111,8 _ 38.7 ng/L f3M1 1/Year

101/YR1 Grab 1GR1 Phenol (Total) 140001 3.4 lbs/Day 1261 -- 6.9 lbs/Day 120 Report ug/L 1281 - Report ug/L MI 1/Year [opyiri Composite 124]

Total Phosphorus(4) [00665] Report

Ibs/Dayi 26/ --- Report

lbs/Day

1261 Report mg/L

1191 -- Report mg/L 1191 1/Month/at/so] Composite 124] (June 1— September 30) 

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 13 of27 VV006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### TIER#liB- Applicablewhen 40 CFR, Part430, Subpart G (Stock & 

### Yarn finishing) production level is ;::42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are>0.465 MGD. Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Avera!!e Weekly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Avera!!e Weekly Avera!!e Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv SamnleTvne Ammonia (as N) £006IOJ 13 lbs/Day !261 

# --­ - Report ug!L1281 

## --­ 

# -­ 2Near ro21YRI Composite r24 (June I- September 30) Antimony roi097f Chromium (Total) £OI034J 3.4 lbs/Day !261 3.4lbs/Day {261 

## --­ -­ Report ug!L 1281 Report ug!L {28{ 

## --­ --­ 2N ear ;oYYRI !Near fOIIYRJ Composite IM Composite £241 

# --­ 6.9lbs/Day !26/ 

## --­ Reportug!L 1281 Copper (Total) £OI097J 

### -­ 

## --­ 0.09 lbs/Day f26J Report ug!L£ 28 

### -­ Report uwLr2s1 2N ear £021YRJ Composite f24J

(S) Mercury (Total) f7!900J 

### - - - 25.8 ng!L f3MI 

# -­ 38.7 ng!L {3M/ !Near !01/YR/ Grab fGRI Phenol (Total) f46000J 3.4lbs/Day {26/ 

### -­ 6.9lbs/Day !261 Report ug!L !281 

# -­ Report ug!L 1281 !NearfOIIYRJ Composite £24J

(4) Total PhosJlhorus _f00665J _(June 1-Sevtember30) Report lbs/Day r261 

## --­ Report lbs/Day r267 Reportmg!L fl91 

### -­ Report mg!L fl91 !!Month[oii30J Composite f24JME0102032 PERMIT Page 14 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cowed) — OUTFALL #001 SURVEILLANCE LEVEL TESTING — Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level testing as follows:
TIER IB and TIER HB Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum MonitoringRequirements Sample Type Monthly Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)(6)

--

—

_ ---

___

—

__ ---

--

--

__ 11 % [23]

Report % [23]

7.7 % [23] 7.7 % [23] 2/Year [02/YR]

2/Year [02/YR]

2/Year [02/YR] 2/Year [02/YR] Composite [24]

Composite [24]

Composite [24] Composite [24] A-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia ITDA3.8] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TDA6F] (Brook trout) C-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [T1306F] (Brook trout)
Analytical Chemistry(7 [514777 - --- --- Report ug/L [28] 1/Quarter [01/90] Composite/ Grab [24/GR]

----- ME0102032 PERMIT Page 14 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS 

### A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)- OUTFALL #001 SURVEILLANCE LEVEL TESTING- Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months priorto permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level testing as follows: 

### TIER IB and TIER liB Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Averaf!:e Daily Maximum Monthly Averaf!:e Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv Sample 1'YI!_e Whole Effluent Toxicitv (WED

### <•>

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TDA3B}

(WaterFlea) Salvelinus fontinalis [FDA6F} (Brook trout) C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B]

(WaterFlea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] (Brook trout) 

# -­

-­



# -­

-­ --­



# --­

-­

-­ --­



# -­

-­

-­ I I% [23] Report % [23]

7.7% [23} 7.7% [23} 2N ear [02/YRJ
2N ear [02/YR]

2N ear [02/YR}
2N ear [02/YR} Composite [24} Composite [24}

Composite [24} Composite [24}

Analytical Chemistry< 7•8

) (514771 

## - --­ --­ Report ug!L [28} !/Quarter[01190] Composite/ Grab {24/GR]**----·~------~---- ------~----------------** ME0102032 PERMIT Page 15 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) — OUTFALL #001 SCREENING LEVEL TESTING — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 testing as follows:
TIER IB and TIER IIB Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Average Daily

Maximum Monthly

Average Daily

Maximum Measurement

Frequency Sample Type Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)(6)

--

--

--- --

-

--

-- --

--

---

-- 11 % [23]

Report % [23]

7.7 % [2.3] 7.7 % (23] 1/Quarter [01/90]

1/Quarter [01/90]

1/Quarter [01/90] 1/Quarter [01/90] Composite [24] Composite [24]

Composite [24] Composite [24] A-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia ITEM3B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [Man (Brook trout) C-NOEL Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B] (Water Flea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] (Brook trout)
Analytical Chemistry(7

### '8) [514777 - - 

### --- Report ug/L[28] 1/Quarter [01/90] Composite/ Grab [24/GR]

. Priority Pollutants(8) [50008] — — -- Report ug/L [28] 1/Year

[01/YR] Composite/Grab

[24/GR] ME0102032 PERMIT Page 15 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)- OUTFALL #001 SCREENING LEVEL TESTING- Beginning 24 months priorto permit expiration and lasting through 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year4 ofthe term ofthe permit) and every five years thereafter ifa timelyrequest for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, oris replaced by a permit renewal containingthis requirement, the permittee shall conduct screening level testing as follows: 

### TIERIB and TIER liB Effluent Characteristic Discharge Limitations Minimum Monitoring Requirements Monthly Averaae Daily Maximum Monthly Avera!!e Daily Maximum Measurement Freauencv Sample**~** Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)

### <•>

A-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TDA3B]

(WaterFlea) Salvelinus fontinalis [TDA6F] (Brook trout) C-NOEL

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3BJ

(WaterFlea) Sa/velinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] (Brook trout) 

# -­

-­

·-­



# -­ -­

-

--·

--­ -­



# -­

-·­

-­ 11% [23] Report% [23]

7.7% [23] 7.7% [23] 1/Quarter [01190] ]/Quarter [01190]

1/Quarter [01190] 1/Quarter [01190] Composite [24] Composite [24]

Composite [24] Composite [24]

Analytical Chemistry< 7•

8> (514771 

## - 

# -­ --­ Report ug!L [28] 1/Quarter [01190] Composite/ Grab [24/GR] Priority Pollutants(S) (50008/ 

# -­ -­ -­ Report ug!L [28] 1/Year [01/YR] Composite/Grab [24/GR]

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 16 of 27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 2. Ground Water Monitoring Wells MW-1 and MW-4 shall be limited and monitored as specified below. Daily Maximum Measurement FrequencA Sample Tyne as specified as specified as specified Depth to Water Level Below Landsurface /72019] Report (feet) t9) [27] 1/Year [01/YR] Measure [14S] Nitrate-Nitrogen [00620] 10 mg/L 119] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] Specific Conductance [00095) Report (umhos/cm) [11] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR) Temperature (°C) [00010) Report (°C) [04] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] PH (Standard Units) [00400) Report (S.U.) [12] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] Total Suspended Solids [005301 Report (mg/L) [19] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] 

### ME0102032 PERMIT 

### Page 16 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS 

### A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### 2. Gronnd Water Monitoring Wells MW-1 and MW-4 

### shall be limited and monitored as specified below. Daily Maximum as specified Measurement Freguenc,)lm

as specified Sample**~** as specified Depth to Water Level Below Landsurface [72019] Report (feet) (SJ [27] 1/Year [01/YR] Measure [MS] Nitrate-Nitrogen /00620] 10 mg/L /19] 1/Year /01/YR] Grab [GR] Specific Conductance [00095) Report (umhos/cm) [11] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] Temperature ('C) [00010) Report ('C) /04] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR] PH (Standard Units) [00400) Report (S.U.) /12] 1/Year /01/YR] Grab [GR] Total Suspended Solids [00530) 

# - Report (mg/L) [19] 1/Year [01/YR] Grab [GR]**~~~~--~~--·-----~-**ME0102032 PERMIT Page 17 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: Sampling Locations: Influent sampling for BOD5 and TSS shall be sampled (composite) at the Water Street pump station. Effluent receiving secondary treatment (Outfall #001) shall be sampled (composite and grab) for all parameters specified in Special Condition A(1) after the chlorine contact chamber (including after dechlorination when applicable) on a year-round basis. Any change in sampling location(s) must be reviewed and approved by the Department in writing. Sampling and analysis must be conducted in accordance with; a) methods approved in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 136, b) alternative methods approved by the Department in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR Part 136, or c) as otherwise specified by the Department. Samples that are sent out for analysis shall be analyzed by a laboratory certified by the State of Maine's Department of Human Services. Samples that are sent to another POTW licensed pursuant to Waste discharge licenses, 38 M.R.S.A. § 413 or laboratory facilities that analyze compliance samples in-house are subject to the provisions and restrictions ofMaine Comprehensive and Limited Environmental Laboratory Certification Rules, 10-144 CMR 263 (last amended February 13, 2000). Tier I and Tier II limitations are differentiated by a mutually agreed upon production level threshold of 42,000 lbs/day for 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn Finishing) category. Tier I limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable when Subpart G production is less than 42,000 lbs/day for 10 production days or less during a calendar month and Tier II limitations are applicable when Subpart G production is greater than or equal to 42,000 lbs/day for more than 10 production days during a calendar month. Tier IA and Tier IB (as well as Tier HA & Tier IIB) are differentiated by the monthly average flow limitations of 0.465 MOD and 0.93 MGD, respectively. The permittee is authorized to discharge under Tier IB and Tier IIB limitations when the dry weather influent flow to the treatment plant exceeds 0.465 MGD for three consecutive months. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 17 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: Sampling Locations: Influent sampling for BOD5 and TSS shall be sampled (composite) at the Water Street pump station. Effluent receiving secondary treatment (Outfall #001) shall be sampled (composite and grab) for all parameters specified in Special Condition A(1) after the chlorine contact chamber (including after dechlorination when applicable) on a year-round basis. Any change in sampling location(s) must be reviewed and approved bythe Department in writing. Sampling and analysis must be conducted in accordance with; a) methods approved in 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) Pat1136, b) alternative methods approved bythe Depattment in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR Pat1136, or c) as otherwise specified bythe Department. Samples that are sent out for analysis shall be analyzed by a laboratory certified by the 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 or laboratory facilities that analyze compliance samples in-house are subject to the provisions and restrictions ofMaine Comprehensive andLimitedEnvironmentalLaboratory Certification Rules, 10-144 CMR 263 (last amended February 13, 2000). Tier I and Tier II limitations are differentiated by a mutually agreed upon production level threshold of42,000 lbs/day for 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpat1 G (Stock & Yarn Finishing) category. Tier I limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable when Subpart G production is less than 42,000 lbs/day for 10 production days or less during a calendarmonth and Tier II limitations are applicable when Subpart G production is greater than or equal to 42,000 lbs/day for more than 10 production days during a calendar month. Tier lA and Tier IB (as well as TierIIA & Tier liB) are differentiated by the monthly average flow limitations of0.465 MGD and 0.93 MGD, respectively. The permittee is authorized to discharge under Tier IB and Tier liB limitations when the dry weather influent flow to the treatmentplant exceeds 0.465 MGD for three consecutive months.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 18 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: 1. E. coli bacteria - Limits are seasonal and apply between May 15 and September 30 ofeach calendar year. The Department reserves the right to require disinfection on a yearround basis to protect the health and welfare of the public. 2. E. coli bacteria — The monthly average limitation is a geometric mean limitation and shall be calculated and reported as such. 3. Total Residual Chlorine — Limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable whenever elemental chlorine or chlorine based compounds are being used to disinfect the discharge. For instances when a facility has not disinfected with chlorine-based compounds for an entire reporting period, the facility shall report "NODI-9" for this parameter on the monthly DMR. The permittee shall utilize approved test methods that are capable of bracketing the TRC limitation in this permit. 4. Phosphorus (Total) - See Attachment A of this permit for a Department protocol for total phosphorus entitled, Protocol For Total P Sample Collection and Analysis for Waste Water — June 1, 2014, unless otherwise specified by the Department. 5. Mercury — All mercury sampling (1/Year) required to determine compliance with interim limitations established pursuant to Interim Effluent Limitations and Controls for the Discharge of Mercury, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 2001) shall be conducted in accordance with EPA's "clean sampling techniques" found in EPA Method 1669, Sampling Ambient Water For Trace Metals At EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels. All mercury analyses shall be conducted in accordance with EPA Method 1631E, Determination of Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Fluorescence Spectrometry. See Attachment B, Effluent Mercury Test Report, of this permit for the Department's form for reporting mercury test results. MEOI02032 PERMIT Page 18 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A 

### EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: I. 

### E. coli bacteria

- Limits are seasonal and apply between May 15 and September 30 of each calendar year. The Department reserves the right to require disinfection on a yearround basis to protect the health and welfare ofthe public. 2. 

### E. coli bacteria- The monthly average limitation is a geometric mean limitation and shall be calculated and reported as such. 3. 

### Total Residual Chlorine- Limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable whenever elemental chlorine or chlorine based compounds are being used to disinfect the discharge. For instances when a facility has not disinfected with chlorine-based compounds for an entire rep01ting period, the facility shall rep01t "NODI-9" for this parameter on the monthlyDMR. The permittee shall utilize approved test methods that are capable ofbracketing the TRC limitation in this permit. 4. 

### Phosphorus (Total)- See 

### Attachment A ofthis permit for a Department protocol for total phosphorus entitled, 

### Protocol For Total P Sample Collection andAnalysis for Waste Water- June 1, 2014, unless othetwise specified bythe Department. 5. 

### Mercury- All mercury sampling (1/Year) required to determine compliance with interim limitations established pursuant to 

### Interim EffluentLimitations and Controls 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 At EPA 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, EffluentMercwy Test Report, ofthis permit for the Department's form for reporting mercury test results.

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 19 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: The limitation in the monthly average column in table Special Condition A of this permit is defined as the arithmetic mean of all the mercury tests ever conducted for the facility utilizing sampling Methods 1669 and analysis Method 1631E.6. Whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing - Definitive WET testing is a multiconcentration testing event (a minimum of five dilutions bracketing the critical acute and chronic thresholds of 5.9% and 4.0% respectively for Tier IA and Tier HA and 11% and 7.7 % respectively for Tier 1B and Tier IBD, which provides a point estimate of toxicity in terms of No Observed Effect Level, commonly referred to as NOEL or NOEC. It is noted the critical thresholds were derived as the mathematical inverse of the applicable dilution factors. See page 8 of the Fact Sheet of this permit for the derivation of the dilution factors. Critical 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 observed effect level with survival, reproduction and growth as the end points. Tier IA & Tier IIA Surveillance level testing Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum frequency of once per year (1/Year) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinusfontinalis). Screening level testing —Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 of twice per year (2/Year) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). ME0\02032 PERMIT Page 19 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: The limitation in the monthly average column in table Special Condition A ofthis permit is defined as the arithmetic mean ofall the mercury tests ever conducted for the facility utilizing sampling Methods 1669 and analysis Method 1631E.
6. 

### Whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing

- Definitive WET testing is a multiconcentration testing event (a minimum offive dilutions bracketing the critical acute and chronic thresholds of5.9% and 4.0% respectively for Tier IA and Tier IIA and 11% and 7.7% respectively for Tier IB and Tier IBI), which provides a point estimate oftoxicity in terms ofNo Observed Effect Level, commonly referred to as NOEL orNOEC. It is noted the critical thresholds were derived as the mathematical inverse ofthe applicable dilution factors. See page 8 ofthe Fact Sheet ofthis permit for the derivation ofthe dilution factors. Critical A-NOEL is defined as the acute no observed effect level with survival as the endpoint. C-NOEL is defined as the chronic no observed effect level with survival, reproduction and growth as the end points. 

### Tier lA & 

### Tier IIA Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum frequency ofonce peryear (!/Year) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinusfontinalis). 

### 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 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 per year (2/Year) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis).

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 20 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: Tier 1B & Tier IIB Surveillance level testing — Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum frequency of twice per year (2/Year) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinusfontinalis). Screening level testing — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 of once per quarter (1/Quarter) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). WET test results must be submitted to the Department not later than the next Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) required by the permit, provided, however, that the permittee may review the toxicity reports for up to 10 business days of their availability before submitting them. The permittee shall evaluate test results being submitted and identify to the Department possible exceedences of the critical acute and chronic water quality thresholds specified above. See Attachment C of this permit for the Department's WET report form. Toxicity tests must be conducted by an experienced laboratory approved by the Department. The laboratory must follow procedures as described in the following USEPA methods manuals manuals as modified by Department protocol for salmonids. See Attachment D of this permit for the Department protocol.

a. Short Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluent and Receiving Water to Freshwater Organisms, Fourth Edition, October 2002, EPA-821-R-02-013. b. Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluent and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition, October 2002, EPA-821-R-02-012. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 20 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: 

### Tier 

### IB & 

### Tier liB Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 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 WET testing at a minimum frequency oftwice per year (2Near) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinusfontinalis). 

### 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 ifa timelyrequest 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 level WET testing at a minimum frequency ofonce per quatter (1/Quarter) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). WET test results must be submitted to the Depattment not later than the next Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) required by the permit, provided, however, that the permittee may review the toxicity rep01ts for up to 10 business days oftheir availability before submitting them. The permittee shall evaluate test results being submitted and identify to the Department possible exceedences ofthe critical acute and chronic water quality thresholds specified above. See 

### Attachment C ofthis permit for the Department's WET report form. Toxicity tests must be conducted by an experienced laborat01y approved by the Department. The laboratory must follow procedures as described in the following USEPA methods manuals manuals as modified by Department protocol for salmonids. See 

### Attachment D ofthis permit for the Departmentprotocol.

a. Sh01t Term Methods 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 Toxicitv ofEffluent and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition, October 2002, EPA-821-R-02-012.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 21 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: 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 of the Department form entitled, Maine Department of Environmental Protection, WET and Chemical Specific Data Report Form. See Attachment E of this permit.
7. Analytical chemistry — Refers to a suite of chemicals in Attachment E of this permit. Tier IA & Tier HA Surveillance level testing — Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency of twice per year (2/Year). Screening level testing — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency of once per calendar quarter (1/Quarter) for four consecutive calendar quarters. Tier 1B & Tier IIB Surveillance level testing — Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit), the permit

-tee shall conduct surveillance level analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency of once per quarter (1/Quarter). Screening level testing — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency of once per calendar quarter (1/Quarter) for four consecutive calendar quarters. 

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 21 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cant'd)
Footnotes: Each time a WET test is performed, the petmittee shall sample and analyze for the parameters in the WET Chemistry and the Analytical Chemistry sections ofthe Depmtment form entitled, Alaine Department of EnvironmentalProtection, WETand Chemical Specific Data ReportForm. 

### See AttachmentE ofthis permit.
7. Analytical chemistry- Refers to a suite ofchemicals in AttachmentE ofthis permit. TierlA & 

### TierIIA Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 24 months priorto 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 oftwice per year (2/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 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 analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency ofonce per calendar qumter (l/Quarter) for four consecutive calendar qumters. TierIB & 

### Tier liB Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon permit issuance and lasting through 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 per quarter (1/Qumter). 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 ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, oris replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall conduct analytical chemistry testing at a minimum frequency ofonce per calendar quarter (1/Qumter) for four consecutive calendar quarters.

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 22 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: 8. Priority pollutant testing — Refers to a suite of chemicals in Attachment E of this permit. Tier IA, Tier IIA, Tier IB & Tier IIB Screening level testing - Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 priority pollutant testing at a minimum frequency of once per year (1/Year), except for those analytical chemistry parameter(s) otherwise regulated in this permit. Surveillance level priority pollutant testing is not required pursuant to Department rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 530. Priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing shall be conducted on samples collected at the same time as those collected for whole effluent toxicity tests when applicable. Priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing shall be conducted using methods that permit detection of a pollutant at existing levels in the effluent or that achieve minimum reporting levels of detection as specified by the Department. See Attachment E of this permit for a list of the Department's most current reporting limits (RL's). Test results must be submitted to the Department not later than the next Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) required by the permit, provided, however, that the permittee may review the toxicity reports for up to 10 business days of their availability before submitting them. The permittee shall evaluate test results being submitted and identify to the Department, possible exceedences of the acute, chronic or human health AWQC as established in Surface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, 06-096 CMR 584 (effective October 9, 2005). For the purposes of DMR reporting, enter a "1" for yo, testing done this monitoring period or "NODI-9" monitoring not required this period. 9. Depth To Water Level Below Surface — Shall be measured to the nearest 1/10'h of a foot. 10.Ground Water Monitoring — Sampling shall be conducted in the month of May of each year. Consistent trends upwards or sudden spikes from previous levels shall be reported immediately to the Department, and may necessitate the need for additional ground water testing requirements. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 22 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: 8. 

### Priority pollutant testing- Refers to a suite ofchemicals in 

### Attachment E ofthis permit. 

### Tier IA, Tier IIA, Tier 1B & 

### Tier liB 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 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 screening level priority pollutant testing at a minimum frequency ofonce per year (1/Y ear), except for those analytical chemistry parameter(s) otherwise regulated in this permit. 

### Surveillance level priority pollutant testing is notrequired pursuant to Department rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 530. Prioritypollutant and analytical chemistry testing shall be conducted on samples collected at the same time as those collected for whole effluent toxicity tests when applicable. Prioritypollutant and analytical chemistry testing shall be conducted using methods that permit detection ofa pollutant at existing levels in the effluent or that achieve minimum reporting levels ofdetection as specified by the Depatiment. See 

### AttachmentE ofthis permit for a list ofthe Department's most current reporting limits (RL's). Test results must be submitted to the Department not later than the next Discharge MonitoringReport (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. 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 

### Swface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, 06-096 CMR 584 (effective October 9, 2005). For the purposes ofDMRreporting, enter a "I"**for~.** testing done this monitoringperiod or "NODI-9" monitoring not required this period. 9. 

### Depth To Water Level Below Surface- Shall be measured to the nearest 1/101 h ofa foot.
I0. 

### Ground Water Monitoring- Sampling shall be conducted in the month ofMay ofeach year. Consistent trends upwards or sudden spikes from previous levels shall be reported immediately to the Department, and maynecessitate the need for additional ground water testing requirements.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 23 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: 11. pH Range Limitation-- The pH value of the 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. B. NARRATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 1. The effluent shall not contain a visible oil sheen, foam or floating solids at any time which would impair the uses designated by the classification of the receiving waters. 2. The effluent shall not contain materials in concentrations or combinations which are hazardous or toxic to aquatic life, or which would impair the uses designated by the classification of the receiving waters. 3. The discharges shall not cause visible discoloration or turbidity in the receiving waters which would impair the uses designated by the classification of the receiving waters. 4. Notwithstanding specific conditions of this permit the effluent must not lower the quality of any classified body of water below such classification, or lower the existing quality of any body of water if the existing quality is higher than the classification. C. TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR The person who has the management responsibility over the treatment facility must hold a Grade III certificate (or higher) or must be a Maine Registered Professional Engineer pursuant 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 any person must be approved by the Department before the permittee may engage the services of the contract operator. MEOI02032 PERMIT Page 23 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes:
II. 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. 

### B. NARRATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 1. The effluent shall not contain a visible oil sheen, foam or floating solids at any time which would impairthe uses designated by the classification ofthe receiving waters. 2. The effluent shall not contain materials in concentrations or combinations which are hazardous or toxic to aquatic life, or which would impair the uses designated bythe classification ofthe receiving waters. 3. The discharges shall not cause visible discoloration orturbidity in the receiving waters which would impairthe uses designated bythe classification ofthe receiving waters. 4. Notwithstanding specific conditions ofthis permit the effluent must not lower the quality ofany classified body ofwater below such classification, or lower the existing quality of any body ofwater ifthe existing quality is higherthan the classification. 

### C. TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR The person who has the management responsibility over the treatment facility must hold a 

### Grade III cettificate (or higher) or must be a Maine Registered Professional Engineer pursuant 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.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 24 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS D. LIMITATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL USERS Pollutants introduced into the waste water collection and treatment system by a non-domestic source (user) shall not pass through or interfere with the operation of the treatment system. The permittee shall conduct an Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) at any time a new industrial user proposes to discharge within its jurisdiction, an existing user proposes to make a significant change in its discharge, or, at an alternative minimum, once every permit cycle and report the results to the Department. The IWS shall identify, in terms of character and volume of pollutants, any Significant Industrial Users discharging into the POTW subject to Pretreatment Standards under section 307(b) of the federal Clean Water Act, 40 CFR Part 403 (general pretreatment regulations) or Pretreatment Program, 06-096 CMR 528 (last amended March 17, 2008).
E. AUTHORIZED DISCHARGES The permittee is authorized to discharge only in accordance with: 1) the permittee's General Application for Waste Discharge Permit, accepted for processing on February 10, 2015; 2) the terms and conditions of this permit; and 3) only from Outfall #001. Discharges of waste water from any other point source are not authorized under this permit, and shall be reported in accordance with Standard Condition B(5)(Bypass) of this permit.
F. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT In accordance with Standard Condition D, the permittee shall notify the Department of the following. 1. Any introduction of pollutants into the wastewater collection and treatment system from an indirect discharger in a primary industrial category discharging process wastewater; and 2. Any substantial change (increase or decrease) in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into the wastewater collection and treatment system by a source introducing pollutants into the system at the time of permit issuance. For the purposes of this section, notice regarding substantial change shall include information on: (a) the quality and quantity of wastewater introduced to the wastewater collection and treatment system; and (b) any anticipated impact caused by the change in the quantity or quality of the wastewater to be discharged from the treatment system. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 24 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS D. LIMITATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL USERS Pollutants introduced into the waste water collection and treatment system by a non-domestic source (user) shall not pass through or interfere with the operation ofthe treatment system. The permittee shall conduct an Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) at any time a new industrial user proposes to discharge within itsjurisdiction, an existing user proposes to make a significant change in its discharge, or, at an alternative minimum, once everypermit cycle and report the results to the Department. The IWS shall 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 Water Act, 40 CFR Patt 403 (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: I) the permittee's General Application for Waste Discharge Permit, accepted for processing on February 10, 2015; 2) the terms and conditions ofthis permit; and 3) onlyfrom Outfall #001. Discharges of waste water 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. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT
In accordance with Standard Condition D, the permittee shall notify the Depattment ofthe following. 1. Any introduction ofpollutants into the wastewater collection and treatment system from an indirect discharger in a primary industrial category discharging process wastewater; and 2. Any substantial change (increase or decrease) in the volume or character ofpollutants being introduced into the wastewater collection and treatment system by a source introducingpollutants into the system at the time ofpermit issuance. Forthe purposes of this section, notice regarding substantial change shall include information on: (a) the quality and quantity ofwastewater introduced to the wastewater collection and treatment system; and (b) any anticipated impact caused by the change in the quantity or quality ofthe wastewater to be discharged from the treatment system.

### ME0102032 PERMIT Page 25 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS G. WET WEATHER FLOW MANAGEMENT PLAN The treatment facility staff shall maintain a current written Wet Weather Flow Management Plan to direct the staff on how to operate the facility effectively during periods of high flow. The Department acknowledges that the existing collection system may deliver flows in excess of the monthly average design capacity of the treatment plant during periods of high infiltration and rainfall. The plan shall conform to Department guidelines for such plans and shall include operating procedures for a range of intensities, address solids handling procedures (including septic waste and other high strength wastes if applicable) 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 have a current written comprehensive Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Plan. The plan shall provide a systematic approach by which the permittee shall at all times, properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of transport, treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. By December 31 of each year, or within 90 days of any process changes or minor equipment upgrades, the permittee shall evaluate and modify the O&M Plan 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 of completion of new and or substantial upgrades of the waste water treatment facility, the permittee shall submit the updated O&M Plan to their Department inspector for review and comment. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 25 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS G. WET WEATHERFLOW MANAGEMENT PLAN The treatment facility staffshall maintain a current written Wet Weather Flow Management Plan to direct the staffon how to operate the facility effectively during periods ofhigh flow. The Department acknowledges that the existing collection system may deliver flows in excess ofthe monthly average design capacity ofthe treatment plant during periods ofhigh infiltration and rainfall. The plan shall conform to Department guidelines for suchplans and shall include operating procedures for a range ofintensities, address solids handling procedures (including septic waste and other high 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 have a current written comprehensive Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Plan. The plan shall provide a systematic approach by which the permittee shall at all times, properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems oftransport, treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions ofthis permit. By December 31 ofeach year, orwithin 90 days ofany process changes or minor equipment upgrades, the permittee shall evaluate and modify the O&M Plan 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 Depatiment and EPA personnel upon request. Within 90 days ofcompletion ofnew and or substantial upgrades ofthe waste water treatment facility, thepermittee shall submit the updated O&M Plan to their Department inspectox for review and comment.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 26 of 27

W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS I. 06-096 CMR 530(2)(D)(4) STATEMENT FOR REDUCED/WAIVED TOXICS TESTING By December 31 of each calendar year, the permittee shall provide the Department with a certification describing any of the following that have occurred since the effective date of this permitfICIS Code 75305]: See Attachment F of the Fact Sheet of this permit for an acceptable certification form to satisfy this Special Condition. 1. Changes in the number or types of non-domestic wastes contributed directly or indirectly to the wastewater treatment works that may increase the toxicity of the discharge; 2. Changes in the operation of the treatment works that may increase the toxicity of the discharge; and 3. Changes in industrial manufacturing processes contributing wastewater to the treatment works that may increase the toxicity of the discharge. 4. Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity of the discharge. 5. Increases in the type or volume of hauled wastes accepted by the facility. The Department reserves the right to modify the Chapter 530 testing requirements if new information becomes available that indicates the discharge may cause or have a reasonable potential to cause exceedences of ambient water quality criteria/thresholds or that there have been changes in the character of the discharge or if annual certifications described above are not submitted.
J. REOPENING OF PERMIT FOR MODIFICATIONS Upon evaluation of the tests results or monitoring requirements specified in Special Conditions of this permitting action, new site specific information, or any other pertinent test results or information obtained during the term of this permit, the Department may, at any time, and with notice to the permittee, modify this permit to: (1) include effluent limits necessary to control specific pollutants or whole effluent toxicity where there is a reasonable potential that the effluent may cause water quality criteria to be exceeded; (2) require additional effluent or ambient water quality monitoring if results on file are inconclusive; or (3) change monitoring requirements or limitations based on new information. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 26 of27 W006792-6C-K-R 

### SPECIAL CONDITIONS I. 06-096 CMR 530(2)(D)(4) STATEMENT FORREDUCED/WAIVED TOXICS TESTING By December 31 ofeach calendaryear, the permittee shall provide the Department with a certification describing any ofthe following that have occurred since the effective date ofthis permit[!CIS Code 75305]: See AttachmentF ofthe Fact Sheet ofthis permit for an acceptable cettification form to satisfy this Special Condition.
I. Changes in the number or types ofnon-domestic wastes contributed directly or indirectly to 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 manufacturingprocesses contributing wastewater to the treatment works that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge. 4. Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity ofthe discharge. 5. Increases in the type or volume ofhauled wastes accepted by the facility. The Depmtment reserves the right to modify the Chapter 530 testing requirements ifnew infmmation becomes available that indicates the discharge may cause or have a reasonable potential to cause exceedences ofambient water quality criteria/thresholds or that there have been changes in the character ofthe discharge or ifannual certifications described above are not submitted. 

### J. REOPENING OFPERMIT FORMODIFICATIONS Upon evaluation ofthe tests results or monitoring requirements specified in Special Conditions ofthis permitting action, new site specific information, or any other pertinent test results or information obtained during the term ofthis permit, the Depmtment may, at any time, and with notice to the permittee, modify this permit to: (I) include effluent limits necessary to control specific pollutants or whole effluent toxicity where there is a reasonable potential that the effluent may cause water quality criteria to be exceeded; (2) require additional effluent or ambient water quality monitoring ifresults on file are inconclusive; or (3) change monitoring requirements or limitations based on new information.ME0102032 PERMIT Page 27 of 27

W006792-6C-K-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 shall be postmarked by the thirteenth ( • —ths) day of the month or handdelivered to a Department Regional Office such that the DMRs are received by the Department by the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the completed reporting period. A signed copy of the DMR and all other reports required herein shall be submitted, unless otherwise specified, to the Department's facility inspector at: Department of Environmental Protection Eastern Maine Regional Office Bureau of Water Quality Division of Water Quality Management

106 Hogan Road Bangor, Maine 04401 Alternatively, if you are submitting an electronic DMR (eDMR), the completed eDMR must be electronically submitted to the Department by a facility authorized DMR Signatory not later than close of business on the 15th day of the month following the completed reporting period. Hard Copy documentation submitted in support of the eDMR must be postmarked on or before the thirteenth Li )(lay of the month or hand-delivered to the Department's Regional Office such that it is received by the Department on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the completed reporting period. Electronic documentation in support of the eDMR must be submitted not later than close of business on the 15th day of the month following the completed reporting period.
L. SEVERABILITY In the event that any provision(s), or part thereof, of this permit is declared to be unlawful by a reviewing court, the remainder of the permit shall remain in full force and effect, and shall be construed and enforced in all aspects as if such unlawful provision, or part thereof, had been omitted, unless otherwise ordered by the court. ME0102032 PERMIT Page 27 of27 W006792-6C-K-R SPECIAL CONDITIONS 

### K. MONITORING AND REPORTING Monitoring results obtained during the previous month shall be summarized for each month and repmted on separate Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms provided bythe Department andshall be postmarked by the thilteenth (13 1 h) day ofthe month or handdelivered to a Department Regional Office such that the DMRs are received bythe Department by the fifteenth (15 1 h) day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. A signed copy ofthe DMR and all other reports required herein shall be submitted, unless otherwise specified, to the Depattment's facility inspector at: Department ofEnvironmental Protection Eastern Maine Regional Office Bureau ofWater Quality Division ofWater Quality Management 106 Hogan Road Bangor, Maine 04401 Alternatively, ifyou are submitting an electronic DMR (eDMR), the completed eDMRmust be electronically submitted to the Depattment by a facility authorized DMR Signatory not later than close ofbusiness on the 151 h day ofthe month following the completed repmting period. Hard Copy documentation submitted in suppott ofthe eDMR must be postmarked on or before the thirteenth (13 1 h) day ofthe month or hand-delivered to the Department's Regional Office such that it is received by the Department on or before the fifteenth (15 1 h) day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. Electronic documentation in suppott ofthe eDMR must be submitted not later than close ofbusiness on the 15 1 h day ofthe month following the completed reporting period. L. SEVERABILITY ln the event that any provision(s), orpart thereof, ofthis permit is declared to be 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, orpattthereof, had been omitted, unless otherwise ordered by the comt.

# ATTACHMENT A 

# I i i 

# i 

# I I 

# ATTACHMENT A 

# I I

i 

# r**~**



### l**~** 

### I 

# I 

# r I I 

### ' 

# I 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 B.5, 4500-P E, 4500-P F, 4500-P G, 4500-P H; ASTM D615-88(A), D515-88(B); USGS 1-4471-97, 1-4600-85, 1-4610-91; OMAAOAC 973.55, 973.56 (laboratory must be certified for any method 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/or jugs should be cleaned prior to each use with dilute HU- 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 Preiervation: During compositing the sample must be at 0-6 degrees C (without freezing), If the sample is being sent to a commercial laboratory or analysis cannot be performed the day of collection then the sample must be preserved using' H2SO4 to obtain a sample pH of <2 su ,and refrigerated at 0-6 degrees C (without freezing). The holding time for a preserved sample Is 28 days. Note: Ideally, Total P samples are preserved as described al4orie, However, If a facility is using a commercial laboratory then that laboratory may choose to add acid to the sample once it arrives at the laboratory. 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: If a 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 Cl 

### 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 8, 4500-P 8.5, 4500-P E, 4500-P F, 4500-P G, 4500-P H; ASTM D515-88(A), 0515-88(8); USGS 1-4971-97, 1-4600-85,1-4610-91; OMAAOAC 973.55, 973.56 (laboratory must be certified for any method. 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 botlles or a single jug made out ofglass or polyethylene. Botlles 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· H2

### S04 

### to obtain a sample pH of <2 su .and ·refrigerated at 0-6 degrees C (without freezing). The holding time for a preserved sample Is 28 days.

t**~** 

### Note: Ideally, Total P samples are preserved as described al:iol}e. However, If a facility is using a commercial laboratory then that laboratory may choose to add acid to the sample once it arrives at the laboratory. The Maine DEP will accept results that use either ofthese 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: If a 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 ATTACHMENT Bcalendar quarter

Sampling Date: mm dd yy Sampling Location: Weather Conditions: Sampling time: AM/PM

Please describe any unusual conditions with the influent or at the facility during or preceding the time of sample collection:

Optional test - not required but recommended where possible to allow for the most meaningful evaluation of mercury results: Suspended Solids mg/L Sample type: Grab (recommended) or Composite Maine Department of Environmental Protection 

### Effluent Mercury Test Report
Name of Facility: Federal Permit l ME
Purpose of this test:l Initial limit determination Compliance monitoring for: year Supplemental or extra test
SAMPLE COLLECTION INFORMATION

ANALYTICAL RESULT FOR EFFLUENT MERCURY Name of Laboratory: Date of analysis: Result: (PPT)

Please Enter Effluent Limits for your facility Effluent Limits: Average = Maximum = ng/L Please attach any remarks or comments from the laboratory that may have a bearing on the results or their interpretation. If duplicate samples were taken at the same time please report the average. CERTIFICATION I certifiy that to the best of my knowledge the foregoing information is correct and representative of conditions at the time of sample 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. Date: Title:

PLEASE MAIL THIS FORM TO YOUR ASSIGNED INSPECTOR
DEPLW 0112-B2007 Printed 1/22/2009 

# -----



# ---

--- Maine Department of Environmental Proteclion



### Effluent Mercury Test Report

Name ofFacility: Federal Permit# ME
Purpose ofthis test: §Initial limit determination Compliance monitoring for: year calendar quatier Supplemental or extra test

SAMPLE COLLECTION INFORMATION Sampling Date: Sampling time:

_____AMIPM mm dd yy Sampling Location: Weather Conditions: Please describe any unusual conditions with the influent or atthe facility during or preceding the time ofsample collection:

Optional test- notrequired butrecommended wherepossible 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 Effluent Limits 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:

PLEASE MAIL THIS FORM TO YOUR ASSIGNED INSPECTOR

DEPLW 0112-82007 Printed 1/22/2009

# ATTACHMENT C 

# ATTACHMENT C

# ~ f
l i t­ 

# ! 

# i I 

# I 

# I I I 

# I 

# I 1 

# lEffhadni



### PAIOnAte(17, suits j :• PIC A-NOEL C-NOEL A-NOEL C-NOEL water flea trout

Laboratory conducting test 

### laq MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY REPORT

FRESH WATERS 

### 10..#401T.Yakg: 140P11. Al:drink

By signing this form, I attest that to the best of my knowledge that the informationprovided is true, accurate, and complete. p4iVANTitrit 

### 041.03V00 4: mtnidd/yy rron/dd/yy .grfii:rBri!i:

QC standard lab control receiving water control cone. ( %) cone. 2 ( %) conc. 3 ( %) conc. 4 ( %) conc. 5 ( %) conc. 6 ( %)

stat test used 4A 

### .!1"il'**41': '

### '''''' %survival ''''2:

-,,c* h no. young - 

### t , % survival final weight (mg) A>90 C>80 A>90 C>80 > 2% increase 11111..11 .21MMEM 1110=111 111MIIIM MIIMIIIM
.1111.10=111.111 111.1

11 1111=

III 

### me mnim

. 11=MIIIIMIIIII 11111.11.111. 1=.1111 IIIIMII

IIIMMIIIIIIM IIIIIIMMIIIMI.

.11111 11.1.11

1111011.M1M01 11.1

- MIMMIIIMIIMIIMIl lii ii 111.1 .1111 111.1111 - place * nest to values statistically different from controls for trout show final wt and % incr for both controls .• • 

### VO*6401Ccii4N" KU A-NOEL M14: C-NOEL A-NOEL C-NOEL toxicant / date limits (mg/L) results (mg/L)
Bwr011ts

..

Report WET chemistry on DEP Form "ToxSheet (Fresh Water Version), March 2007."

DEPLW0741-B2007, Revised March 2007 Printed 1/22/2009 MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY REPORT FRESH WATERS**iF~HiitY:'RePres~~t~tiY~:;': ,----,----------,-,--,--SJg~t~t~~~::**  

### ,-. lly signing this form, I attest that to the best ofmy knowledge that the information proylded is true, accurate, and complete.



### 'l;:{:·::::::EmhentiihlU3.t!OhS1

# I

': QC standard lab control receivingwater control conc.1 ( %) cone. 2 ( %) cone. 3 ( %) cone. 4 ( %) cone. 5 ( %) cone. 6 ( %) stat test used

### :,r**~'·~:(tl~:~~::>::** %survival A>90 C>80 

# .... no. young >15/fcmale

place 

### * next to values statistrcally dtffcrcnt from controls . ,,_ ;; '''"'''

. .': 1_' %

### ""vi~~~ ""·""' ' ' ""

### fin~! weight (mg) A>90 C>80 > 2% increase

for trout show final wt and % incrfor both controls h·out A-NOEL 

## "·I A-NOELI C-NOEL

. . C-NOELt_

# =========:!=========j

toxicant I date A-NOEL A-NOEL
limits (mg/L) results (mg/L)

Laboratory conducting test**iColiip~i,yN;iu,~"** 

### i' ,·· .. ··.·

___________**C<1trip~ti.Y** 

### .**.R~J1** 

## .**.&M\~(l'rini¢<ll'i''.'-----------**

Report \VET chemistry on DEP Form "ToxShcct (Fresh Water Version), March 2007."

DEPLW0741·B2007, Revised March 2007 Printed 1/22/2009

# ATTACHMENT D ATTACHMENT D



# i


# r r i 

# I I

I ,- kc

## 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 Department modifications: Species - Brook Trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, or other salmonid approved by the 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 greater than 150% of the smallest. Loading Rate - < 0.5 g/l/day Feeding rate - 5% of body weight 3 times daily (15%/day) Temperature - 12° + 1°C Dissolved Oxygen - 6.5 mg/1 ,aeration if needed with large bubbles (> 1 mm diameter) at a rate of <100/min Dilution Water - Receiving water upstream of discharge (or other ambient water approved by the 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 of known suitable water quality Duration - Acute = 48 hours

-Chronic = 10 days minimum Test acceptability - Acute = minimum of 90% survival in 2 days

- Chronic = minimum of 80% survival in 10 days; minimum growth of 20 mg/grn/d dry weight in controls, (individual fish weighed, dried at 100°C to constant weight and weighed to 3 significant figures) 

## 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 by the Depattment. 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 greater than 150% ofthe smallest. Loading Rate- < 0.5 g/1/day Feeding rate- 5% ofbody weight 3 times daily (15%/day) Temperature- 12° ± 

### I°C Dissolved Oxygen

- 6.5 mg/1 ,aeration ifneeded with large bubbles (> 

### 1 mm diameter) at a rate of<100/min ' Dilution Water- Receiving water upstream ofdischarge (or other ambient water approved by the Department) Dilution Series - A minimum of5 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 1 00°C to constant weight and weighed to 3 significant figures)

# ATTACHMENT E ATTACHMENT E

# ~ r i

L I 

### I !

IReceiving Water to Ambient Effluent

Concentration (tig/1,. or as natant) Printed 7 /10/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chem This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. Facility Name MEPDES Pipe # Facility Representative Signature To the best of my Icnowiedgethls information is true, accurate and complete. Flow Avg. for Month (MGD)la Date Sample Analyzed Licensed Flow (MGD) Acute dilution factor Chronic dilution factor Human health dilution factor Criteria type: IIII(arine) or F(resh) Flow for Day (MGD)I i Date Sample Collected

Laboratory Address Telephone

Lab Contact ERROR WARNING I Essential facility FRESH WATER VERSION information Is missing. Please check required entries In bold above. Please see the footnotes on the last page. Lab ID t.

I , MIANHOLE EFFLUENT

### ToxIcrrY • IiiIVIR:N10.111Nitab*.digp10, ,,:-i.1,,,. 1 ,.1 0 ,Nli, ' '

.622Rill agalia0141. p. ,J p 

### "NlitAii!x-W141411.5gigifiliiIMERIPU Reporting Possible Exceedence (7) Effluent Limits, % WET Result, % Acute Chronic Do not enter % sign Limit Check Acute Chronic Trout - Acute Trout - Chronic Water Flea -Acute Water Flea - Chronic 

### 11.31.ZTrNTILfTadamiffillialEgia416JF 11 T rig WET CHEMISTRY 

### kiagfERTAIRIFIEEEMPRE

- m[M , : , ..A:TRMIEERITEigiliglilog: •Ili*ORIFORIP1131 pH (S.U) (9) . Total Organic Carbon (mg/L) (8) Total Solids (mgiLj Total Suspended

### solids (mq/L) Alkalinity (mg/L) ( 8 ) 1 Specific Conductance (umhos) i Total Hardness (mg/L) (8) Total Magnesium (mO/L) (8) Total Calcium/m9/L) (8)

, l' Ffi ',..,8 -iiru 7 Reporting Limit Check 1116rEfilk,

TI,I titijj ''"' v rat igaii

. ,42., iilla l 1 .igi'll,gi:I l Possible

7 Exceedence (7) r, 'rl ,,,, ',Lt ''`;'Al'IA1 -‘/TICAL. CHEMISTRY (3) jgrg:2:111 '.6111:514;" Also do these tests on the effluent with l r. lw liF4Igic7 „1„E i tt l toriul ''

.,: ''' ,k .,Lvii. '' , ,i , , 401 :1L-4.LAIREL

-97 -4, 1: L I '', 171 1ailit:" Effluent Limits, ug/L WET. Testing the is

on receiving water optional RepOrting Limit Acute ). Chronic

(s) Health63 Acute Chronic Health TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE (moiL) (9 ) 0.05 NA AMMONIA NA (8) M ALUMINUM NA (8) M ARSENIC 5 (8) ' 

### ivi CADMIUM 1 (8) M CHROMIUM 10 (8) 30 COPPER 3 (8) II CYANIDE, TOTAL 5 (8)

ifil CYANIDE, AVAILABLE (la) 5 (8 ) LEAD 3 (8) i NICKEL. 5

_ (8) SILVER 1 (8) M ZINC 5 • (8) ., Revised July 1, 2015 Pagel DEPLW 07441-H2015 I I Printed 7/10/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chern This form isfor reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP.

Facility Name---------- MEF>DES#

---­ F>ipe#

____ Facility Representative Signature Tothe best ofmy lm:;<m:;lod:::;:g:;e ,;;:!h:;;l,c;rn:<to::;rma;::;;tro::;.**:;n'-isc;tru:::::e,-;=:;:;:;:::,..:;:,.~an;::;;d:;co::m::p::l.,.::::-.** Ucensed Flow(MGO)

### ~ Acute dUution factor Chronic dilution factor

_ Human health dilutfon factor Crlterla type: M(arine} or F(resh) f**l!!lll!l~!lllliWll!HIIl!iiml~l\1ijill201i)i!)** Flowfor Day (MGD) 111

### ,_I

____,I FlowAvg. for Month (MGD)10

## I I

Date Sample Collected**r~----,1** DateSampleAnalyzed 

### I I Laboratory------------------ Telephone-------­

Address---------------­

ERROR WARNING l**~ntial** facility" information is missing. Please check required entries In bold above.

# --~~~~~~~~--~bCon~a-=;=====~:::;;:::::::;----- FRESH WATERVERSION 

### r Receiving Effluent Lab ID#

------­

### §~:~**E:IF~FL-~** TOXJCJT'{ Please see the footnotes on the last page.**Fffl••~nt**

## u_rnlts. % Acute c;nromc Water or Concentration (ugll. or Ambient as notoo:)



### '·,'

..**1!:~;** t·**-~:!;** 1 )1i<'l-::

. •:J-,·: ,: 'ii,. WET Result,% Do not enter% sign 'Ill;:' 1, j"'-j

I

## UmitCheCkk1Acut~e~O~hronic~~,(7)~

• '"," 

## '­

## ~WETC~£

I II ;olids 1Solids lmo/Ll L)

# ~~~M TOTAl
! , I '"'"'"(Sal ;A[ ILVER NC
Revised July 1, 2015 l Umit IL

Page1 DEPLW 0740-H2015



# --------·-----------------­Printed 7/10/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chem This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official
111 PRIORITY POLLUTANTS ' c4) .. -Amvz , IpT727

-frp47 5QPURTili fliggF

77017 'n ' '1 ''''' '''''''''

.`v; ':'''''4'''

.41/ 4 1-il'''' ,''' '. .1c.,;a:.,„: ,1 compliance reviews

liT z+17?

- eir i r,74 rtpre

- ft;mii ,, . il, -,,11 ' , ',ILI wa ''' 1,'1, `4 1 v-1 :- ' I'' will be done by DEP. 3ril ,

4

.;:i.,..,, ,1 q 1 i.,

ripFpr

. r:,rlir.11P

1 -:' 1 1 1:1`khEt

. A'Al'Al0 IL 'Llja!! l '' '

i]!; -5 ,t 6z, Effluent Limits Possible Exceedence (7)

. Reporting Limit Acute ) Chronic (6) Health(6) Reporting Limit Check Acute Chronic Health M ANTIMONY j 

### 5 *I ' BERYLLIUM 2 sPill0i0:;t1SRatit5.tglItMlittiSlilirftlMliglallitVlairMitttlliittAMMIMMILOiiiiftiattatifillaltnillailf tiltmotiritOlOn fotcutlitiogiNgaigir , t fiAtillmVARMA:$041474011trMiptikpgalegt M SELENIUM ' 5 DIA THALLIUM 4 A 12,4-DI CHLORO PH EN OL 5 A 24-DIMETHYLPHENDL 5 A 2,4-DINITROPHENDL 45 AI 2-CHLOROPHENOL 5 A 2-N7ROPHENOL 5 4,6 DINITRO-O-CRESOL (2-methy(-4,6- dinitrophenot 25 Al 4-NITROPHENOL 20 A P-CHLORD-M-CRESOL (3-methyl-4- chloropheno1)+1680 5 A PENTAOHLOROPHENOL 20 

### Al PHENOL 5 EN 1 2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 5 BIN 1 -2-(0)DICHLOROBENZENE 5 12-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE 20 EN 1,34M)DICHLOROBENZENE 5 EN 1,4-(P)DICHLOROBENZENE 5 SAN 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE 6 EN 2,6-DINITROTOLUENE 5 EN 2-CHLORONAPI-M-IALENE 5 3,3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINE 16_5 EN 3,4-BENZOMFLUORANTHENE 5 4.BROMOPHENYLPHENYL ETHER 5 BN 4-CHLOROPHENYL PHENYL ETHER 5 EN ACENAPHTHENE 

### 5 EN ACENAPHTHYLENE 5 SIN ANTHRACENE 5 ESN E ENZ1DINE 45 IN BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE SN BENZO(A)PYRENE 5 SIN BENZO(G.1-1,9_PERYLENE 5 SIN BENZO(K)PLUORANTHENE 5 1_131‘3 BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE 5 PIN BIS12-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER 6 SIN BIS(2-CHLORO:SOPROPYL)ETHER 6 EN BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 10 EN SUTYLBENZYL PHTHALATE 5 EN CHRYSENE 5 SIN Dl-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE 5 EN Di-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE 5 DIBENZO(A.H)ANTHRACENE 5 EN DIETHYL PHTHALATE 5 EN DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 5 SIN FLUORAI\M-tENE 5 Revised July 1, 20'15 Page 2 DEPLW 0740-1-12015 Printed 7/10/2015 Maine Departmentof Environmental Protection 

### we:r and Chern This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP.

'

# ~ .HY

i- FOr:i# ~-~ lRC



### ,... i­ ' ",' ' ' POLLUTANTS ( 4)

25

I :HJORC**~ENE ~E** 
.5

Ii

# H:: f\;l I

# ~ -lANE

# ~

;­ i­ .PHTHAI TE

Revised July 1, 2015 Page2 DEPLW 0740-H2015**·--H-~,+---------·----·-----** 

## --------- ,_____ -----··Printed 7/10/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WET and Chem This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP, BN FLUORENE 5 BN HEXACHLOROBENZENE 5 BN HEXACHLOROBUTADEENE 5 13N I HO. CACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE 10 BN I HEXACHLOROETHANE I 5 BN INDEN0(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE 5 BN ISOPHORONE 5 BN N-NITROSODI-N-PROPYLAMINE 10 BN N-NITROSODIMETHYLAIVIINE 5 BN N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE 5 BN NAPHTHALENE 5 BN NITROBENZENE 5 BN PHENANTHRENE 5 BN PYRENE 5 R 4,4'-DOD 0.05 R 4.4'-DDE 0.05 R 4,4'-DDT 0.05 R A-BHC 0.2 A-ENDOSULFAN 0.05 R ALDRIN 0.15 B-BHC 0.05 B-ENDOSULFAN 0.05 P CHLORDANE 0.1 D-BHC 0.05 P DIELDRIN 0.05 P ENDOSULFAN SULFATE 0.1 P ENDRIN 0.05 P ENDRIN ALDEHYDE 0.05 P G.-6HO 0.15 - P HEPTACHLOR 0.15 r P I HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE 0.1 P IPCB-1016 0.3 P IPCB-1221 0.3 P PCB-1232 0.3 PCB-1242 0.3 P PCB-1248 02 P PCB-1254 02 I? PCB-1260 0.2 P TOXAPHENE 1 111/ 1,1,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE 5 W 1,12.2-TETRACHLOROETHANE 7 W t 12-TRICHLOROET1-1ANE 5 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE 5
v 1,1-DICHLOROETHYLENE (1 ;II cilchloroethene) 3 1.2-DICHLOROEFHANE • 3 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 6 1,2-TRANS-0ICHLOROETHYLENE (1,2- V trans-dialloroethene) 5 1.3-DICHLOROPROPYLENE (1,3- I r W 2-CHLOROETI-3YLVINYL ETHER 20 IW ACROLEIN NA W ACRYLONITIRILE NA IV BENZENE 5 Revised July 1, 2015 Page 3 DEPLW 0740-1-12015 Printed 7110/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WETandChem This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP.

# ~~**~E;t;E** 

# llib;

IH! <AC 

## c-1 ;-I I I iYI.AI\,1lNE I I

# I

-**~** I 

## - ;-­ 

## ·.­**~**I LOR

';­

# ~ ;--­ 

### ;--­ 

# I ;--­ 

## .­

# ~~ 

# --'" 3

I ' '**I~** ?-2-l •v· '(1,2· 5 l '{1,3­ "VlNYL ETHER IACR rTRlLE Revised July 1, 2015 Page3 DEPLW0740-H2015

----------­ ..**-~·---·-** -­**-~--** ----­ I**--~---** ·---···-------·· 

### ---­Printed 711312015 

### MaineDepartment of Environmental Protection WET and Chem This form is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP, BROMOFORM 5 T W CARSON TETRACHLORIDE '5 N/ CHLOROBENZENE ' 6 ' CHLORODIBROMOMETHANE 3 IV CHLOROETHANE 5 1 1 IV CHLOROFORM 5 Ni DICHLOROBROMOMETHANE 3 V ETHYLBENZENE IC METHYL BROMIDE (Bromomethane) 5 1 pv !METI-IYL CHLORIDE (Chloromethane) 5 V METHYLENE CHLORIDE 5

1 TETRACHLOROETHYLENE (Perchloroethylene or Tetrachlorcethene) 5 ii TOLUENE 5 V TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TrichIoroethene) 3 y VINYL CHLORIDE 1 $ 1
totes: (1)Flow average for day pertains to WET/PP composite sample day. (2)Flow average for month is for month in which WErIPP sample was taken. (3)Analytical chemistry parameters must be done as part of the WET test chemistry. ]7•171 AiLi (3a) Cyanide, Available (Cyanide Amenable to Cillorination) is not an analytical chemistry parameter, but may be required by certain discharge permits . (4)Priority Pollutants snould be reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L). 

## ga ia. , edt , :

## Lrszzwzmgomvommmrsmtjimtvmamvggw 4 1MikillMaTaMer dsheet. (6) Effluent limits 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 consider watershed wide allocations for fresh water discharges. (8) These tests are optional for the receiving water. However, where possible samples of the receiving water should be preserved and saved for the duration of the 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. Comments:

Revised July 1, 2015 Page 4 DEPLW 0740-H2015

tPrinted 7/10/2015 Maine Department of Environmental Protection WETandChem This form**i~** for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP.

· 5 5 3 5**~otes:** . (1) Flowaveragefor day pertains to WETIPP composite sample day. (2) Flow average for month is for month in which WETIPP samplewastaken. (3) Analytical chemistrY parameters must be done as part ofthe WET test chemistry. "' (3a) Cyanide, Available (Cyanide Amenable to Ci\lorination) is not an analytical chemistry parameter, but may be required by certain discharge permits

.

(4) Priority Pollutants should be reported in micrograms per liter (ugll).**tt<SW~$J!!$fi%Meii®~B!!1!Mi!!JMN#Ia!\1111M!iiMEOld®IM!!'JIIIl91i'IMif4li!MtBW.llm!ffilmmactsheet.** (6) Effluent Limits are calculated based on dilution factor, background allocation (1 0%) and water quality reserves (15% -to allowfor new or changed discharges or non-point sources). (7) Possible Exceedence determinations are donefor a single sample only on a mass basis using the actual pounds discharged. This analysis does not considerwetershed wide allocations forfresh waterdischarges.

­ (8) These tests are optional forthe receiving weter. However, where possible samples ofthe receiving watershould be preserved and saved for the duration ofthe WET test. In the event ofquestions aboutthe receiving wate(s possible effect on the WET results, chemistrytests should then be conducted. (9) pH and Total Residual Chlorine must be conducted at the time ofsample collection. Tests forTotal Residual Chlorine need be conducted onlywhen an effluent has been chlorinated or residual chlorine is believed to be present for any other reason. Comments:

. Revised July 1, 2015 Page4 DEPLW 07 40-H2015**~-1+-\\,------------------------------------·** 

## ---- ---------- ------ 

# -------------------­

... ----------- .... --------- -· 

### -----­MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS

CONTENTS SECTION A TOPIC

GENERAL PROVISIONS PAGE

1 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 Property rights 3 9 Confidentiality 3 10 Duty to reapply 3 11 Other laws 3 12 Inspection and entry 3 B OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FACILITIES 1 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 1 General requirements 6 2 Representative sampling 6 3 Monitoring and records 6 D REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 1 Reporting requirements 7 2 Signatory requirement 8 3 Availability of reports 8 4 Existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers 8 5 Publicly owned treatment works 9 E OTHER PROVISIONS 1 Emergency action - power failure 9 2 Spill prevention 10 3 Removed substances 10 4 Connection to municipal sewer 10 F DEFINTIONS 10

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

SECTION
A I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
B 1 2 3 4 5 6 

## c I 2 3
D 1 2 3 4 5
E 1 2 3 4
F CONTENTS TOPIC PAGE
GENERAL PROVISIONS General compliance 2 Other materials 2 Duty to Comply 2 Duty to provide information 2 Permit actions 2 Reopener clause 2 Oil and hazardous substances 2 Property rights 3 Confidentiality 3 Duty to reapply 3 Other laws 3 Inspection and entry 3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FACILITIES General facility requirements 3 Proper operation and maintenance 4 Need to halt reduce not a defense 4 Duty to mitigate 4 Bypasses 4 Upsets 5 MONITORING AND RECORDS General requirements 6 Representative sampling 6 Monitoring and records 6 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Reporting requirements 7 Signatmy requirement 8 Availability ofreports 8 Existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers 8 Publicly owned treatment works 9
OTHER PROVISIONS Emergency action

- powerfailure 9 Spill prevention 10 Removed substances 10 Connection to municipal sewer 10
DEFINTIONS 10

Revised July 1, 2002 Page IMAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS A. GENERAL PROVISIONS General compliance. All discharges shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit; any changes in production capacity or process modifications which result in changes in the quantity or the characteristics of the discharge must be authorized by an additional license or by modifications of this permit; it shall be a violation of the terms and conditions of this permit to discharge any pollutant not identified and authorized herein or to discharge in excess of the rates or quantities authorized herein or to violate any other conditions of this permit. 2. Other materials. Other materials ordinarily produced or used in the operation of this 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 of Sections 307 and 311, respectively, of the 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 of such 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) of the 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 if the permit has not yet been 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 of the Board or Commissioner is subject to the penalties set forth in 38 MRSA, §349. 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 permit or to determine compliance with this permit, The permittee shall also furnish to the Department upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit. 5. Permit actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit condition. 6. Reopener clause. The Department reserves the right to make appropriate revisions to this permit in order to establish any appropriate effluent limitations, schedule of compliance or other provisions which may be authorized under 38 MRSA, §414-A(5).

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 2 MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS A. GENERALPROVISIONS I. General compliance. All discharges shall be consistent with the terms and conditions ofthis permit; any changes in production capacity or process modifications which result in changes in the 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) of the 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 permit has 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. 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 permit 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 permit. 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(5).

Revised July 

### I, 2002 Page 

### 2MAINE 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 of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under section 311 of the Federal Clean Water Act; section 106 of the 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 of records. 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, if made 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 of the 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. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. 11. Other laws. The issuance of this permit does not authorize any injury to persons or property or invasion of other property rights, nor does it relieve the permittee if its 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 of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to: (a) Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit; (b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions of this permit; (c) Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit; and (d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.

B, OPERATION AND MAINTENACE OF FACILITIES 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 3 MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD COND!TlONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS
7. Oil and hazardous substances. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution ofany legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under section 311 ofthe Federal Clean Water Act; section I06 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 of records. 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 of the 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 pennittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. 11. Other laws. The issuance ofthis permit does not authorize any injury to persons or property 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 under 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 OF FACILITIES 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 mmmer as to

Revised July I, 2002 Page 3MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS maximize removal of pollutants unless authorization to the contrary is obtained from the Department. (b) The permittee shall at all times maintain 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 of any wastewaters. (d) Final plans and specifications must be submitted to the Department for review prior to the construction or modification of any treatment facilities. (e) The permittee shall install flow measuring facilities of a design approved by the Department. (f) The permittee must provide an outfall of a 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 of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. 3. Need to halt or reduce activity not a defense. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. 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 environment. 5. Bypasses. (a) Definitions. (i) Bypass means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility. (ii) Severe property damage means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production. (b) Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. (c) Notice. (i) Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 4 MAINE 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 maintain 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 mannerthat 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 installed 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 auxiliaty facilities or similar systems which are insialled by a permittee only when the operation is necessaty 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 environment. 5. Bypasses. (a) Definitions. (i) Bypass means the intentional diversion ofwaste streams from any portion ofa treatment facility. (ii) Severe property damage means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production. (b) Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only ifit also is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions ofparagraphs (c) and (d) ofthis section. (c) Notice. (i) Anticipated bypass. If the 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 of bypass. (i) Bypass is prohibited, and the Department may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless: (A) Bypass was 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 auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and (C) The permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph (c) of this 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) of this 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 if the requirements of paragraph (c) of this 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 to judicial review. (c) Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that: (i) An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset; (ii) The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated; and (iii)The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in paragraph D(I)(f) , below. (24 hour notice). (iv)The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under paragraph B(4). (d) Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 5 MAINE 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 inparagraph D(I)(f), below. (24-hour notice). (d) Prohibition ofbypass. (i) Bypass is prohibited, and the Depmiment may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless: (A) Bypass was 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 auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and (C) The permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph (c) ofthis section. (ii) The Depatiment 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 petmittee. 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) An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify 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 in paragraph D(l)(f), below. (24 hour notice). (iv) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under paragraph B(4). (d) Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding the petmittee seeking to establish the occurrence ofan upset has the burden ofproof.

Revised July I, 2002 Page 5MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION 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 of monitoring 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 of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. If effluent limitations are based wholly or partially on quantities of a product processed, the permittee shall ensure samples are representative of times 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 of averages, unless specifically authorized by the Department. 3. Monitoring and records. (a) Samples and measurements taken for the purpose of monitoring shall be representative of the monitored activity. (b) Except for records of monitoring information required by this permit related to the permittee's sewage sludge use and disposal activities, which shall be retained for a period of at 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 of at least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request of the Department at any time. (c) Records of monitoring information shall include: (i) The date, exact place, and time of sampling 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 of such 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 I, 2002 Page MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS

C. MONITORING AND RECORDS 1. General Requirements. This penni! 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 pennittee shall provide the Department with periodic repOiis 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 or partially 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, repOii or application. This period may be extended by request ofthe Depatiment at any time. (c) Records ofmonitoring information shall include: (i) The date, exact place, and time ofsampling ormeasurements; (ii) The individual(s) who performed the sampling ormeasurements; (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 l, 2002 Page 6MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICAI3LE 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 in 40 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). (iii)The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the permittee's sludge use or disposal practices, and such alteration, addition, or change may justify the application of permit conditions that are different from or absent in the existing permit, including notification of additional use or disposal sites not reported during the permit application process or not reported pursuant to an approved land application plan; (b) Anticipated noncompliance. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Department of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. (c) Transfers. This permit is not transferable to any person except upon application to and approval of the Department pursuant to 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 forms provided or specified by the Department for reporting results of monitoring of sludge use or disposal practices. (ii) If the 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 of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR or sludge reporting form specified by the Department. (iii)Calculations for all limitations which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified by the Department in the permit. (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 of the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 7 MAINE 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 Depat1ment as soon as possibleof 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 in 40 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). (iii)The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the permittee's sludge use or disposal practices, and such alteration, addition, or change mayjustify 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 petmittee shall give advance notice to the Department of any platmed changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. (c) Transfers. This permit is not transferable to any person except upon application to and approval ofthe Department pursuant to 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 forms 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 Depatiment in the permit. (e) Compliance schedules. Repotis 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 enviromnent. 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 of the time the permittee becomes aware of the 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 1, 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 of the 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 in the permit. (C) Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants listed by the Department in the permit to be reported within 24 hours. (iii) The Department may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis for reports under paragraph (f)(ii) of this section if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. (g) Other noncompliance. The permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this section, at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed in paragraph (0 of this 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, report, 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 of reports. Except for data determined to be confidential under A(9), above, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Department. As required by State law, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal 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, of any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of the following "notification levels": (i) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1); (ii) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/l) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/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 in accordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(f).

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 8 MAINE 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 in the permit (C) Violation ofa maximum daily discharge limitation for any ofthe pollutants listed by the Department in the permit to be reported within 24 homs. (iii)The Department may waive the written report 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 permittee 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 incoJTect 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 Depat1ment's rules. State law provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation or certification in any application, record, report, 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 fotth 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 repot1 may result in the imposition ofcriminal sanctions as provided by law. 4. Existing manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultnral 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 (1 00 ug!l); (ii) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug!l) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (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 Depm1ment in accordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(f).

Revised July I, 2002 Page 8MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE 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 of the following "notification levels": (i) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l); (ii) One milligram per liter (1 mg/I) 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 by the Department in accordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(f). 5. Publicly owned treatment works. (a) All POTWs must provide adequate notice to the Department of the following: (i) Any new introduction of pollutants 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 in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into that POTW by a source introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time of issuance of the permit. (iii)For purposes of this paragraph, adequate notice shall include information on (A) the quality and quantity of effluent introduced into the POTW, and (B) any anticipated impact of the change on the quantity or quality of effluent to be discharged from the POTW. (b) When the effluent discharged by a POTW for a period of three consecutive months exceeds 80 percent of the permitted flow, the permittee shall submit to the Department a projection of loadings up to the time when the design capacity of the treatment facility will be reached, and a program for maintaining satisfactory treatment levels consistent with approved water quality management plans.
E. OTHER REQUIREMENTS 1. Emergency action - power failure. Within thirty days after the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall notify the Department of facilities and plans to be used in the event the primary source of power to 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 of primary 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 of the 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 or halt, reduce or otherwise control production and or all discharges upon reduction or loss of power to the wastewater pumping or treatment facilities,

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 9 MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE 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/l); (ii) One milligram per liter (l mg/l) for antimony; (iii)Ten ( l0) 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 Depmtment in accordance with Chapter 523 Section 5(!). 5. Publicly owned treatmentworks. (a) All POTWs must provide adequate notice to the Department ofthe following: (i) Any new introduction of pollutants into the POTW from an indirect dischm·ger which would be subject to section 30I or 306 of CW A or Chapter 528 if it were directly discharging those pollutants. (ii) Any substantial change in the volume or character ofpollutants being introduced into that POTW by a source introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time ofissuance ofthe 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 pennitted 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 thitty days after the effective date ofthis permit, the permittee shall notifY the Depattment offacilities and plm1s to be used in the event the primary source of power to its wastewater pumping and treatment facilities fails as follows. (a) Formunicipal 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 altemative power source sufficient to operate the wastewater pumping and treatment facilities orhalt, reduce or otherwise control production and or all discharges upon reduction or loss ofpower to the wastewater pumping or treatment facilities.

Revised July 

### I, 2002 Page 9MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS 2. Spill prevention. (applicable only to industrial sources) Within six months of the 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 of pulp, chemicals, oils or other contaminates and shall specify means of disposal and or treatment to be used. 3. Removed substances. Solids, sludges trash rack cleanings, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from the treatment or control of waste waters shall be disposed of in 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 of this permit, the following definitions shall apply. Other definitions applicable to this permit may be found in Chapters 520 through 529 of the Department's rules Average means the arithmetic mean of values 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 of daily discharges over a calendar month, calculated as the sum of all daily discharges measured during a calendar month divided by the number of daily discharges measured during that month. Except, however, bacteriological tests may be calculated as a geometric mean. Average weekly discharge limitation means the highest allowable average of daily discharges over a calendar week, calculated as the sum of all daily discharges measured during a calendar week divided by the number of daily discharges measured during that week. Best management practices ("BMPs") means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the State. BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material storage. Composite sample means a sample consisting of a minimum of eight grab samples collected at equal intervals during a 24 hour period (or a lesser period as specified in the section on monitoring and reporting) and combined proportional to the flow over that same time period. Continuous discharge means a discharge which occurs without interruption throughout the operating hours of the facility, except for infrequent shutdowns for maintenance, process changes, or other similar activities. Daily discharge means the discharge of a pollutant measured during a calendar day or any 24-hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day for purposes of sampling. For pollutants with limitations expressed in units of mass, the daily discharge is calculated as the total mass of the pollutant discharged over the day. For pollutants with limitations expressed in other units of measurement, the daily discharge is calculated as the average measurement of the pollutant over the day.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 10 MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS 2. Spill prevention. (applicable only to industrial sources) Within six months 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 or treatment to be used. 3. Removed substances. Solids, sludges trash rack cleanings, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from orresulting from the treatment or control ofwaste waters shall be disposed ofin a manner approved by the Depattment. 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. Forthe 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 weekly 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 or reduce 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, or drainage from raw material storage. Composite sample 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 on monitoring and reporting) and combined proportional to the flow over that 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-hour period 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 DISCHARGE ELIMINATION 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 of self-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 of EPA's. Flow weighted composite sample means a composite sample consisting of a mixture of aliquots collected at a constant time interval, where the volume of each aliquot is proportional to the flow rate of the discharge. Grab sample means an individual sample collected in a period of less than 15 minutes. Interference means a Discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: (1) 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 of the 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 of the SWDA), the Clean Air Act, the 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 of pollutants, the construction of which commenced:

(a)After promulgation of standards of performance under section 306 of CWA which are applicable to such source, or (b)After proposal of standards of performance in accordance with section 306 of CWA which are applicable to such source, but only if the standards are promulgated in accordance with section 306 within 120 days of their 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 cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation). Permit means an authorization, license, or equivalent control document issued by EPA or an approved State to implement the requirements of 40 CFR parts 122, 123 and 124. Permit includes an NPDES 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 11 MAINE POLLUTANTDISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PERMITS Discharge Monitoring Report ("DMR") means the EPA uniform national form, including any subsequent additions, revisions, ormodifications 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 IS minutes. Interference means a Discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: (l)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 of the SWDA), the Clean Air Act, the 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, orinstallation 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 ofCWA 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 cause 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 an NPDES general permit (Chapter 529). Permit does not include any pe1mit which has not yet been the subject of final agency action, such as a draft pe1mit or a proposed permit. Person means an individual, firm, corporation, municipality, quasi-municipal corporation, state agency, federal agency or other legal entity.

Revised July I, 2002 Page IIMAINE 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 or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged. Pollutant means dredged spoil, solid waste, junk, incinerator residue, sewage, refuse, effluent, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemicals, biological or radiological materials, oil, petroleum products or byproducts, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, dirt and industrial, municipal, domestic, commercial or agricultural wastes of any kind. Process wastewater means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct contact with or results from the production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, byproduct, or waste product. Publicly owned treatment works ("POTW") means any facility for the treatment of pollutants owned by the State or any political subdivision thereof, any municipality, district, quasi-municipal corporation or other public entity. Septage means, for the purposes of this permit, any waste, refuse, effluent sludge or other 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. Time weighted composite means a composite sample consisting of a mixture of equal volume aliquots collected over a constant time interval. Toxic pollutant includes any pollutant listed as toxic under section 307(a)(1) or, in the case of sludge use or disposal practices, any pollutant identified in regulations implementing section 405(d) of the CWA. Toxic pollutant also includes those substances or combination of substances, 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, on the basis of information 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, or physical deformations in such organism or their offspring. Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation 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 of an effluent measured directly by a toxicity test.

Revised July 1, 2002 Page 12 MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION 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 or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged. Pollutant means dredged spoil, solid waste,junk, incinerator residue, sewage, refuse, effluent, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemicals, biological or radiological 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 worl<s ("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 or other 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 or disposal practices, any pollutant identified in regulations implementing section 405( 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, on the basis ofinformation available to the board either alone orin 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 or ground 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 I, 2002 Page 12

### MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT MAINE WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE

FACT SHEET Date: July 10, 2015

PERMIT NUMBER: ME0102032 LICENSE NUMBER: W006792-6C-K-R NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT

P.O. Box 370 Guilford, Maine 04443 COUNTY: Piscataquis County NAME AND ADDRESS WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: 22 Dean Road Guilford, Maine 04443 RECEIVING WATER/CLASSIFICATION: Piscataquis River/Class B COGNIZANT OFFICIAL AND TELEPHONE NUMBER: Mr. Frank Ruksznis (207) 876-4598 fprgssd@myfairpoint.net 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY a, Application: The Guilford-Sangerville Sanitary District (GSSD/permittee hereinafter) has filed a timely and complete application with the Department for the renewal of combination Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #ME0102032/Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W006792-6C-H-R (permit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department on on June 11, 2010, for a five-year term. The 6/11/10 permit authorized the discharge of up to a monthly average flow of 0,93 million gallons per day (MGD) of secondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine. See Attachment A of this Fact Sheet for a location map. MAINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEMPERMIT & 

### MAINE WASTE DISCHARGE LICENSE FACT SHEET Date: July 10, 2015

PERMIT NUMBER: ME0102032 LICENSE NUMBER: W006792-6C-K-R NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: GUILFORD-SANGERVILLE SANITARY DISTRICT P.O. Box370 Guilford, Maine 04443 COUNTY: Piscataquis County NAME AND ADDRESS WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: 22 Dean Road Guilford, Maine 04443 RECEIVING W ATERICLASSIFICATION: Piscataquis River/Class B COGNIZANT OFFICIAL AND TELEPHONE NUMBER: Mr. FrankRuksznis (207) 876-4598 fprgssd@myfairpoint.net 1. 

### APPLICATION SUMMARY

a. Application: The Guilford-Sangerville SanitaryDistrict (GSSD/permittee hereinafter) has filed a timely and complete application with the Department for the renewal ofcombination Maine Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MEPDES) permit #ME0102032/Maine Waste Discharge License (WDL) #W006792-6C-H-R (permit hereinafter) which was issued by the Department on on June 11,2010, for a five-year term. The 6/11/10 permit authorized the discharge ofup to a monthly average flow of0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) ofsecondary treated sanitary waste waters to the Piscataquis River, Class B, in Guilford, Maine. See AttachmentA ofthis Fact Sheet for a location map.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 2 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY (cont'd) b. Source Description: The waste water treatment facility receives sanitary waste water flows from a population of approximately 1,200 residential and commercial users within the District's boundaries. The GSSD has one industrial contributor to its system, True Textiles. True Textiles is a manufacturer of polyester/woolen products that at full production capacity, contributes approximately 73% of the total flow, 97% of the total biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), 14% of the total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% of the chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. The GSSD is not currently required to develop a formal pretreatment program pursuant to federal regulations. The GSSD owns and maintains a sewer collection system that is approximately 11 miles in length and is 100% separated from the storm water collection system resulting in no combined sewer overflows (CSO) in the system. The collection system has seven (7) pump stations. Two of the seven pump stations have on-site back-up power and five are served by a portable generator. All seven pump stations are equipped with radio telemetry systems. The GSSD is not currently authorized to receive septage/transported wastes from local septage haulers. e. Waste Water Treatment: The GSSD waste water treatment facility became operational in January of 1988. The facility provides a secondary level of treatment via four aerated lagoons that are normally operated in series but can be operated in parallel if necessary. Aeration is provided by a fine bubble diffused aeration system. The four lagoons have a total surface area of 9.60 acres, have a volume of 38.0 million gallons and provides for a detention time of 65 days at the maximum monthly average design flow of 0.93 MGD. If needed, seasonal disinfection would be achieved by sodium hypochlorite and dechlorination would be accomplished by the addition of sodium bisulfite. Secondary treated waste waters are measured via a magnetic flow meter and are discharged to the Piscataquis River via a ductile iron pipe measuring 18 inches in diameter with a three port diffuser to enhance mixing of the effluent with the receiving water. See Attachment B of this Fact Sheet for schematic of the waste water treatment process. The District currently utilizes a reed bed with an area of approximately 3,000 square feet for sludge treatment. True Textiles pre-treats waste waters conveyed to the GSSD waste water treatment facility via flow equalization and neutralization utilizing an automated pH control system which adds acid or caustic chemical solutions as needed. The flow is measured using a parshall flume prior to being conveyed to the GSSD treatment facility. 2. PERMIT SUMMARY

a. Terms and conditions: This permitting action is carrying forward all the terms and conditions of the 6/11/10 permit except that this permit: . Eliminating water quality based concentration limits for ammonia and total copper pursuant to Maine law 38 M.R.S.A. §464, IN K. MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 2 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY (cont'd) b. Source Description: The waste water treatment facility receives sanitary waste water flows from a population ofapproximately 1,200 residential and commercial users within the District's boundaries. The GSSD has one industrial contributor to its system, True Textiles. True Textiles is a manufacturer ofpolyester/woolenproducts that at full production capacity, contributes approximately 73% ofthe total flow, 97% ofthe total biochemical oxygen demand (BODs), 14% ofthe total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% ofthe chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. The GSSD is not currently required to develop a formal pretreatmentprogram pursuant to federal regulations. The GSSD owns and maintains a sewer collection system that is approximately 11 miles in length and is l00% separated from the stormwater collection system resulting in no combined sewer overflows (CSO) in the system. The collection system has seven (7) pump stations. Two ofthe seven pump stations have on-site back-up power and five are served by a pmiable generator. All seven pump stations are equipped with radio telemetry systems. The GSSD is not currently authorized to receive septage/transported wastes from local septage haulers.

c. Waste Water Treatment: The GSSD waste water treatment facility became operational in January of 1988. The facility provides a secondary level oftreatment via four aerated lagoons that are normally operated in series but can be operated in parallel ifnecessary. Aeration is provided by a fine bubble diffused aeration system. The four lagoons have a total surface area of9.60 acres, have a volume of38.0 million gallons andprovides for a detention time of65 days at the maximum monthly average design flow of0.93 MGD. Ifneeded, seasonal disinfection would be achieved by sodium hypochlorite and dechlorination would be accomplished bythe addition ofsodium bisulfite. Secondarytreated waste waters are measured via a magnetic flow meter and are discharged to the Piscataquis River via a ductile iron pipe measuring 18 inches in diameter with a three port diffuser to enhance mixing ofthe effiuent with the receiving water. See Attachment B ofthis Fact Sheet for schematic ofthe waste water treatment process. The District currently utilizes a reed bed with an area ofapproximately 3,000 square feet for sludge treatment. True Textiles pre-treats waste waters conveyed to the GSSD waste water treatment facility via flow equalization and neutralization utilizing an automated pH control system which adds acid or caustic chemical solutions as needed. The flow is measured using a parshall flume prior to being conveyed to the GSSD treatment facility. 2. PERMIT SUMMARY

a. Terms and conditions: This permitting action is carrying forward all the terms and conditions ofthe 

### 6/11110 permit except that this permit:
I. Eliminating water quality based concentration limits for ammonia and total copperpursuant to Maine law 38 M.R.S.A. §464,**~~** 

### K.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 3 of 36 W006792-6C-K-R 2. PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 2. Reducing the monthly average mass limit for ammonia and increasing the daily maximum mass limit for total copper based on a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department and taking into consideration guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations when there are multiple dischargers in a watershed. 3. Eliminating monthly average and daily maximum mass and concentration limitations for total cadmium and total lead and the monthly average mass and concentration limits for total copper as a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department indicates there is no longer a reasonable potential for these parameters to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria (AWQC). 4. Establishing a monitoring requirement for total phosphorus as the discharge from the permittee's facility has a reasonable potential to exceed the Department's draft ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) of 30 ug/L. 5. Establishing a monthly average mass limit for total antimony as a statistical evaluation of the most current 60 months of analytical chemistry and priority pollutants on file at the Department indicates there are test results for total antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria AWQC. 6. Reducing the monitoring requirements for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), chemical oxygen demand (COD), settleable solids and E. coil bacteria from 2/Week to 1/Week for Tier IA (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD) as a result of a statistical evaluation of test results for said parameters during the term of the previous permit. b. History: The most current relevant regulatory activities include the following: August 28, 1997 — The Department issued WDL renewal #W006792-47-F-R for a five-year term. February 11, 1998 - The EPA issued NPDES permit #ME0102032 for a five-year term. May 23, 2000 — The Department adminstratively modified the GSSD's WDL by establishing interim average and maximum concentration limits of 25.9 ng/L and 38.7 ng/L respectively, for mercury. January 12, 2001--The State of Maine received authorization from the USEPA to administer the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program in Maine. From that date forward, the program has been referred to as the MEPDES permit program and ME0102032 remains the primary reference number for the GSSD waste water treatment facility ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 3 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 2. 

### PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) 2. Reducing the monthly average mass limit for ammonia and increasing the daily maximum mass limit for total copper based on a statistical evaluation ofthe most culTent 60 months ofanalytical chemistly and priority pollutants on file at the Department and taking into consideration guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations when there are multiple dischargers in a watershed. 3. Eliminating monthly average and daily maximum mass and concentration limitations for total cadmium and total lead and the monthly average mass and concentration limits for total copper as a statistical evaluation ofthe most current 60 months ofanalytical chemistry and prioritypollutants on file at the Department indicates there is no longer a reasonable potential for these parameters to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria (AWQC). 4. Establishing a monitoring requirement for total phosphorus as the discharge from the permittee's facility has a reasonable potential to exceed the Depmiment's draft ambient water quality criteria (A WQC) of30 ug/L. 5. Establishing a monthly average mass limit for total antimony as a statistical evaluation ofthe most current 60 months ofanalytical chemistty and priority pollutants onfile atthe Department indicates there are test results for total antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria AWQC.
6. Reducing the monitoring requirements for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), chemical oxygen demand (COD}, settleable solids and

### E. coli bacteria from 2!Week to I!Weekfor Tier IA (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dty weather flows are .::;0.465 MGD) as a result ofa statistical evaluation oftest results for said parameters during the term ofthe previous permit. b. Histow: The most current relevant regulatory activities include the following: 

### August28, 1997- The Depatiment issued WDL renewal #W006792-47-F-R for a five-year term. 

### Februwy 11, 1998- The EPAissuedNPDES petmit #ME0102032 for a five-year term. 

### May 23, 2000- The Department adminstratively modified the GSSD's WDL by establishing interim average and maximum concentration limits of25.9 ng/L and 38.7 ng/L respectively, for mercury. 

### Januwy 12, 2001- The State ofMaine received authorization from the USEPA to administer the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitprogram inMaine. From that date forward, the program has beenrefen·ed to as the MEPDES permit program and ME0102032 remains the primary reference number for the GSSD waste water treatment facility

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 4 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 2. PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) September 17, 2001 — The GSSD filed a timely application with the EPA to renew the NPDES for the waste water treatment facility. The application was never acted on as EPA was not authorized to issue NPDES permits in the disputed area of the State until a decision regarding authorization of the NPDES program was finalized. August 11, 2004 — The Department issued combination MEPDES permit #ME0102032/WDL W006792-5L-G-R for a five-year term. February 6, 2006 -The Department issued a minor revision to the 8/11/04 permit by reducing the monitoring frequency for mercury from 4/Year to 1/Year. April 10, 2006— The Department administratively Modified the 8/11/04 permit by establishing revised monitoring requirements for whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing and chemical specific testing pursuant to a new Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, Surface Water Toxics Control Program. March 24, 2010 — The GSSD submitted an application to the Department to renew the 8/11/04 permit. June 11, 2010 - The Department issued MEPDES permit #ME0102032/MWDL #W006792-6C-H-R for a five year term September 10, 2013 — The Department issued a minor revision to the 8/11/04 permit by eliminating the water quality based limitations for inorganic arsenic given the discharge no longer exceeded or had a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria. February 9, 2015 — The GSSD submitted a timely and complete application to the Department for the renewal of the MEPDES permit!WDL. 3. CONDITIONS OF PERMITS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A. Section 414-A, requires that the effluent limitations prescribed for discharges, including, but not limited to, effluent toxicity, require application of best 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 Toxics Control Program, 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 of toxic pollutants such that existing and designated uses of surface waters are maintained and protected. MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 4 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 2. PERMIT SUMMARY (cont'd) September 17, 2001- The GSSD filed a timely application with the EPA to renew the NPDES for the waste water treatment facility. The application was never acted on as EPA was not authorized to issue NPDES permits in the disputed area ofthe State until a decision regarding authorization ofthe NPDES program was finalized. 

### August 11, 2004- The Department issued combination MEPDES permit #ME0102032/WDL W006792-5L-G-R for a five-year term. 

### Februmy 6, 2006- The Department issued a minor revision to the 8/11104 permit byreducing the monitoring frequency for mercury from 4/Year to 1/Y ear. 

### Aprill0, 2006- The Department administratively modified the 8/11/04 permit by establishing revised monitoring requirements for whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing and chemical specific testing pursuant to a newDepartment rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, 

### Swface Water Toxics Control Program. March 24, 2010- The GSSD submitted an application to the Department to renew the 8/11/04 permit. 

### June 11, 2010- The Department issued MEPDES permit #MEOI02032/MWDL #W006792-6C-H-R for a five year term

1

### September 10, 2013

- The Department issued a minor revision to the 8/11/04 permit by eliminating the

water quality based limitations for inorganic arsenic given the discharge no longer exceeded orhad a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria. 

### February 9, 2015- The GSSD submitted a timely and complete application to the Department for the renewal ofthe MEPDES permit/WDL. 

### 3. CONDITIONS OF PERMITS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A. Section 414-A, requires that the 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 Depmiment rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, 

### Swface Water Toxics Control Program, require the regulation oftoxic substances not to exceed levels set forth in Depatiment rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 584, 

### Swface 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.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 5 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 4. RECEIVING WATER STANDARDS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 467(7)(E)(1)(b&c) classify the Piscataquis River from the Route #15 bridge in Guilford to its confluence with the Penobscot River as a Class B waterway. Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 465(3) describes standards for classification of Class B waters as follows: Class B waters must be of such quality that they are suitable for the designated uses of drinking water supply after treatment; fishing; agriculture; recreation in and on the water; industrial process and cooling water supply; hydroelectric power generation, except as prohibited under Title 12, section 403; navigation; and as habitat for fish and other aquatic life. The habitat must be characterized as unimpaired. The dissolved oxygen content of Class B waters may not be less than 7 parts per million or 75% of saturation, whichever is higher, except that for the periodfrom October 1st to May 14th, in order to ensure spawning and egg incubation of indigenous fish species, the 7-day mean dissolved oxygen concentration may not be less than 9.5 parts per million and the 1-day minimum dissolved oxygen concentration may not be less than 8.0 parts per million in identified fish spawning areas. Between May 15th and September 30th, the number of Escherichia coli bacteria of human and domestic animal origin in these waters may not exceed a geometric mean of 64 per 100 milliliters or an instantaneous level of 236 per 100 milliliters. In determining human and domestic animal origin, the department shall assess licensed and unlicensed sources using available diagnostic procedures. Discharges to Class B waters may not cause adverse impact to aquatic life in that the receiving waters must be of sufficient quality to support all aquatic species indigenous to the receiving water without detrimental changes in the resident biological community. 5. RECEIVING WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS The Department conducted ambient water 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 of a total maximum daily load (TMDL) report. Ambient water quality sampling was conducted on 23 miles of the Piscataquis River from Guilford to Milo. The Department published a document entitled, Piscataquis River Data Report, 2001 Survey, January 2002, DEPLW0465, with the results of the sampling events. The 2012 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, published by the Department (often referred to as the 305b Report) lists a 13.44 mile segment of the main stem of the Piscataquis River below the Dover-Foxcroft waste water treatment facility(ADB Assessment Unit ID ME0102000402_219R01) in a table entitled, Table 5-A: Rivers And Streams Impaired By Pollutants Other Than Those Listed in 5-B Through 5-D (TMDL Required). The report cites the cause of the impairment is low dissolved oygen levels. Previous 305b reports listed low dissolved oxygen levels and bacteria as a result of municipal point sources, agricultural non-point sources and combined sewer overflows as being the cause of the impairment. The Department is scheduled to perform a comprehensive ambient water quality survey during the summer of 2015 and prepare a TMDL for the 12-mile segment during calendar year 2016. If the TMDL indicates that atfull permitted discharge limits, the discharge from the GSSD facility is causing or contributing to the nonattainment of ambient water quality standards, this permit will be re-opened per Special Condition J, Reopening Of The Permit For Modifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meet water quality standards. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 5 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 4. RECEIVING WATER STANDARDS Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 467(7)(E)(l)(b&c) classify the Piscataquis River from the Route #15 bridge in Guilford to its confluence with the Penobscot River as a Class B waterway. Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A., Section 465(3) describes standards for classification ofClass B waters as follows: Class B waters must be of such quality that they are suitable for the designated uses of drinking water supplyafter treatment;fishing; agriculture; recreation in andon the water; industrialprocess and cooling water supply; hydroelectricpowergeneration, except asprohibited under Title 12, section 403; navigation; andas habitatforftsh andother aquatic life. The habitatmustbe characterizedas unimpaired. The dissolvedoxygen content of Class B waters maynot be less than 

### 7partspermillion or 75% of saturation, whichever is higher, except that for theperiod ji·om October 1 sfto May 14th, in order to ensure spawning andegg incubation of indigenous fish species, the 7-day mean dissolvedoxygen concentration maynotbe less than 9.5partspermillion andthe 1-dayminimum dissolved oxygen concentration maynot be less than 8. 0partspermillion in identified fish spawningareas. BetweenMay 15th andSeptember 30th, the number of Escherichia coli bacteria of human anddomestic animal origin in these waters maynot exceeda geometric mean of 64per 100 milliliters or an instantaneous level of 236per 100 milliliters. In determining human anddomestic animal origin, the department shallassess licensed andunlicensedsources using available diagnosticprocedures. Discharges to Class B waters maynot cause adverse impact to aquatic life in that the receivingwaters must be of sufficientquality to support all aquatic species indigenous to the receiving water without detrimental changes in the resident biological community. 5. RECEIVING WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS The Department conducted ambient water 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 of a total maximum daily load (TMDL) report. Ambient water quality sampling was conducted on 23 miles of the Piscataquis River from Guilford to Milo. The Department published a document entitled, Piscataquis RiverData Report. 2001 Survev. Januarv 2002. DEPLW0465, with the results ofthe sampling events. The 2012 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, published bythe Depmiment (often referred to as the 305b Report) lists a 13.44 mile segment ofthe main stem ofthe Piscataquis River below the Dover-Foxcroft waste water treatment facility(ADB Assessment Unit ID ME0102000402_219R01) in a table entitled, Table 5-A: RiversAndStreams ImpairedByPollutants Other Than Those Listedin 5-B Through 5-D (FMDL Required). The report cites the cause ofthe impairment is low dissolved oygen levels. Previous 305b repotis 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 of 2015 and prepare a TMDL for the 12-mile segment during calendar year 2016. Ifthe TMDL indicates that at full permitted discharge limits, the discharge from the GSSD facility is causing or contributing to the nonattainment ofambient water quality standards, this permit will be re-opened per Special Condition 

### J, Reopening ()[The PermitForModifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meet water quality standards.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 6 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS The GSSD has one industrial contributor to its system, True Textiles. True Textiles is a manufacturer of polyester/woolen products that contributes approximately 73% of the total flow (at full production), 97% of the total biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) and 14% of the total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% of the chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. The EPA has developed National Effluent Guidelines and Standards found at 40 CFR, Part 410, Textile Mills Point Source Category for facilities such as Interface. Applicable subparts of 40 CFR Part 410 include: Subpart B - Wool Finishing Subcategory — Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills that are wool finishers including processes such as carbonizing, filling, dyeing, bleaching, rinsing, fireproofing, and other similar processes. True Textiles conducts wool stock dyeing at its facility. The most stringent technology based [best practicable treatment (BPT) and or best available technology economically achievable (BAT)] limitations expressed in pounds/I 000 pounds of wool have been established for the following parameters: Daily Maximum Daily Average BOD 22.4 11.2 COD 163 81.5 TSS 35.2 17.6 Sulfide 0.28 0.14 Phenol 0.14 0.07 Total Chromium 0.14 0.07 For the purposes of the regulation, wool means the dry raw wool as it is received by the wool scouring mill. Subpart C — Low Water Use Processing Subcategory — Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills that include processes such as yarn manufacturing, yarn texturizing, unfinished fabric manufacturing, fabric coating, fabric laminating, tire cord and fabric dipping, and carpet tufting and carpet backing. True Textiles conducts polyester yarn texturing operations at its facility. The most stringent technology based BPT and or BAT limitations for general processing expressed in pounds/1000 pounds of wool have been established for the following parameters: Daily Maximum Daily Average BOD 1.4 0.7 COD 2.8 1.4 TSS 1.4 0.7 Subpart G - Stock & Yarn Finishing Subcategory - Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills that include processes such as stock or yarn dyeing or finishing which may include unit operations and processes such as cleaning, scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing and special finishing. True Textiles conducts polyester stock and yarn dyeing operations. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 6 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS The GSSD has one industrial contributor to its system, True Textiles. True Textiles is a manufacturer of polyester/woolen products that contributes approximately 73% ofthe total flow (at full production), 97% ofthe total biochemical oxygen demand (BODs) and 14% ofthe total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% ofthe chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. The EPA has developed National Effluent Guidelines and Standards found at 40 CFR, Patt 410, 

### Textile Mills Point Source CategoiJ' for facilities such as Interface. Applicable subparts of40 CFR Patt 410 include: 

### Subpart B- Wool Finishing Subcategmy- Is applicable 

### to process waters resulting from textile mills that are wool finishers includingprocesses such as carbonizing, fulling, dyeing, bleaching, rinsing, fireproofing, and other similarprocesses. True Textiles conducts wool stock dyeing at its facility. The most stringent technology based [best practicable treatment (BPT) and or best available technology economically achievable (BAT)]limitations expressed in pounds/!000 pounds ofwool have been established for the following parameters: Dailx Maximum Dailx Average BOD 22.4 11.2 COD 163 81.5 TSS 35.2 17.6 Sulfide 0.28 0.14 Phenol 0.14 0.07 Total Chromium 0.14 

### O.D7
Forthe purposes ofthe regulation, 

### wool means the dry raw wool as it is received by the wool scouring mill. 

### Subpart 

### C- Low Water Use Processing Subcategmy- Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills that include processes such as yarn manufacturing, yarn texturizing, unfinished fabric manufacturing, fabric coating, fabric laminating, tire cord and fabric dipping, and carpet tufting and carpet backing. True Textiles conducts polyester yarn texturing operations at its facility. The most stringent technology based BPT and or BAT limitations for general processing expressed in pounds/1000 pounds ofwool have been established for the following parameters: DailyMaximum Daily Average BOD 1.4 0.7 COD 2.8 1.4 TSS 1.4 0.7 

### Subpart G- Stock & 

### Yarn FinishingSubcategmy- Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills that include processes such as stock or yarn dyeing or finishing which may include unit operations and processes such as cleaning, scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing and special finishing. True Textiles conducts polyester stock and yarn dyeing operations.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 7 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) The most stringent technology based BPT and or BAT limitations expressed in pounds/1000 pounds of wool have been established for the following parameters: Daily Maximum Daily Average BOD 6.8 3.4 COD 84.6 42.3 TSS 17.4 8.7 Sulfide 0.24 0.12 Phenol 0.12 0.06 Total Chromium 0.12 0.06

a. Tiered Limitations — The 8/11/04 permit established four tiers of limitations due to concerns surrounding the applicability and imposition of effluent limitations for certain metals under various discharge flows and production regimes at True Textiles. Tier I and Tier II limitations are differentiated by a mutually agreed upon production level threshold of 42,000 lbs/day for 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn Finishing) category. Tier I limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable when Subpart G production is less than 42,000 lbs/day for 10 production days or less during a calendar month and Tier 11 limitations are applicable when Subpart G production is greater than or equal to 42,000 lbs/day for more than 10 production days during a calendar month. Tier IA and Tier TB (as well as Tier 11A & Tier JIB) are differentiated by the monthly average dry weather flow limitations of 0.465 MGD and 0.93 MGD, respectively. Therefore, the limitations applicable at any given time are based on: TIER IA — Subpart G production <42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow <0.465 MGD. TIER IB - Subpart G production <42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow >0.465 MGD. TIER IIA — Subpart G production >42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow <0.465 MGD. TIER IIB - Subpart G production >42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow >0.465 MGD. It is noted the permittee has been operating under the TIER IA criteria for the full term of the 8/11/04 permit. b. Flow: As a result of the imposition of water quality based mass limits for metals in this permit and to address future production increases at True Textiles, the Department and GSSD mutually agreed to establish four tiers of limits for all parameters. As a result, the 8/1 1/04 permit established a monthly average limit of 0.465 MGD ('/2 of the facility design flow) for Tier IA and Tier IIA. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 7 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) The most stringent technology based BPT and or BAT limitations expressed in pounds/!000 pounds of wool have been established for the following parameters: DailyMaximum Daily Average BOD 6.8 3.4 COD 84.6 42.3 TSS 17.4 8.7 Sulfide 0.24 0.12 Phenol 0.12 0.06 Total Chromium 0.12 0.06

a. Tiered Limitations- The 8/11/04 petmit established four tiers oflimitations due to concerns surrounding the applicability and imposition ofeffluent limitations for certain metals under various discharge flows and production regimes at True Textiles. Tier I and Tier II limitations are differentiated by a mutually agreed uponproduction level threshold of42,000 lbs/day for 40 CFR, Patt410, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn Finishing) category. Tier I limitations and monitoring requirements are applicable when Subpart G production is less than 42,000 lbs/day for 10 production days or less during a calendar month and Tier II limitations are applicable when Subpart G production is greater than or equal to 42,000 lbs/day for more than I 0 production days during a calendar month. Tier IA and TierIB (as well as Tier ITA & Tier liB) are differentiated by the monthly average dry weather flow limitations of0.465 MGD and 0.93 MGD, respectively. Therefore, the limitations applicable at any given time are based on: 

### TIER IA- Subpart G production <42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow ::':0.465 MGD. 

### TIER IB- Subpart G production <42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dryweather flow >0.465 MGD. 

### TIERIIA- Subpart G production 2::42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dry weather flow :S0.465 MGD. 

### TIER 

### liB- Subpart G production 2::42,000 lbs/day and monthly average dtyweather flow >0.465 MGD. It is noted the permittee has been operating under the TIER IA criteria for the full term ofthe 8111/04 permit. b. Flow: As a result ofthe imposition ofwater qualitybased mass limits for metals in this permit and to address future production increases at True Textiles, the Department and GSSD mutually agreed to establish four tiers oflimits for all parameters. As a result, the 8/11/04 permit established a monthly average limit of0.465 MGD 

### (Yz ofthe facility design flow) for Tier !A and Tier IIA.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 8 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) For Tier 1B and Tier IIB, the previous permitting action established a monthly average limit of 0.93 MGD which is the design capacity of the lagoon system. The monthly average flow limits are being carried forward in this permitting action. A review of the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) data for the period January 2012 — January 2015 indicates flow values have been reported as follows: Flow MRs=34 Value Limit (MGD) Range (MGD) Mean (MGD) Monthly average 0.465 0.161 — 0.536 0.284 Daily maximum Report 0.351 — 0.998 0.548 c. Dilution Factors - The Department established applicable dilution factors for the discharge in accordance with freshwater protocols established in Department Rule Chapter 530 Surface Water Toxics Control Program, October 2005. The Department has determined that the discharge receives rapid and complete mixing with the receiving water due to the 3-port diffuser on the outfall pipe. With permit flow limits of 0.465 MGD (Tier IA & Tier IIA) and 0.93 MGD (Tier IB & Tier IIB), the dilution factors are as follows: TIER IA & TIER IIA (11.5 cfs)(0.6464(1)) + (0.465 MGD) = 17:1 Acute: 1Q10 = 11.5 cfs (0.465 MGD) Chronic: 7Q10 = 17.3 cfs f17.3 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.465 MGD) = 25:1 (0.465 MGD) Harmonic Mean: = 135 cfst 2 = (135 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.465 MGD) = 189:1

(0.465 MGD) TIER IB & TIER IIB Acute: 1Q10 = 11.5 cfs —> (11.5 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.93 MGM = 9.0:1

(0.93 MGD) Chronic: 7Q10 = 17.3 cfs (17.3 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.93 MGD) = 13.0:1 (0.93 MGD) Harmonic Mean: = 135 cfs(1) = (135 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.93 MGM = 94:1

(0.93 MGD) 1 cubic feet per second (cfs) = 0.6464 million gallons per day (MGD) ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 8 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (con!'d)
For Tier IB and Tier liB, the previous permitting action established a monthly average limit of 0.93 MGD which is the design capacity ofthe lagoon system. The monthly average flow limits are being carried forward in this permitting action.
A review ofthe monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) data for theperiod January 2012- January 2015 indicates flow values have been reported as follows: 

### Flow (DMRs=34)



### Value Limit (MGD) Range (MGD) Mean (MGD) Monthly average 0.465 0.161-0.536 0.284 Daily maximum Repmt 0.351

- 0.998 0.548

c. Dilution Factors

- The Depattment established applicable dilution factors for the discharge in accordance with freshwater protocols established in Department Rule Chapter 530 

### Surface Water Taxies Control Program, October 2005. The Department has determined that the discharge receives rapid and complete mixing with the receiving water due to the 3-port diffuser on the outfall pipe. With permit flow limits of 0.465 MGD (Tier IA & Tier IIA) and 0.93 MGD (Tier IB & Tier liB), the dilution factors are as follows: 

### TIER IA & 

### TIERIIA Acute: 1 Q 10 = 11.5 cfs 

### => (11.5 cfs)(0.6464(1)) 

### + (0.465 MGD) = 17:1 (0.465 MGD) Chronic: 7Q10 = 17.3 cfs 

### => (17.3 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.465 MGD) = 25:1 (0.465 MGD) Harmonic Mean:= 135 cfs(2) 

### => (135 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.465 MGD) = 189:1 (0.465MGD) 

### TIER IB & 

### TIER liB Acute: 1Q10 = 11.5 cfs 

### => (11.5 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.93 MGD) 

## =9.0:1 (0.93 MGD) Chronic: 7Q10 

### = 17.3 cfs 

### => (17.3 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.93 MGD) 

### = 13.0:1 (0.93 MGD) Harmonic Mean: 

### = 135 cfs(l) 

### => (135 cfs)(0.6464) 

### + (0.93 MGD) 

### = 94:1 (0.93 MGD) 1 cubic feet per second (cfs) = 0.6464 million gallons per day (MGD)

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 9 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Footnotes: (2) The 8/11/04 permit established a harmonic mean flow of the Piscataquis River at GSSD at 51.8 cfs. In November 2009, the Department conducted a stastistical evaluation on the flow data of the river for the period 1903 to the present and determined a more representative harmonic mean flow for the Piscataquis River at GSSD is 135 cfs. d. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5), Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD): The previous permitting action established technology based monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for BOD and TSS based on a weighted loading calculation which took into consideration the variation in loadings between domestic (residential and commercial) sanitary waste waters and process waste waters generated by True Textiles. Loadings were and are now, based on historic and projected production figures at True Textiles and BPT and or BAT criteria in EPA's National Effluent Guidelines and Standards at 40 CFR, Part 410, Textile Mills Point Source Category. The monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for BOD5, TSS and COD in this and the 8/11/04 permitting action are based on projected loadings from the domestic sanitary waste waters and the production based loadings from True Textiles. The production levels used to calculate the final effluent limits for all parameters regulated by 40 CFR, Part 410 are as follows: TIER I Subpart 13 - Wool Finishing Subcategory — 3,000 lbs/day Subpart C — Low Water Use Processing Subcategory — 4,000 lbs/day Subpart G - Stock & Yarn Finishing Subcategory 31,000 lbs/day TIER II Subpart B - Wool Finishing Subcategory — 3,000 lbs/day Subpart C — Low Water Use Processing Subcategory — 4,000 lbs/day Subpart G - Stock & Yarn Finishing Subcategory — 54,000 lbs/day ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 9 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
Footnotes: (2) The 8111/04 permit established a harmonic mean flow ofthe Piscataquis River at GSSD at S1.8 cfs. In November 2009, the Department conducted a stastistical evaluation on the flow data ofthe river for the period 1903 to the present and determined a more representative harmonic mean flow for the Piscataquis River at GSSD is 13S cfs. d. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS), Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD): The previous permitting action established technology based monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for BOD and TSS based on a weighted loading calculation which took into consideration the variation in loadings between domestic (residential and commercial) sanitary waste waters and process waste waters generated by True Textiles. Loadings were and are now, based on historic and projected production figures at True Textiles and BPT and or BAT criteria in EPA's National Effluent Guidelines and Standards at 40 CFR, Patt 410, Textile Mills PointSource Categ01y. The monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for BODs, TSS and COD in this and the 8/11104 permitting action are based on projected loadings from the domestic sanitary waste waters and the production based loadings from True Textiles. The production levels used to calculate the final effluent limits for all parameters regulated by 40 CFR, Patt 410 are as follows: 

### TIER I Subpatt B- Wool Finishing Subcategory- 3,000 lbs/day Subpart C- Low Water Use Processing Subcategory- 4,000 lbs/day Subpatt G - Stock & Yarn Finishing Subcategory- 31,000 lbs/day 

### TIER II SubpartB- Wool Finishing Subcategory- 3,000 lbs/day Subpart C- Low WaterUse Processing Subcategory- 4,000 lbs/day Subpart G - Stock & Yarn Finishing Subcategory- S4,000 lbs/day

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 10 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIER I - Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day.
TIER I - Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits

EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart B — Wool Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 3,000 lbsiday lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 22.4 11.2 67 lbs/day 34 lbsiday TSS 35.2 17.6 106 lbs/day 52 lbs/day COD 163 81.5 489 lbs/day 244 lbsiday Phenol 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day

TIER I — Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart C — Low Water Use Processing Sucategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 4,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 1.4 0.7 5.6 lbs/day 2.8 lbs/day TSS 1.4 0.7 5.6 lbs/day 2.8 lbs/day COD 2,8 1.4 11 lbs/day 5.6 lbs/day ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 10 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENTLIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIERI - Applicable when 40 CFR, Pati

### 430, Subpart G (Stock & 

### Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day.

TIERI - Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 SubpartB- Wool Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Dailx Maximum Month!)' Average Dailx Maximum Monthly Average 3,000 lbs/day lbs/1 000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 22.4 11.2 67lbs/day 34lbs/day TSS 35.2 17.6 106lbs/day 52lbs/day COD 163 81.5 489lbs/day 244lbs/day Phenol 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day

TIERI- Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 Subpart C -Low WaterUse Processing Sucategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Dailx Maximum Monthlx Average DailyMaximum Monthlx Average 4,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 1.4 0.7 5.6lbs/day 2.8lbs/day TSS 1.4 0.7 5.6lbs/day 2.8lbs/day COD 2.8 1.4 11 lbs/day 5.6lbs/day

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 11 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIER I - Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day.
TIER I — Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits

EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart G — Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 31,000 lbsiday lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BOD5 

### 6.8 3.4 211 lbsiday 105 lbs/day TSS 17.4 8.7 539 lbs/day 270 lbs/day COD 84.6 42.3 2,623 lbsiday 1,311 lbsiday Phenol 0.12 0.06 3.7 lbs/day 1.9 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.12 0.06 3.7 lbs/day 1.9 lbs/day

Domestic Waste Water Only — Applicable for Tier I and Tier II Flow Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 0.465 MGD mg/1 mg/I lb/day lb/day BOD5 50 mg/L 30 mg/L 194 lbs/day 116 lbs/day TSS 50 mg/L 30 mg/L 194 lbs/day 116 lbs/day COD 110 mg/L 66 mg/L 426 lbsiday 256 lbs/day
Footnotes: (1) The permittee has requested the Department take into consideration the COD in the domestic waste water when calculating the permit limits for COD. MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page II of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
TIERI -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & 

### Yarn finishing) production level is <42,000 lbs/day.

TIER I- Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 Subpart G- Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production DailyMaximum Monthly Average DailyMaximum Monthly Average 31,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 6.8 3.4 211lbs/day 105 lbs/day TSS 17.4 8.7 539 lbs/day 270 lbs/day COD 84.6 42.3 2,623 lbs/day I,311 lbs/day Phenol 0.12 0.06 3.71bs/day 1.9lbs/day T. Chromium 0.12 0.06 3.7 lbs/day 1.9lbs/day

Domestic Waste Water Only- Applicable for Tier I and TierII Flow 0.465MGD Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/1 mg/1 lb/day lb/day BODs 50 mg/L 30 mg!L 194 lbs/day 116lbs/day TSS 50 mg!L 30 mg!L 194lbs/day 116 lbs/day COD 110 mg/L 66mg/L 426lbs/day 256lbs/day
Footnotes: (I) 

### The permittee has requested the Department take into consideration the COD in the domestic waste water when calculating the permit limits for COD.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 12 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIER II - Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day.
TIER II- Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits

EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart B — Wool Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 3,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BOD5 22.4 11.2 67 lbs/day 34 lbs/day TSS 35.2 17.6 106 lbs/day 52 lbsiday COD 163 81.5 489 lbs/day 244 lbs/day Phenol 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day

TIER II — Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart C —Low Water Use Processing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 4,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BOD5 1.4 0.7 5.6 lbs/day 2.8 lbsiday TSS 1.4 0.7 5.6 lbs/day 2.8 lbsklay COD 2.8 1.4 11 lbs/day 5.6 lbs/day MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 12 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIERII- Applicable when 40 CFR, Pmt 430, Subpatt G (Stock & 

### Yarn finishing) production level is**~42,000** 

### lbs/day.

TIERII- Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 SubpartB- Wool Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production DailyMaximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 3,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1 000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 

### 22.4 11.2 67 lbs/day 34lbs/day TSS 35.2 17.6 106 lbs/day 52 lbs/day COD 163 81.5 489lbs/day 244 lbs/day Phenol 0.14 0,07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.14 0.07 0.42 lbs/day 0.20 lbs/day

TIERII- Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 Subpart C- Low WaterUse Processing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production DailyMaximum Monthly Average DailyMaximum Monthly Average 4,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 

### 1.4 0.7 5.6 lbs/day 2.8lbs/day TSS 1.4 0.7 5.61bs/day 2.8lbs/day COD 2.8 1.4 II lbs/day 5.6lbs/day

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 13 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TIER II - Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is >42,000 lbs/day.
TIER II - Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits

EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1000 lbs) of Production 40 CFR 410 Subpart G — Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 54,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BOD5 6.8 3.4 ' 367 lbs/day 184 lbs/day TSS 17.4 8.7 940 lbs/day 470 lbs/day COD 84.6 42.3 4,568 lbs/day 2,284 lbs/day Phenol 0.12 0.06 6.5 lbs/day 3.2 lbs/day T. Chromium 0.12 0.06 6.5 lbs/day 3.2 lbs/day

Domestic Waste Water Only — Applicable for Tier I and Tier II Flow Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 0.465 MGD mg/I mg/l lb/day lb/day BOD5 50 mg/L 30 mg/L 194 lbs/day 116 lbs/day TSS 50 mg/L 30 mg/L 194 lbs/day 116 lbs/day COD(" 110 mg/L 66 mg/L 426 lbs/day 256 lbs/day
Footnotes: (I) The permittee has requested the Department take into consideration the COD in the domestic waste water when calculating the permit limits for COD. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 13 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
TIERII -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & 

### Yarn finishing) production level is 2::42,000 lbs/day.

TIER II

- Calculation ofGSSD EffluentLimits EPA Guidelines expressed in (lbs/1 000 lbs) ofProduction 40 CFR 410 Subpart G- Stock and Yarn Finishing Snbcategory Guidelines mass based permit limits expressed in lbs/day

Production Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average 54,000 lbs/day lbs/1000 lbs lbs/1000 lbs lb/day lb/day BODs 

### 6.8 3.4 367lbs/day 1841bs/day TSS 17.4 8.7 940 lbs/day 470 lbs/day COD 84.6 42.3 4,568 lbs/day 2,284 lbs/day Phenol 0.12 0.06 6.5lbs/day 3.2lbs/day T. Chromium 0.12 0.06 6.5lbs/day 3.21bs/day

DomesticWaste Water Only- Applicable for Tier I and TierII Flow 0.465MGD Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/1 mg/1 lb/day lb/day BODs 

### 50 mg/L 30mg/L 194 lbs/day 116 lbs/day TSS 50mg/L 30 mg/L 194lbs/day I I6 lbs/day 

## coo<!) 110 mg/L 66mg/L 426lbs/day 256lbs/day

Footnotes: (1) The permittee has requested the Depmiment take into consideration the COD in the domestic waste water when calculatingthe permit limits for COD.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 14 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)

TIER I & TIER II- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER I TIER II Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day BOD5 478 lbs/day 258 lbs/day 634 lbs/day 337 lbs/day TSS 845 lbs/day 441 lbs/day 1,246 lbs/day 641 lbs/day COD 3,549 lbs/day 1,817 lbs/day 5,494 lbs/day 2,790 lbs/day Phenol 4.1 lbs/day 2.1 lbs/day 6.9 lbs/day 3.4 lbsiday Total Chromium 4.1 lbs/day 2.1 lbsiday 6.9 lbs/day 3.4 lbs/day

TIER IA, TIER IB & TIER IIA, TIER IIB- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER IA & TIER IB TIER IIA & TIER IIB Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day Lbs/day BOD5 478 lbs/day 258 lbs/day 582 lbs/day 305 lbs/day TSS 845 lbs/day 441 lbs/day 1,206 lbs/day 617 lbs/day COD 4,394 lbs/day 1,817 lbs/day 5,443 lbs/day 2,752 lbs/day To ensure best practicable treatment is being applied to the discharge under all production regimes at True Textiles and discharge regimes from the GSSD treatment facility, the Department is carrying forward the monthly average and daily maximum concentration limits for all parameters. Concentration limits are based on Department rule Chapter 523, §6(1)(2) which states that pollutants limited in terms of mass additionally may be limited in terms of other units of measurement. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 14 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)

TIERI & 

### TIERII- PermitLimitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIER I TIERII Daily Maximum MonthlyAverage Daily Maximum Monthly Average lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day BODs 478 lbs/day 2581bs/day 6341bs/day 3371bs/day TSS 845 lbs/day 44llbs/day 1,2461bs/day 641 lbs/day COD 3,549 lbs/day 1,817 lbs/day 5,494 lbs/day 2,790 lbs/day Phenol 4.1 lbs/day 2.llbs/day 6.91bs/day 3.4 lbs/day Total Chromium 4.1 lbs/day 2.11bs/day 6.91bs/day 3.41bs/day

TIERIA, TIERIB & 

### TIERIIA, TIER

### liB- Permit Limitations (Industrial+ Domestic) TIERIA & 

### TIERIB TIERIIA & 

### TIER

### liB Daily Maximum Monthly Average DailyMaximum Monthly Average lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day Lbs/day BODs 478\bs/day 2581bs/day 582\bs/day 3051bs/day TSS 845\bs/day 441 lbs/day 1,206 lbs/day 617 lbs/day COD 4,394 lbs/day 1,817 lbs/day 5,443 lbs/day 2,752 lbs/day
To ensure best practicable treatment is being applied to the discharge under all production regimes at True Textiles and discharge regimes from the GSSD treatment facility, the Department is carrying forward the monthly average and daily maximum concentration limits for all parameters. Concentration limits are based on Department rule Chapter 523, §6(1)(2) which states that pollutants limited in terms of mass additionally may be limited in terms ofother units ofmeasurement.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 15 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) End-of-pipe concentration limits were derived by back-calculating using the applicable monthly average flow limitation for each tier. For Tier IA & Tier IIA a flow limitation of 0.465 MGD was utilized and for Tier IB & Tier I1B a flow limitation of 0.93 MGD was utilized. The limits are as follows:

TIER IA & TIER IB- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER IA TIER IB Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L mg/L mg/L Mg/L BOD5 123 mg/L 66 mg/L 62 mg/L 33 mg/L TSS 218 mg/L 114 mg/L 109 mg/L 57 mg/L COD 1,133 mg/L 468 mg/L 567 mg/L 234 mg/L Example calculations: TIER IA - BOD5 Daily Maximum 478 lbs/day = 123 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) TIER IB — BOD5 Daily Maximum 478 lbs/day = 62 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) Monthly Average 258 lbs/day = 66 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34)

Monthly Average 258 lbs/day = 33 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 15 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) End-of-pipe concentration limits were derived byback-calculating using the applicable monthly average flow limitation for each tier. ForTier IA & Tier IIA a flow limitation of0.465 MGD was utilized and for Tier IB & Tier liB a flow limitation of0.93 MGD was utilized. The limits are as follows:



### TIER lA & 

### TIER IB- Permit Limitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIER lA TIERIB Dailx Maximum Month!)' Average Dailx Maximum Month!)' Average mg!L mg/L mg!L Mg/L 

### BODs 123 mg/L 66mg!L 62mg!L 33 mg/L TSS 218 mg!L 114 mg/L 109 mg!L 57mg!L COD 1,133 mg/L 468 mg!L 567 mg/L 234 mg/L Example calculations: 

### TIER IA- 

### BODs DailxMaximum 478 lbs/dax = 123 mg!L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) 

### TIER 1B-- 

### BODs Dail)' Maximum 478 lbs/dax = 62 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) Month!)' Average 258 lbs/da)' = 66 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34)

Month!)' Average 258 lbs/da)' = 33 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34)

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 16 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) For Tier IIA a flow limitation of 0.465 MGD was utilized and for Tier IIB a flow limitation of 0.93 MGD was utilized. The limits are as follows:

TIER IIA & TIER IIB- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER IIA TIER JIB Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L BOD5 150 mg/L 79 mg/L 75 mg/L 39 mg/L TSS 311 mg/L 159 mg/L 155 mg/L 80 mg/L COD 1,404 mg/L 710 mg/L 702 mg/L 355 mg/L Example calculations: TIER IIA - BOD5 Daily Maximum 582 lbs/day = 150 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) TIER IIB — BOD5 Daily Maximum 1,206 lbs/day = 155 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) Monthly Average 305 lbs/day = 79 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8,34)

Monthly Average 617 lbs/day = 80 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) The monthly DMR data for the period January 2012 — January 2015 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the BOD, TSS and COD limits as values have been reported as follows: BOD Mass (37 DMRs Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 258 6 - 61 21 Daily Maximum 478 10 - 122 34 BOD Concentration (37 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 66 3 - 26 9 Daily Maximum 123 3 -- 40 12 ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 16 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) For Tier IIA a flow limitation of0.465 MGD was utilized and for Tier liB a flow limitation of0.93 MGD was utilized. The limits are as follows:

TIERIIA & 

### TIERliB- PermitLimitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIERIIA TIERliB Dailx Maximum Monthlx Average Dailx Maximum MonthlxAverage mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L BODs 150 mg/L 79 mg/L 75 mg/L 39 mg/L TSS 311 mg/L 159 mg/L 155 mg/L 80mg/L COD 1,404 mg/L 710 mg/L 702 mg/L 355 mg/L Example calculations:
TIERliA- BODs Dailx Maximum 582 lbs/dax = 

### 150 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) TIERliB

- -BODs Dailx Maximum 1,206 lbs/dax = 

### !55 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) MonthlxAverage 305 lbs/dax = 

### 79 mg/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34)

Monthlx Average 617 lbs/dax = 

### 80 mg/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) The monthly DMR data for the period January 2012- January 2015 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the BOD, TSS and COD limits as values have been reported as follows: BOD Mass (37 DMRs

Value RanJ:(e (lbs/day) AveraJ:(e (lbs/day) Monthly Average Limit (lbs/day) 6- 61 21 Daily Maximum 258 I0- 122 478 34 BOD Concentration (37 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 66 3-26 9 

### DailyMaximum 123 3-40 12

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 17 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TSS mass (37 DMRs) Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 441 4 - 46 13 Daily Maximum 845 7 - 75 22 TSS concentration (37 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 114 2 - 11 5 Daily Maximum 218 2 - 20 7 COD mass (10 DMRs Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 1,817 225 - 357 190 Daily Maximum 4,394 314 - 941 332 COD concentration (9 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mgfL) Monthly Average 468 88 - 121 72 Daily Maximum 1,133 106 - 145 87 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 Based Reductions of NPDES Permit Monitoring Frequencies (USEPA Guidance April 1996). In addition, the Department has supplemented the EPA guidance with its own guidance entitled, Performance Based Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies - Modification of EPA Guidance Released April 1996 (Maine DEP May 22, 2014). Both documents are being utilized to evaluate the compliance history for each parameter regulated by the previous permit to determine if a reduction in the monitoring frequencies is justified, Although EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation of the most current two-years of mass effluent data for a parameter, the Department is considering 37 months of data (January 2012 — January 2015). A review of the mass monitoring data for BOD, TSS and COD indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) of the long term effluent average to the monthly average limits can be calculated as 8%, 3% and 15% respectively. According to Table I of the EPA Guidance and Department guidance, a 2/Week monitoring requirement can be reduced to 1/Week. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequencies for BOD, TSS and COD to 1/Week for Tier 1 (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD) only as this is the current regime the facility is currently discharging under and demonstrated it is well within the limitations for this discharge regime. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 17of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TSS mass (37 DMRs)

Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 441 4-46 13 Daily Maximum 845 7-75 22 TSS concentration (37 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg!L) Average (mg!L) Monthly Average 114 2- II 5 Daily Maximum 218 2-20 7 COD mass (10 DMRs'

Value Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average Limit (lbs/day) 1,817 225- 357 190 Daily Maximum 4,394 314-941 332 COD concentration (9 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) MonthlyAverage 468 88

- 121 72 

### DailyMaximum 1,133 106- 145 87 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 Pe1jormance BasedReductions ofNPDESPermitMonitoring Frequencies 

### (USEPA Guidance April 1996). In 

### addition, the Department has supplemented the EPA guidance with its own guidance entitled, Pe1jormance BasedReduction of Monitoring Frequencies- Modification of EPA Guidance Released April 1996 

### (Maine DEP May 22, 20 14). Both documents are being utilized to evaluate the compliance history for each parameter regulated by the previous permit to determine ifa reduction in the monitoring frequencies isjustified. Although EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation ofthe most current two-years ofmass effluent data for a parameter, the Department is considering 37 months ofdata (January 2012- January 2015). A review ofthe mass monitoring data for BOD, TSS and COD indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) ofthe long term effluent average to the monthly average limits can be calculated as 8%, 3% and 15% respectively. According to Table I ofthe EPA Guidance and Department guidance, a 2/Week monitoring requirement can be reduced to 1/Week. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequencies for BOD, TSS and COD to 1/Weekfor Tier I (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are _:S0.465 MOD) only as this is the current regime the facility is currently discharging under and demonstrated it is well within the limitations for this discharge regime.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 18 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) f. Phenol and Total chromium — The previous permitting action established technology based monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for phenol and total chromium in accordance with 40 CFR, Part 410 and are being carried forward in this permitting action. Calculations for Tier I and Tier II limitations were derived earlier in this Fact Sheet based on different levels of production and are summarized as follows;

TIER I & TIER II- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER I TIER II Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average lbs/day Lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day Phenol 4.1 lbs/day 2.1 lbs/day 6.9 lbs/day 3.4 lbs/day Total Chromium 4.1 lbs/day 2.1 lbs/day 6.9 lbs/day 3.4 lbs/day

Phenols and total chromium which are potentially toxic pollutants. A document entitled EPA's Technical Support Document For Water Quality Based Toxics Control, March 1991, Chapter 5, Section 5.7, recommends that permit limits for both mass and concentration be specified for effluents discharging into waters with less than 100 fold dilution to ensure attainment of water quality standards. As not to penalize the GSSD facility for operating at flows less than the permitted flow of the waste water plant, the Department established concentration limits for toxic pollutants with NEGs based on a factor of 1.5 which was consistent with all other permitting actions by the Department when establishing concentration limits for said pollutants. Concentration limits for phenol and total chromium have been back-calculated utilizing a Tier IA & Tier IIA flow limitation of 0.465 MGD. The concentration limits are as follows:

TIER IA & TIER IIA- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER IA TIER HA Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L Mg/L mg/L mg/L Phenol 1,586 

### ug it, 812 ug/L 2,669 ug/L 1,315 ug/L Total Chromium 1,586 ug/L 812 ug/L 2,669ug/L 1,315 ug/L ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 18 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) f. Phenol and Total chromium- The previous permitting action established technology based monthly average and daily maximum mass limitations for phenol and total chromium in accordance with 40 CFR, Patt 41 0 and are being carried forward in this permitting action. Calculations for Tier I and Tier II limitations were derived earlier in this Fact Sheet based on different levels ofproduction and are summarized as follows:



### TIER I & 

### TIER II- Permit Limitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIERI TIER II Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average lbs/day Lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day Phenol 4.1 lbs/day 2.1 lbs/day 6.9lbs/day 3.4 lbs/day Total Chromium 4.1lbs/day 2.1lbs/day 6.9lbs/day 3.4lbs/day

Phenols and total chromium which are potentially toxic pollutants. A document entitled EPA's Technical Suppott Document For Water Qualitv Based Toxics Control, March 1991, Chapter 5, Section 5.7, recommends that permit limits for both mass and concentration be specified for effluents discharging into waters with less than 1 00 fold dilution to ensure attainment ofwater quality standards. As not to penalize the GSSD facility for operating at flows less than the permitted flow ofthe waste water plant, the Depattment established concentration limits for toxic pollutants with NEGs based on a factor of 1.5 which was consistent with all other permitting actions by the Department when establishing concentration limits for said pollutants. Concentration limits for phenol and total chromium have been back-calculated utilizing a Tier IA & Tier IIA flow limitation of0.465 MOD. The concentration limits are as follows:



### TIER lA & 

### TIER IIA- Permit Limitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIER lA TIERIIA Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L Mg/L mg/L mg/L Phenol 1,586 ug/L 812 ug/L 2,669 ug/L 1,315 ug/L Total Chromium 1,586 ug/L 812 ug/L 2,669ug/L 1,315 ug/L

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 19 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Example calculations: TIER IA — Phenol & chromium Daily Maximum Monthly Average (4.1 lbs/day(1.5) 1,586 ug/L L2.1 lbs/day(1.5) = 812 ug/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) (0.465 MGD)(8.34) TIER- IIA - - Phenols & chromium Daily Maximum (6.9 lbs/day(1.5) = 2,669 ug/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) Monthly Average (3.4 lbs/day(1.5) = 1,315 ug/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) TIER IB & TIER IIB- Permit Limitations (Industrial + Domestic)

TIER 1B TIER IIB Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Phenol 406 ug/L 792 ug/L 1,334 ug/L 658 ug/L Total Chromium 406 ug/L 792 ug/L 1, 334 ug/L 658 ug/L Example calculations: TIER 1B — Phenols & chromium Daily Maximum (4.1 lbs/day(1.5) = 792 ug/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) Monthly Average (2.1 lbs/day(1.5) 406 ug/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) TIER- IIB - - Phenols & chromium Daily Maximum Monthly Average (6.9 lbs/day(1.5) = 1,334 ug/L f3.4 lbsiday(1.5) = 658 ug/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) (0.93 MGD)(8.34) ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 19 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Example calculations: 

### TIER lA- Phenol & chromium Daily Maximum C4.11bs/day(1.5) = 1,586 ug!L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) 

### TIER- IIA-- Phenols & chromium Daily Maximum (6.9 lbs/day(l.5) = 2,669 ug/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34) Monthly Average (2.1 lbs/day(l.5) = 812 ug/L (0.465 MGD)(8.34)

Monthly Average (3.4lbs/day(].5) 

## = 1,315 ug!L (0.465 MGD)(8.34)



### TIER

### IB & 

### TIER liB- Permit Limitations (Industrial+ Domestic)
TIERIB TIER liB Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum Monthly Average mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Phenol 406 ug!L 792 ug/L 1,334 ug!L 658 ug!L Total Chromium 406 ug/L 792 ug!L 1, 334 ug!L 658 ug/L Example calculations: 

### TIER IB

­ Phenols & chromium DailyMaximum Monthly Average C 4.1 lbs/day(l.5) = 792 ug/L (2.1 lbs/dayC1.5) = 406 ug!L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) (0.93 MGD)(8.34) 

### TIER- liB

- - Phenols & chromium Daily Maximum Monthly Average (6.9 lbs/day(1.5) = 1,334 ug!L (3.4 lbs/day(1.5) = 658 ug/L (0.93 MGD)(8.34) (0.93 MGD)(8.34)

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 20 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A review of the monthly DMR data for the period December 2012 — June 2014 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the phenol and chromium limits 100% of the time as values have been reported as follows: Phenols Mass (3 DMRs Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 2.1 0.008 — 0,012 0.02 Daily Maximum 4.1 0.008 — 0.012 0.02 Phenols Concentration (3 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 812 3.4 <5 — 5.1 Daily Maximum 1,586 3.4 <5 — 5.1 Less than (<) values were reduced by a factor of two for calculation purposes. Chromium mass (7 DMRs Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 2.1 <0.003 - <2.1 <0,42 Daily Maximum 4.1 <0.005 - <4.1 <0.0009 Chromium concentration (7 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 812 0.0008 — 0.03 0.01 Daily Maximum 1,586 0.0008 — 0.03 0.01 Less than (1 values were reduced by a factor of two for calculation purposes.
g. E. coil bacteria — The previous permitting action established seasonal (May 15th — September 30th) monthly average and daily maximum limits of 64 colonies/100 ml and 427 colonies/I00 ml, respectively, that were based on the State of Maine Water Classification Program Class B standards as established in Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A, §465(4). During calendar year 2005, Maine's Legislature approved a new daily maximum water quality standards of 236 colonies/100 ml for water bodies designated as Class B and Class C. The Department has determined that end-of-pipe limitations for the instantaneous concentration standard of 427 colonies/I00 mL will be achieved through available dilution of the effluent with the receiving waters and need not be revised in MEPDES permits for facilities with adequate dilution as is the case with GSSD. Therefore, the monthly average and daily maximum limitations in the previous permitting action are being carried forward in this permitting action. The Department reserves the right to impose year-round bacteria limits, if necessary, to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 20 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A review ofthe monthly DMR data for the period December 2012- June 2014 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the phenol and chromium limits 100% ofthe time as values have been reported as follows: Phenols Mass (3 DMRs)

Value Limit (lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 2.1 0.008-0.012 0.02 Daily Maximum 4.1 0.008- 0.012 0.02 Phenols Concentration {3 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) MonthlyAverage 812 3.4 <5- 5.1 Daily Maximum 1,586 3.4 <5- 5.1
Less than(<) values were reduced by a factor oftwo for calculation purposes. Chromium mass (7 DMRs)

Value Limit {lbs/day) Range (lbs/day) Average (lbs/day) Monthly Average 2.1 <0.003

- <2.1 <0.42 Daily Maximum 4.1 <0.005

- <4.1 <0.0009 Chromium concentration (7 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Average (mg/L) Monthly Average 812 0.0008- 0.03 0.01 DailyMaximum 1,586 0.0008- 0.03 0.01
Less than (<)values were reduced by a factor oftwo for calculation purposes. g. E. 

### coli bacteria- The previous permitting action established seasonal (May l5 1h- 

### September 301 h) 

### monthly average and daily maximum limits of64 colonies/!00 ml and 427 colonies/l00 ml, respectively, that were based on the State ofMaine Water Classification Program Class B standards as established in Maine law, 38 M.R.S.A, §465(4). 

### 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. The Department has determined that end-of-pipe limitations for the instantaneous concentration standard of 427 colonies/100 mL will be achieved through available dilution ofthe effluent with the receiving waters and need not be revised in MEPDES permits for facilities with adequate dilution as is the case with GSSD. Therefore, the monthly average and daily maximum limitations in the previous permitting action are being carried forward in this permitting action. The Department reserves the right to impose year-round bacteria limits, ifnecessaty, to protectthe health, safety and welfare ofthe public.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 21 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A review of the seasonal monthly DMR data for the period May 2012 — September 2014 indicates the permittee has reported E. coli bacteria test results as follows: E. coli bacteria (11 DMRs Value Limit (col/100 ml) Range (co1/100 ml) Mean (col/100 ml) Monthly Average 64 3 - 62 28 Daily Maximum 427 8 - 488 97 EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation of the most current two-years of effluent data for a parameter, the Department is considering 11 months of data (May 2012 — September 2014). A review of the monitoring data for E. coil bacteria indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) of the long term effluent average to the monthly average limits can be calculated as 44%. According to Table 1 of the EPA Guidance and Department guidance, a 2/Week monitoring requirement can be reduced to 1/Week. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequency for E. coil bacteria to 1/Week for Tier 1 (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are <0.465 MGD) only as this is the current regime the facility is currently discharging under and demonstrated it is well within the limitations for this discharge regime. h. Total Residual Chlorine - The previous permitting action established technology based monthly average concentration limitations of 0.1 mg/L and either water quality based or technology based daily maximum concentration limits ranging from 0.17 mg/L to 0.3 mg/L. Limits for total residual chlorine are specified to ensure attainment of the ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for levels of chlorine and that the best practicable treatment technology (BPT) is utilized to abate the discharge of chlorine. The more stringent of the two limitations is established in licensing/permitting actions. Daily maximum (acute) and monthly average (chronic) end-of-pipe water quality based concentration limits for total residual chlorine may be calculated as follows:

Acute Criteria Chronic

Criteria Acute

Dilution Chronic

Dilution Acute

Limit Chronic

Limit Tier IA Tier HA 19 ug/L 11 ug/L 17:1 25.0:1 0.32 mg/L 0.28 mg/L Tier 1B Tier I1B 19 ug/L 11 ug/L 9.0:1 13.0:1 0.17 mg/L 0.14 mg/L
Example calculation (Tier IA & Tier EA): Acute — 0.019 mg/L (17.0) = 0.32 mg/L To meet any of the water quality based thresholds calculated above, the permittee must dechlorinate the effluent prior to discharge. The Department has established a daily maximum and monthly average best practicable treatment (BPT) limitations of 0.3 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L respectively, for facilities that need to ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 21 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A review ofthe seasonal monthly DMR data for the period May 2012- September 2014 indicates the permittee has reported E. 

### coli bacteria test results as follows: 

### E. 

### coli bacteria (11 DMRs)

Value Limit (col/100 ml) Range (col/100 ml) Mean (col/100 ml) Monthly Average 64 3-62 28 Daily Maximum 427 8-488 97 EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation ofthe most current two-years ofeffluent data for a parameter, the Department is considering 11 months ofdata (May 2012- September 2014). A review of the monitoring data for E. coli bacteria indicates the ratios (expressed in percent) ofthe long term effluent average to the monthly average limits can be calculated as 44%. According to Table I ofthe EPA Guidance and Depattment guidance, a 2/Week monitoring requirement can be reduced to 1/Week. Therefore, this permitting action is reducing the monitoring frequency for 

### E. coli bacteria to 1/Week for Tier 1 (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dry weather flows are _:::0.465 MGD) only as this is the current regime the facility is currently discharging under and demonstrated it is well within the limitations for this discharge regime. h. Total Residual Chlorine

- The previous permitting action established technologybased monthly average concentration limitations of0.1 mg!L and either water quality based or technology based daily maximum concentration limits ranging from 0.17 mg!L to 0.3 mg/L. Limits for total residual chlorine are specified to ensure attainment ofthe ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for levels ofchlorine and that the best practicable treatment technology (BPT) is utilized to abate the discharge ofchlorine. The more stringent ofthe two limitations is established in licensing/permitting actions. Daily maximum (acute) and monthly average (chronic) end-of-pipe water quality based concentration limits for total residual chlorine may be calculated as follows: Acute Criteria Chronic Criteria Acute Dilution Chronic Dilution Acute Limit Chronic Limit Tier lA Tier IIA 19 ug!L 11 ug!L 17:1 25.0:1 0.32 mg!L 0.28 mg/L Tier IB Tier liB 19 ug/L II ug/L 9.0:1 13.0:1 0.17 mg!L 0.14 mg!L

Example calculation (Tier lA & Tier ITA): Acute- 0.019 mg!L (17.0) = 0.32 mg!L
To meet any ofthe water quality based thresholds calculated above, the permittee must dechlorinate the effluent prior to discharge. The Department has established a daily maximum and monthly average best practicable treatment (BPT) limitations of0.3 mg/L and 0.1 mg!L respectively, for facilities that need toME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 22 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) dechlorinate their effluent, If calculated water quality based limits are lower than 0.3 mg/L and or 0.1 mg/L then the more stringent water quality based limits are applicable. In the case of the GSSD, for Tier IA & Tier HA, the calculated acute (daily maximum) water quality based threshold is higher than the BPT limit of 0.3 mg/L, thus the daily maximum BPT limitation of 0.3 mg/L is imposed. As for monthly average, the calculated chronic water quality based threshold is higher than the BPT of 0.1 mg/L thus the BPT limit of 0.1 mg/L is imposed. For Tier IB & Tier JIB, the calculated acute water quality based threshold is lower than the BPT limit of 0.3 mg/L, thus the daily maximum water quality based limitation of 0.17 mg/L is imposed. As for monthly average, the calculated chronic water quality based limit is higher than the BPT of 0.1 mg/L thus the BPT limit of 0.1 mg/L is imposed. A review of the DMR data for the period January 2012 — November 2014 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with both the monthly average and daily maximum concentration limits 100% and has reported values as follows: Total residual chlorine (15 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) Monthly Average 0.1 N/A N/A Daily Maximum 0.3 N/A N/A No TRC values were reported as the facility can achieve E. coli bacteria limits without disinfecting the discharge. i. pH Range- The previous permitting action established a pH range limitation of 6.0 —9.0 standard units pursuant to a Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(III)(c) along with a 3/Week monitoring requirement. The limits are considered BPT. The limitation range and 3/Week monitoring frequency are being carried forward in this permitting action. A review of the DMR data for the period January 2012 — January 2015 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the pH range limits 100% of the time as the pH has ranged from a minimum of 6.4 standard units and a maximum of 8.6 standard units. As a result, this permit reduces the monitoring frequency from 3/Week to 2/Week for Tier IA only (current production level) which is consistent with Department guidance on monitoring frequency reductions. h. Total phosphorus — The 2005 permitting action established a 1/Month monitoring requirement for total phosphorus between June and September of each year to gather a statistically valid data set on phosphorus discharge levels. The data collected would be utilized in any water quality modeling conducted by the Department to determine if phosphorus is causing or contributing to dissolved oxygen deficits in the Piscataquis River. MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 22 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) dechlorinate their effluent. Ifcalculated water quality based limits are lower than 0.3 mg/L and or 0.1 mg!L then the more stringent water quality based limits are applicable. In the case ofthe GSSD, for Tier lA & Tier IIA, the calculated acute (daily maximum) water quality based threshold is higher than the BPT limit of0.3 mg/L, thus the daily maximum BPT limitation of0.3 mg/L is imposed. As for monthly average, the calculated chronic water quality based threshold is higher than the BPTof 0.1 mg!L thus the BPT limit of0.1 mg/L is imposed.
For Tier IB & Tier liB, the calculated acute water quality based threshold is lower than the BPT limit of 0.3 mg!L, thus the daily maximum water quality based limitation of0.17 mg/L is imposed. As for monthly average, the calculated chronic water quality based limit is higher than the BPT of0.1 mg!L thus the BPT limit of0.1 mg!L is imposed. A review ofthe DMR data for the period January 2012- November 2014 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with both the monthly average and daily maximum concentration limits 100% and has reported values as follows: Total residual chlorine (15 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) Monthly Average 0.1 

## NIA NIA Daily Maximum 0.3 

## NIA NIA
No TRC values were reported as the facility can achieve E. coli bacteria limits without disinfecting the discharge. i. pH Range- The previous permitting action established a pHrange limitation of6.0 -9.0 standard units pursuant to a Department rule, 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(III)(c) along with a 3/Week monitoring requirement. The limits are considered BPT. The limitation range and 3/Week monitoring frequency are being carried forward in this permitting action. A review ofthe DMR data for the period January 2012- January 2015 indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the pH range limits 100% ofthe time as the pH has ranged from a minimum of 6.4 standard units and a maximum of8.6 standard units. As a result, this petmit reduces the monitoring frequency from 3/Week to 2/Week for Tier IA only (current production level) which is consistent with Depatiment guidance on monitoring frequency reductions. h. Total phosphorus- The 2005 permitting action established a !/Monthmonitoring requirement for total phosphorus between June and September ofeach year to gather a statistically valid data set on phosphorus discharge levels. The data collected would be utilized in any water quality modeling conducted by the Department to determine ifphosphorus is causing or contributing to dissolved oxygen deficits in the Piscataquis River.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 23 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (coned) A review of the DMR data for the period June 2007 — September 2009 indicates values have been reported as follows: Total phosphorus — mass (9 DMRs Value

_ Limit (mg/L) Range (lbs/day) Mean (lbs/day) Monthly Average Report 3.28 — 5.4 4.4 Daily Maximum Report 3.28 — 8.7 5.2 Total phosphorus — concentration (9 DMRs Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) Monthly Average Report 1.6 — 3.9 2.2 Daily Maximum Report 1.6 — 3.9 2.2 The total phosphorus monitoring and reporting requirements were not being carried forward in the 2010 permiting action as the Department made a best professional judgement at that time that it had sufficient information on discharge levels of total phosphorus from the GSSD facility. Given the elevated scrutiny by the USEPA on the potential impact of phosphorus being discharge to fresh waters, the Department is utilizing 2.2 mg/L as being representative of the discharge from the GSSD. 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 may be based upon criterion derived from a proposed State criterion, or an explicit State policy or regulation interpreting its narrative water quality criterion, supplemented with other relevant information which may include: EPA's Water Quality Standards Handbook, October 1983, risk assessment data, exposure data, information about the pollutant from the Food and Drug Administration, and current EPA criteria documents.2 USEPA's Quality Criteria for Water 1986 (Gold Book) puts forth an in-stream phosphorus concentration goal of less than 0.1 mg/L in streams or other flowing waters not discharging directly to lakes or impoundments, to prevent nuisance algal growth. The use of the 0.1 mg/L Gold Book value is consistent with the requirements of 06-096 CMR Chapter 523 noted above for use in a reasonable potential (RP) calculation.

I Waste Discharge License Conditions, 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(1)(i) (effective date January 12, 2001) 2 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(1)(vi)(A) ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 23 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A review ofthe DMR data for the period June 2007- September 2009 indicates values have been reported as follows: Total phosphorus- mass (9 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L} Range (lbs/day) Mean (lbs/day) Monthly Average Report 3.28- 5.4 4.4 DailyMaximum Report

. 3.28-8.7 5.2 Total phosphorus- concentration (9 DMRs)

Value Limit (mg/L) Range (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) Monthly Average Report 1.6- 3.9 2.2 Daily Maximum Report 1.6-3.9 2.2 The total phosphorus monitoring and reporting requirements were not being carried forward in the 2010 permiting action as the Depatiment made a best professionaljudgement at that time that it had sufficient information on discharge levels oftotal phosphorus from the GSSD facility. Given the elevated scrutiny by the USEPA on the potential impact ofphosphorus being discharge to fresh waters, the Department is utilizing 2.2 mg/L as being representative ofthe discharge from the GSSD. Depattment 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. 1 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 other relevant information which may include: EPA's Water Quality Standards Handbook, October 1983, risk assessment data, exposure data, information about the pollutant from the Food and Drug Administration, and current EPA criteria documents.2 USEPA's Quality Criteria for Water 1986 (Gold Book) puts forth an in-stream phosphorus concentration goal ofless than 0.1 mg/L in streams or other flowing waters not discharging directly to 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.

1 Waste Discharge License Conditions, 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(!)(i) (effective date January I2, 200I) 2 06-096 CMR 523(5)(d)(l)(vi)(A)

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 24 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (coned) Based on the above rationale, the Department has chosen to utilize the Gold Book value of 0.1 mg/L. It is the Department's intent to continue to make determinations of actual attainment or impairment based upon environmental response indicators from specific water bodies. The use of the Gold Book value of 0.1 mg/L for use in the RP calculation will enable the Department to establish water quality based limits in a manner that is reasonable and that appropriately establishes the potential for impairment, while providing an opportunity to acquire environmental response indicator data, numeric nutrient indicator data, and facility data as needed to refine the establishment of site specific water quality based limits for phosphorus-This permit may be reopened during the term of the permit to modify any reasonable potential calculations, phosphorus limits, or monitoring requirements based on new site-specific data. For calculation purposes, the Department is utilizing 2.2 mg/L as being representative of the discharge from the GSSD. For the background concentration in the Piscataquis River, the permittee conducted sampling upstream of its discharge in the summer of 2009 indicating the background total phosphorus concentration is 0.008 mg/L. Using the following calculation and criteria, the GSSD facility does not have a reasonable potential to exceed the EPA's Gold Book value of 0.1 mg/L for phosphorus but does have a reasonable potential 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 Ce = effluent pollutant concentration Qs = 7Q10 flow of receiving water Cs = upstream concentration Qr = receiving water flow Cr = receiving water concentration 0.465 MGD 2.2 mg/L (6/07 — 9/09) 11.2 MGD (17.3 cfs) 0.008 mg/L (summer 2007) 11.665 MGD
Cr = (0.465 MGD x 2.2 mg/L) + (11.2 MGD x 0.008 mg/L) = 0.096 mg/L

11.665 MGD Cr = 0.096 mg/L < 0.1 mg/L = No, Reasonable Potential Cr = 0.096 mg/L >0.030 mg/L Yes, Reasonable Potential Therefore, no water quality based mass limitations for total phosphorus are being established in this permitting action, but pursuant to a Department guidance established in a letter to dischargers to fresh waters dated July 1, 2014, a seasonal (June 1-- Septemer 30) monitoring requirement for total phosphorus is being established. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 24 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Based on the above rationale, the Depatiment has chosen to utilize the Gold Book value of0.1 mg!L. It is the Department's intentto continue to make determinations ofactual attainment or impairment based upon environmental response indicators from specific water bodies. The use ofthe Gold Bookvalue of 0.1 mg!L for use in the RP calculation will enable the Depatiment to establishwater quality based limits in a manner that is reasonable and that appropriately establishes the potential for impairment, while providing an opportunity to 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 phosphoms,This permit may be reopened during the term ofthe permit to modify any reasonable potential calculations, phosphorus limits, or monitoring requirements based on new site-specific data.
For calculation purposes, the Depatiment is utilizing 2.2 mg!L as beingrepresentative ofthe discharge from the GSSD. For the background concentration in the Piscataquis River, the permittee conducted sampling upstream ofits discharge in the summer of2009 indicating the background total phosphorus concentration is 0.008 mg!L. Using the following calculation and criteria, the GSSD facility does not have a reasonable potential to exceed the EPA's Gold Bookvalue ofO.l mg!L for phosphorus but does have a reasonable potential to exceed the Department's Chapter 583 draft criteria of0.030 mg!L. The calculations are as follows: Cr = QeCe 

### + QsCs Qr Qe = effiuent flow i.e. facility design flow 0.465 MGD Ce 

## =effiuentpollutant concentration 2.2 mg/L (6/07- 9/09) Qs = 7Q 10 flow ofreceiving water 11.2 MGD (17.3 cfs) Cs = upstream concentration 0.008 mg!L (summer 2007) Qr

## =receiving water flow 

## = 11.665 MGD Cr = receiving water concentration Cr = (0.465 MGD x 2.2 mg/L) 

### + (11.2 MGD x 0.008 mg/L) = 0.096 mg!L 11.665 MGD Cr

## =0.096 mg!L 

### < 0.1 mg/L =:> No, 

### Reasonable Potential Cr = 0.096 mg/L >0.030 mg!L=:> Yes, 

### Reasonable Potential Therefore, no water quality based mass limitations for total phosphorus are being established in this permitting action, butpursuant to a Department guidance established in a letterto dischargers to fresh waters dated July I, 2014, a seasonal (June 1 - Septemer 30) monitoring requirement for total phosphorus is being established.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 25 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) i. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) and Chemical Specific Testing Maine Law, 38 M.R.S.A., Sections 414-A and 420, prohibit the discharge of effluents containing substances in amounts that would cause the surface waters of the State to contain toxic substances above levels set forth in Federal Water Quality Criteria as established'by the USEPA. Department Rules, 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, Swface Water Toxics Control Program, (Chapter 530 hereinafter) and Chapter 584, Surface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, (Chapter 584 hereinafter) set forth ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for toxic pollutants and procedures necessary to control levels of toxic pollutants in surface waters. WET, priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing as required by Chapter 530, is included in this permit in order to fully characterize the effluent. This permit also provides for reconsideration of effluent limits and monitoring schedules after evaluation of toxicity testing results. The monitoring schedule includes consideration of results currently on file, the nature of the wastewater, existing treatment and receiving water characteristics. WET monitoring is required to assess and protect against impacts upon water quality and designated uses caused by the aggregate effect of the discharge on specific aquatic organisms. Acute and chronic WET tests are performed on invertebrate and vertebrate species. Priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing is required to assess the levels of individual 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 of testing 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 >20:1 but <100:1. 3) Level 111— chronic dilution factor >100:1 but <500:1 or >500:1 and Q >1.0 MGD 4) Level IV — chronic dilution >500:1 and Q <1.0 MGD Department rule Chapter 530 (1)(D) specifies the criteria to be used in determining the minimum monitoring frequency requirements for WET, priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing. Based on the Chapter 530 criteria, the permittee's facility falls into the Level II frequency category for Tier IA and Tier IIA as the facility has a chronic dilution factor of >20:1 but <100:1. Under Tier IB and Tier 11B, Chapter 530 criteria places the permittee in the Level I category as the facility has a chronic dilution factor of <20:1. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 25 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

### i. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) and Chemical Specific Testing Maine Law, 38 M.R.S.A., Sections 414-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·by the USEPA. Department Rules, 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, 

### Swface Water Taxies Control Program, (Chapter 530 hereinafter) and Chapter 584, 

### Swface Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants, (Chapter 584 hereinafter) set forth ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for toxic pollutants and procedures necessary to control levels oftoxic pollutants in surface waters. WET, priority pollutant and analytical chemistry testing as required by Chapter 530, is included in this permit in order to fully characterize the effluent. This permit also provides for reconsideration of effluent limits and monitoring schedules after evaluation oftoxicity testing results. The monitoring schedule includes consideration ofresults currently on file, the nature ofthe wastewater, existing treatment and receiving water characteristics.
WET monitoring 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 oftestingrequirements based predominately on the chronic dilution factor. The categories are as follows: I) Level I- chronic dilution factor of<20:I. 2) Level II- chronic dilution factor of:>:20:1 but <100:1. 3) Level Ill- chronic dilution factor :>:100:1 but <500: 1 or >500:1 and Q :>:1.0 MGD 4) Level IV- chronic dilution >500: 1 and Q ,:::1.0 MGD Depmtment rule Chapter 530 (l)(D) specifies the criteria to be used in determining the minimum monitoring frequency requirements for WET, priority pollutant and analytical chemistrytesting. Based on the Chapter 530 criteria, the permittee's facility falls into the Level II frequency category for Tier !A and Tier IIA as the facility has a chronic dilution factor of:>:20:1 but <100:1. Under Tier IB and Tier liB, Chapter 530 criteria places the permittee in the Level I category as the facility has a chronic dilution factor of<20: l.ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 26 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Chapter 530(1)(D)(1) specifies that routine screening and surveillance level testing requirements are as follows: TIER IA & TIER IIA (Level II) Surveillance level testing — Beginning upon issuance of the permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit): Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry
II I per year None required 2 per year Screening level testing — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement: Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry
II 2 per year 1 per year 4 per year TIER IB & TIER IIB (Level I) Surveillance level testing — Beginning upon issuance of the permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit): Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry
I 2 per year None required 4 per year Screening level testing — Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement: Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry 4 per year 1 per year 4 per year ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 26 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Chapter 530(1)(D)(!) specifies that 

### routine screening and surveillance level testing requirements are as follows: 

### TIER IA & 

### TIER IIA (Level II) 

### Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon issuance ofthe permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years!, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term ofthe permit): Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry II 1 per year None required 2 per year 

### Screening level testing- Beginning 24 months priorto permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prim· 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 a permit renewal containing this requirement: Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemishy II 2 peryear 1 per year 4 per year 

### TIER IB & 

### TIER IIB (Level I) 

### Surveillance level testing- Beginning upon issuance ofthe permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years I, 2 & 3 ofthe term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (Yem· 5 ofthe term ofthe permit): Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry I 2 per year None required 4 per year 

### 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 ifa timely request for renewal has been made and the permit continues in force, or is replaced by a permit renewal containing this requirement: Level WET Testing Priority pollutant testing Analytical chemistry
I 4 per year I per year 4 per yearME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 27 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A recent review of GSSD's data indicates that they have fulfilled the Chapter 530 testing requirements to date. See Attachment C of this Fact Sheet for a summary of the WET test results and Attachment D of this Fact Sheet for a summary of the chemical specific test dates. Department rule Chapter 530(D)(3)(d) states in part "Dischargers in Level I may reduce surveillance testing to one WET or specific chemical series per year provided that testing in the preceding 60 months does not indicate any reasonable potential for exceedence as calculated pursuant to section 3(E)." Department rule Chapter 530(D)(3)(c) states in part "Dischargers in Level II may reduce surveillance testing to one WET or specific chemical series every other year provided that testing in the preceding 60 months does not indicate any reasonable potential for exceedence as calculated pursuant to section 3(E). 57 Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "For effluent monitoring data and the variability of the pollutant in the effluent, the Department shall apply the statistical approach in Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 of USEPA's "Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control" (USEPA Publication 505/2-90- 001, March, 1991, EPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.) to data to determine whether water-quality based effluent limits must be included in a waste discharge license. Where it is determined through this approach that a discharge contains pollutants or WET at levels that have a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-based limits must be established in any licensing action." Chapter 530 §3 states, "The Department shall establish appropriate discharge prohibitions, effluent limits and monitoring requirements in waste discharge licenses f a discharge contains pollutants that are or may be discharged at levels that cause, have reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an ambient excursion in excess of a numeric or narrative water quality criteria or that may impair existing or designated uses. The licensee must also control whole effluent toxicity (WET) when discharges cause, have a reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an ambient excursion above the narrative water quality criteria. "In determining f effluent limits are required, the Department shall consider all information on file and effluent testing conducted during the preceding 60 months. However, testing done in the performance of a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) approved by the Department may be excluded from such evaluations." WET Evaluation — The previous permitting action establish a C-NOEL limit of 4.0% for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for Tier IA and Tier IIA and C-NOEL limits of 7.7% for the water flea and brook trout and A-NOEL of 11% for Tier lB and Tier IIB as a statistical evaluation at that time indicated the discharge exceeded or had a reasonable potential to exceed critical chronic WET thresholds of 4.0% 7.7% respectively for Tier IA and Tier HA and the A-NOEL of 11% for Tier 1E and Tier JIB. The critical C-NOEL threshold for Tier IA and Tier IIA is calculated as the mathematical inverse of the chronic dilution factors of 25:1 and 13:1 and the A-NOEL for Tier IB and Tier IIB is calculated as the mathematical inverse of the acute dilution factors of 9.0:1. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 27 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A recent review ofGSSD's data indicates that they have fulfilled the Chapter 530 testing requirements to date. See Attachment C ofthis Fact Sheet for a summary ofthe WET test results and AttachmentD of this Fact Sheet for a summary ofthe chemical specific test dates. Department rule Chapter 530(D)(3)(d) states in part "Dischargers in LevelI may reduce surveillance testing to one WETorspecific chemical seriesperyearprovidedthat testing in thepreceding 60 months does not indicate any reasonablepotential for exceedence as calculated pursuantto section 3(E)." Department rule Chapter 530(D)(3)(c) states in part "Dischargers in Level IImayreduce surveillance testing to one WETor specific chemical series eve1y otheryearprovidedthat testing in thepreceding 60 months does not indicate any reasonablepotential for exceedence as calculated pursuant to section 3(E)." Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "For ejjluent monitoring data andthe variability of thepollutant in the ejjluent, the Department shall apply the statistical approach in Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 ofUSEPA's "Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Taxies Control" (USEPA Publication 505/2-90­ 001, March, 1991, EPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.) to data to determine whether water-quality basedejjluent limits must be included in a waste discharge license. Where it is determined through this approach that a discharge containspollutants or WETatlevels that have a reasonablepotential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-basedlimits must be established in any licensing action." Chapter 530 §3 states, "The Department shall establish appropriate dischargeprohibitions, ejjluent limits andmonitoring requirements in waste discharge licenses 

## if a discharge containspollutants that are ormay be discharged at levels that cause, have reasonablepotential to cause, or contribute to an ambient excursion in excess of a numeric ornarrative water quality criteria or that may impair existing ordesignated uses. The licensee mustalso controlwhole ejjluent toxicity (WET) when discharges cause, have a reasonablepotential to cause, or contribute to an ambient excursion above the narrative water quality criteria. "In determining 

## if ejjluent limits are required, the Departmentshall consider all information on file andejjluent testing conductedduring thepreceding 60 months. However, testing done in thepetformance of a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) approved by the Department may be excluded from such evaluations. "
WET Evaluation- The previous permitting action establish a C-NOEL limit of4.0% for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for Tier 1A and Tier ITA and C-NOEL limits of7.7%for the water flea and brook trout and A-NOEL of 11% for Tier IB and Tier IlB as a statistical evaluation at that time indicated the discharge exceeded orhad a reasonable potential to exceed critical chronic WET thresholds of4.0% 7.7% respectively for Tier !A and TierIIA and the A-NOEL of II% for Tier IB and Tier 

### liB. The critical C-NOEL threshold for Tier 1A and Tier JIA is calculated as the mathematical inverse ofthe chronic dilution factors of25:1 and 13:1 and the A-NOEL for Tier IB and TierliB is calculated as the mathematical inverse ofthe acute dilution factors of9.0:1.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 28 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) On March 17, 2015, the Department conducted a statistical evaluation on the most recent 60 months of WET test results on file with the Department in accordance with the statistical approach specified in Chapter 530. Tier IA & Tier IIA — Flow of 0.465 MGD The 3/17/15 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste water treatment facility has one C-NOEL test result (2.0% on 9/8/11) for the water flea that exceeds the C-NOEL threshold of 4.0% and one A-NOEL test result (143% on 9/18/11) for the water flea that has a reasonable potential to exceed the A-NOEL threshold of 7.7%. See Attachment C of this Fact Sheet for the WET test dates and results of concern. Pursuant to Chapter 530 §3, this permitting action carries forward the C-NOEL limit of 4.0%. for the water flea and establishes a new A-NOEL limit of 7.7% for the water flea. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for test species that exeeeed or have a reasonable potential to exceed critical acute or chronic thresholds. The Department establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency of the tests of concern. Being that the number of tests of concern, this permitting action is establishing a routine surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Year for the water flea. Surveillance testing is to begin upon issuance of the permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit). Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 testing at a frequency of 2/Year. Tier IB & Tier IIB — Flow of 0.93 MGD The 3/17/15 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste water treatment facility has one C-NOEL test result for the water flea that exceeds the C-NOEL threshold of 7.7%, and one (1) A-NOEL test result for the water flea that has a reasonable potential to exceed the A-NOEL threshold of 11%. See Attachment C of this Fact Sheet for the WET test dates and results of concern. Pursuant to Chapter 530 §3, this permitting action carries forward the C-NOEL limit of 7.7% and the A-NOEL limit 11% for the water flea. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for test species that exceeed or have a reasonable potential to exceed critical acute or chronic thresholds. The Department establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency of the tests of concern. Given the number of tests of concern, this permitting action is establishing a routine surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Year for the water flea. Surveillance testing is to begin upon issuance of the permit and lasting through 24 months prior to permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 of the term of the permit). MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 28 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) On March 17, 2015, the Depatiment conducted a statistical evaluation on the most recent 60 months of WET test results on file with the Department in accordance with the statistical approach specified in Chapter 530. 

### Tier IA & 

### Tier IIA- Flow of0.465 MGD The 3/17/15 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste water treatment facility has one C-NOEL test result (2.0% on 9/8/11) for the water flea that exceeds the C-NOEL threshold of4.0% and one A-NOEL test result (14.3% on 9/18/11) for the water flea that has a reasonable potential to exceed the A-NOEL threshold of7.7%. See 

### Attachment C ofthis Fact Sheet for the WET test dates and results ofconcern. Pursuant to Chapter 530 §3, this permitting action carries forward the C-NOEL limit of4.0%. for the water flea and establishes a new A-NOEL limit of7.7% for the water flea. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for test species that exceeed orhave a reasonable potential to exceed critical acute or chronic thresholds. The Department establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency ofthe tests ofconcern. Being that the number oftests ofconcern, this permitting action is establishing a routine surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Year for the water flea. Surveillance testing is to begin upon issuance ofthe permit and lasting through 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). 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 testing at a frequency of2/Year. 

### Tier 

### IB & 

### Tier liB- Flow of0.93 MGD The 3/17/15 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste watertreatment facility has one C-NOEL test result for the water flea that exceeds the C-NOEL threshold of7.7%, and one (I) A-NOEL test result for the water flea that has a reasonable potential to exceed the A-NOEL threshold of II%. See 

### Attachment C ofthis Fact Sheet for the WET test dates and results ofconcern. Pursuant to Chapter 530 §3, this permitting action carries forward the C-NOEL limit of7.7% and the A-NOEL limit II%for the water flea. Chapter 530 does not establish monitoring frequencies for test species that exceeed orhave a reasonable potential to exceed critical acute or chronic thresholds. The Depatiment establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency ofthe tests of concern. Given the number oftests ofconcern, this permitting action is establishing a routine surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Year for the water flea. Surveillance testing is to begin upon issuance ofthe permit and lasting through 24 months priorto permit expiration (Years 1, 2 & 3 of the term ofthe permit) and commencing again 12 months priorto permit expiration (Yeat· 

### 5 ofthe term ofthe permit).

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 29 of 36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term of the permit) and every five years thereafter if a 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 testing at a frequency of 2/Year. Analytical chemistry and priority pollutant testing — The previous permitting action established monthly average and or daily maximum water quality based limitations for ammonia, antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper and lead. The limits were established based on the fact that a statistical evaluation conducted at that time on the most recent 60 months of test results on file indicated the pollutants of concern were being discharged at levels that exceeded or had a reasonable potential to exceed applicable AWQC. Chapter 530 §4(C), states "The background concentration of specific chemicals must be included in all calculations using the following procedures. The Department may publish and periodically update a list of default background concentrations for specific pollutants on a regional, watershed or statewide basis. In doing so, the Department shall use data collected from reference sites that are measured at points not significantly affected by point and non point discharges and best calculated to accurately represent ambient water quality conditions The Department shall use the same general methods as those in section,I(D) to determine background concentrations. For pollutants not listed by the Department, an assumed concentration of 10% of the applicable water quality criteria must be used in calculations." The Department has limited information on the background levels of metals in the water column in the Piscataquis River in the vicinity of the permittee's outfall. Therefore, a default background concentration of 10% of the applicable water quality criteria is being used in the calculations of this permitting action, Chapter 530 4(E), states "In allocating assimilative capacity for toxic pollutants, the Department shall hold a portion of the total capacity in an unallocated reserve to allow for new or changed discharges and non-point source contributions. The unallocated reserve must be reviewed and restored as necessary at intervals of not more than five years. The water quality reserve must be not less than 15% of the total assimilative quantity." Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "... that a discharge contains pollutants or WET at levels that have a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-based limits must be established in any licensing action." Chapter 530 §4(F) states in part "Where there is more than one discharge into the same fresh or estuarine receiving water or watershed, the Department shall consider the cumulative effects of those discharges when determining the need for and establishment of the level of effluent limits. The Department shall calculate the total allowable discharge quantity for specific pollutants, less the water quality reserve and background concentration, necessary to achieve or maintain water quality criteria at all points of discharge, and in the entire watershed. The total allowable discharge quantity for pollutants must be allocated consistent with the following principles. Evaluations must be done for individual pollutants of concern in each watershed or segment to assure that water quality criteria are met at all points in the watershed and, if appropriate, within tributaries of a larger river. M£0102032 FACT SHEET Page 29 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 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 a permit renewal containing this requirement, the permittee shall conduct screening level testing at a frequency of2/Year. 

### Analytical chemistry and priority pollutant testing- The previous permitting action established monthly average and or daily maximum water quality based limitations for ammonia, antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper and lead. The limits were established based on the fact that a statistical evaluation conducted at that time on the most recent 60 months oftest results on file indicated the pollutants of concern were being discharged at levels that exceeded or had a reasonable potential to exceed applicable AWQC. Chapter 530 §4(C), states "The backgroundconcentration of specific chemicals must be included in all calculations using thefollowingprocedures. The Departmentmaypublish and periodically update a list of default backgroundconcentrations for specificpollutailts on a regional, watershedor statewide basis. In doing so, the Department shall use data collected from reference sites thatare measuredatpoints not significantly affectedbypointandnon-point discharges andbest calculatedto accurately represent ambient water quality conditions The Departmentshall use the same general methods as those in section 4(D) to determine backgroundconcentrations. Forpollutants not listed by the Department, an assumed concentration of 10% of the applicable water quality criteria must be used in calculations." The Depat1ment has limited information on the background levels ofmetals in the water column in the Piscataquis River in the vicinity ofthe permittee's outfall. Therefore, a default background concentration of 10% ofthe applicable water quality criteria is being used in the calculations ofthis permitting action. Chapter 530 4(E), states "In allocating assimilative capacity for toxicpollutants, the Departmentshall holdaportion of the total capacity in an unallocatedreserve to allow for new or changeddischarges andnon-pointsource contributions. The unallocatedresen•e must be reviewedandrestoredas necessmyat intervals of not more than fiveyears. The water quality reserve must be not less than 15% of the total assimilative quantity. " Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "

... that a discharge containspollutants or WETat levels that have a reasonablepotential to cause or contribute to an exceedence of water quality criteria, appropriate water quality-based limits must be established in any licensing action." Chapter 530 §4(F) states inpart "Where there is more than one discharge into the same fresh or estuarine receivingwater 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 andbackgroundconcenh·ation, necessmy 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 allocatedconsistent with thefollowingprinciples. Evaluations mustbe donefor individualpollutants of concern in each watershedor segment to assure that water quality criteria are metat allpoints in the watershedand, 

## if appropriate, within tributaries of a larger river.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 30 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) The total assimilative capacity, less the water quality reserve and background concentration, may be allocated among the discharges according to the past discharge quantities for each as a percentage of the total quantity of discharges, or another comparable method appropriate for a specific situation and pollutant. Past discharges ofpollutants must be determined using the average concentration discharged during the past five years and the facility's licensed flow. The amount of allowable 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 of USEPA's "Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control'] of the rule, but in no event may allocations cause the water quality reserve amount to fall below the minimum referred to in 4(E) [15% of the total assimilative capacity]. Any difference between the total allowable discharge quantity and that allocated to existing dischargers must be added to the reserve. The Picataquis River is a tributary to the Penobscot River. Three municipal waste water treatment facilities that are subject to the Department's Chapter 530 testing requirements discharge to thePiscataquis River. The waste water treatment facilities are the Milo Water District, the Town of DoverFoxcroft 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 that AWQC must be met at the confluence of the 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 (10% of AWQC) and a reserve (15% of AWQC). On August 21, 2014, the Department conducted statistical evaluations based on 15% of the ambient water quality criteria reserve being withheld (Report ID 706) and 0% of the reserve of the criteria being withheld (Report ID 705) to determine if the unallocated assimilative capacity would avoid an exceedance or avoid a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria for toxic pollutants. Report ID 705 indicates Dover-Foxcroft would no longer has a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambient water quality criteria for lead. Therefore, the Department is utilizing the full 15% of the unallocated assimilative capacity in the statistical evaluation when establishing limits for toxic pollutants in waste discharge licenses for facilities in the Penobscot River watershed including the Piscatquis River watershed. The 8/21/15 statistical evaluation (Report ID 705) indicates the GSSD has two test result that have a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for ammonia and has four test results that have a reasonable potential to exceed both the acute and chronic AWQC for total copper. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 30 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) The total assimilative capacity, less the water quality reserve andbackgroundconcentration, maybe allocatedamong the discharges according to thepastdischarge quantities for each as apercentage of the total quantity of discharges, oranother comparable methodappropriate for a specific situation and pollutant. Past discharges of pollutants must be determined using the average concentration discharged during thepast fiveyears andthefacility's licensed flow. The amount of allowable discharge quantitymay be no more than thepastdischarge quantity calculated using the statistical approach referredto in section 3(E) [Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 ofUSEPA's "Technical Support Docwnentfor Water Quality-Based Taxies Control''] of the rule, but in no event may allocations cause the water quality reserve amount to fall below the minimum referredto in 4(E) [15% of the total assimilative capacity]. Anydifference between the total allowable discharge quantity andthat allocatedto existingdischargers must be addedto the reserve. The Picataquis River is a tributary to the Penobscot River. Three municipal waste water treatment facilities that are subject to the Depatiment's Chapter 530 testing requirements discharge to the Piscataquis River. The waste water treatment facilities are the Milo WaterDistrict, the Town ofDoverFoxcroft and the Guilford-Sangerville SanitaryDistrict. 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 that AWQC 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 (10% ofAWQC) and a reserve (15% ofAWQC). On August 21,2014, the Depatiment conducted statistical evaluations based on 15% ofthe ambient water quality criteria reserve being withheld (Rep01i 10 706) and 0% ofthe reserve ofthe criteria being withheld (Report 10 705) to determine ifthe unallocated assimilative capacity would avoid an exceedance or avoid a reasonable potential to exceed applicable ambient water quality criteria for toxic pollutants. Report ID 705 indicates Dover-Foxcroft would no longer has a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambient water quality criteria for lead. Therefore, the Department is utilizing the full15% of the unallocated assimilative capacity in the statistical evaluation when establishing limits for toxic pollutants in waste discharge licenses for facilities in the Penobscot River watershed including the Piscatquis River watershed. The 8/211!5 statistical evaluation (Report 10 705) indicates the GSSD has two test result that have a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) for ammonia and has four test results that have a reasonable potential to exceed both the acute and chronic AWQC for total copper.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 31 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Tier IA & Tier IIA — Flow of 0.465 MGD The 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste water treatment facility has four (4) test results for ammonia that have a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic AWQC for ammonia, two (2) test results for antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed the human health (water & organisms) AWQC for cadmium, has one test result for copper that has a reasonable potential to exceed the acute AQWC. The pollutants of concern in the 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates all three facilities have discharged detectable levels of ammonia and copper and only the GSSD facility has discharged a detectable level of antimony. The Department's guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations can be found in Attachment E of this Fact Sheet. The guidance states that the most protective of water quality becomes the facility's allocation. According to the 3/17/15 statistical evaluation, all the pollutants are to be limited based on the segment allocation method. Chapter 530 §(3)(D)(1) states "For specific chemicals, effluent limits must be expressed in total quantity that may be discharged and in effluent concentration. In establishing concentration, the Department may increase allowable values to reflect actual flows that are lower than permitted flows and/or provide opportunities for flow reductions and pollution prevention provided water quality criteria are not exceeded. With regard to concentration limits, the Department may review past and projected flows and set limits to reflect proper operation of the treatment facilities that will keep the discharge of pollutants to the minimum level practicable." In May 2012, Maine law 38 M.R,S.A. §464, ¶¶ K was enacted which reads as follows, "Unless otherwise required by an applicable effluent limitation guideline adopted by the department, any limitations for metals in a waste discharge license may be expressed only as mass-based limits." There are no applicable effluent limitation guidelines adopted by the Department or the USEPA for metals from a publicly owned treatment works. Tier IA & Tier HA — Flow of 0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology Historical Average: For the segment allocation methodology, the historical average quantity (mass) for each pollutant of concern for each facility is calculated utilizing the arithmetic mean of the concentrated values reported for each pollutant, a conversion factor of 8.34 lbs/gallon and the monthly average permit limit for flow. For the GSSD facility, historical averages for ammonia, antimony and copper and were calculated as follows: ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 31 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENTLIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TierlA & TierIIA- Flow of0.465 MGD The 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates the discharge from the permittee's waste water treatment facility has four (4) test results for ammonia that have a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic AWQC for ammonia, two (2) test results for antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed the human health (water & organisms) AWQC for cadmium, has one test result for copper thathas a reasonable potential to exceed the acute AQWC. The pollutants ofconcern in the 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates all three facilities have discharged detectable levels ofammonia and copper and only the GSSD facility has discharged a detectable level ofantimony. The Depat1ment's guidance that establishes protocols for establishing waste load allocations can be found in AttachmentE ofthis Fact Sheet. The guidance states that the mostprotective ofwater quality becomes the facility's allocation. According to the 3/17/15 statistical evaluation, all the pollutants are to be limited based on the segment allocation method. Chapter 530 §(3)(D)(l) states 

### "For specific chemicals, effluent limits must be expressed in total quantity that may be discharged andin effluent concentration. In establishing concentration, the Department may increase allowable values to reflect actual flows that are lower thanpermitted flows and/orprovide opportunities for flow reductions and pollutionpreventionprovidedwater quality criteria are not exceeded. With regardto concentration limits, the Department may reviewpastandprojected flows and set limits to reflectproper operation of the treatment facilities that will keep the discharge of pollutants to the minimum levelpracticable. " InMay 2012, 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 expressedonly as mass-based limits." There are no applicable effluent limitation guidelines adopted bythe Department orthe USEPA for metals from a publicly owned treatment works. Tier lA & TierIIA- Flow of0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology HistoricalAverage:
For the segment allocation methodology, the historical average quantity (mass) for each pollutant of concern for each facility is calculated utilizing the arithmetic mean ofthe concentrated values reported for each pollutant, a conversion factor of8.34 lbs/gallon and the monthly average permit limit for flow. For the GSSD facility, historical averages for ammonia, antimony and copper and were calculated as follows:ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 32 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (coned) Tier IA & Tier IIA — Flow of 0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology Ammonia Mean concentration 1,302 ug/L or 1.3 mg/L Permit flow limit = 0.465 MGD Historical average mass = (1.3 mg/L)(8.34)(0.465 MGD) = 5.04 lbs/day The 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass of ammonia discharged by GSSD is 3.18% of the ammonia discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, GSSD's segment allocation for ammonia is calculated as 3.18% of the chronic assimilative capacity of the river at Milo, the most downstream discharger on the Piscataquis. The assimilative capacity at Milo is calculated as follows: 7Q10 = 27.7 cfs (0.6464) = 17.90528 MGD 27.7 cfs is the 7Q10 at Milo. Chronic AWQC = 3,006 ug/L or 3.006 mg/L Taking into consideration 0% of the AWQC reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Chronic = (3.006 mg/L)(0.90)(8.34 lbs/gal)(17.90528 MGD) = 404 lbs/day Monthly average (chronic) mass limitations for ammonia are calculated as follows: Monthly average: (Chronic assimilative capacity mass)(% of total ammonia discharged)

(404 lbs/day)(0.0318) = 12.8 lbs/day or 13 lbs/day Antimony Mean concentration = 351 ug/L or 0.351 mg/L Permit flow limit = 0.465 MGD Historical average mass = (0.351 mg/L)(8.34)(0.465 MGD) =1.36 lbs/day The 8/21/15 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass of antimony discharged by GSSD is 100% of the antimony discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, GSSD's segment allocation for antimony is calculated as 100% of the chronic assimilative capacity of the river at Milo. The assimilative capacity at Milo is calculated as follows: ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 32 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TierlA & TierIIA- Flow of0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology Ammonia Mean concentration = I ,302 ug!L or 1.3 mg/L Permit flow limit= 0.465 MOD Historical average mass= (1.3 mg!L)(8.34)(0.465 MOD)= 5.04 lbs/day The 8/21/14 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass ofammonia discharged by OSSD is 3.18% ofthe ammonia discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD's segment allocation for ammonia is calculated as 3.18% ofthe chronic assimilative capacity ofthe river at Milo, the most downstream discharger on the Piscataquis. The assimilative capacity at Milo is calculated as follows: 

### * 7Ql0 = 27.7 cfs (0.6464) = 17.90528 MOD 27.7 cfs is the 7Ql0 at Milo. Chronic AWQC = 3,006 ug!L or 3.006 mg/L Taking into consideration 0% ofthe AWQC reserve and I0% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Chronic= (3.006 mg/L)(0.90)(8.34 lbs/gal)(l7.90528 MOD)=404lbs/day Monthly average (chronic) mass limitations for ammonia are calculated as follows: Monthly average: (Chronic assimilative capacity mass)(% oftotal ammonia discharged) (404lbs/day)(0.0318) = 12.8lbs/dayor 13Ibs/day Antimony Mean concentration= 351 ug!L or0.351 mg/L Permit flow limit= 0.465 MOD Historical average mass= (0.351 mg/L)(8.34)(0.465 MOD) =1.36lbs/day The 8/21/15 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass ofantimony discharged by OSSD is I00% ofthe antimony discharged bythe three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD's segment allocation for antimony is calculated as 100% ofthe chronic assimilative capacity ofthe river at Milo. The assimilative capacity at Milo is calculated as follows:

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 33 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Tier IA & Tier IIA — Flow of 0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology Harmonic mean =- 135*

cfs (0.6464) =. 82.264 MGD 135 cfs is the 7Q10 at GSSD RH (w&o) AWQC = 5.5 ug/L or 0.00550 mg/L Taking into consideration 0% of the AWQC reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Harmonic mean = (0.0055 mg/L)(0.90)(8.34 lbs/gal)(82.264 MGD) = 3.40 lbs/day Monthly average mass limitations for antimony are calculated as follows: Monthly average: (Chronic assimilative capacity mass)(% of total antimony discharged)

(3.4 lbs/day)(1.0) = 3.4 lbs/day Copper Mean concentration = 12.7 ug/L or 0.0127 mg/L Permit flow limit = 0.465 MGD Historical average mass = (0.0127 mg/L)(8.34)(0.465 MGD) 0.0492 lbs/day The 8/21/15 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass of copper discharged by GSSD is 32.4% of the copper discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, GSSD's segment allocation for copper is calculated as 32.4% of the acute assimilative capacity of the river at Milo. The assimilative capacity at Milo are calculated as follows: 1Q10 = 18.5 cfs (0.6464) = 11.9584 MGD Acute AWQC = 3.07 ug/L or 0.00307 mg/L Taking into consideration 0% of the AWQC reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Acute = (0.00307 mg/L)(0.9)(8.34 lbs/gal)(11.9584 MGD) = 0.276 lbs/day Daily maximum (acute) mass limitation for copper are calculated as follows: Daily maximum: (Acute assimilative capacity mass)(% of total copper discharged)

(0.276 lbs/day)(0.324) = 0.089 lbs/day or 0.09 lbs/day MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 33 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENTLIMITATIONSAND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) TierlA & 

### TierIIA- Flow of0.465 MGD Segment allocation methodology



### . * Harmomc mean= 135 cfs (0.6464) = 82.264 MOD 135 cfs is the 7QIO at OSSD HH 

### (w&o) AWQC = 5.5 ug/L or 0.00550 mg!L Taking into consideration 0% ofthe AWQC reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Harmonic mean= (0.0055 mg!L)(0.90)(8.34 lbs/gal)(82.264 MOD)= 3.40 lbs/day Monthly average mass limitations for antimony are calculated as follows: Monthly average: (Chronic assimilative capacity mass)(% oftotal antimony discharged) (3.4 lbs/day)(l.O) = 3.4 lbs/day Copper Mean concentration= 12.7 ug/L or 0.0127 mg/L Permit flow limit= 0.465 MOD Historical average mass= (0.0127 mg!L)(8.34)(0.465 MOD)= 0.0492lbs/day The 8/21/15 statistical evaluation indicates the historical average mass ofcopper discharged by OSSD is 32.4% ofthe copper discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD's segment allocation for copper is calculated as 32.4% ofthe acute assimilative capacity ofthe river at Milo. The assimilative capacity at Milo are calculated as follows:
IQl0 = 18.5 cfs (0.6464) = 11.9584 MOD Acute AWQC = 3.07 ug/L or 0.00307 mg!L Taking into consideration 0% ofthe AWQC reserve and 10% for background, the assimilative capacities are: Acute= (0.00307 mg/L)(0.9)(8.34lbs/gal)(ll.9584 MOD)= 0.276lbs/day Daily maximum (acute) mass limitation for copper are calculated as follows: Dailymaximum: (Acute assimilative capacity mass)(% oftotal copper discharged) (0.276 lbs/day)(0.324) = 0.089 lbs/day or0.09 lbs/day

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 34 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Segment allocation methodology Tier IB & Tier IIB — Flow of 0.93 MGD For these two tiers, the dilution factors are reduced by approximately one half which results in all the same parameters being of concern (ammonia, antimony and copper). The limitations for ammonia, antimony and copper remain the same as the limitations established for Tier IA & Tier IIA were based on the segment allocation methodology and not the individual allocation methodology. In other words, the higher flow limitation resulting in lower dilution factors is irrelevant when establishing the water quality based limits based on the segment allocation methodology. Allowable mass loadings for a facility based on the segment allocation methodology are determined by assimilative capacity of the receivng water based on 1Q10, 7Q10 and the harmonic mean flows (unchanged from tier to tier), facility specific historic loadings discharged (unchanged) and each facilty's percentage of the total historic mass discharged for a pollutant in a watershed (unchanged). Mercury: Pursuant to Certain deposits and discharges prohibited, 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 of Mercury, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 2001), the Department issued a Notice of Interim Limits for the discharge of mercury to the permittee on May 23, 2000, thereby administratively modifying MEPDES #ME0102032/WDL # W002689-5L-G-R by establishing interim monthly average and daily maximum effluent concentration limits of 25.8 parts per trillion (ppt) and 38.7 ppt, respectively, and a minimum monitoring frequency requirement of four (4) tests per year for mercury. On February 6, 2012, the Department issued a minor revision of the permit by reducing the monitoring frequency to 1/Year. Maine law 38 M.R.S.A., §420 1-B,(B)(1) states that a facility is not in violation of the AWQC for mercury if the facility is in compliance with an interim discharge limit established by the Department pursuant to section 413, subsection 11. A review of the Department's database for the previous 60- month period indicates the permitted has been in compliance with the interim limitations for mercury as test results reported have ranged from 1.9 ppt to 7.8 ppt with an arithmetic mean (n=20) of 3,7 ppt. i. Ground Water Monitoring Program - On June 9, 1986, the Department's Land Bureau issued Site Location Order fiL-011197-26-A-N to the GSSD requiring a monitoring program that included quarterly sampling of surface waters in Maxfield Brook as well as five monitoring wells around the lagoons. The purpose of the program was to ensure that the newly constructed secure lagoons were not leaking and that the integrity of the surface waters and ground waters in the vicinity of the lagoons was maintained. Sampling to date indicates that the lagoon system is performing as designed. The Department is carrying ' forward the ground water monitoring program forward in this permitting action. MEOI02032 FACT SHEET Page 34 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) Segment allocation methodology Tier 

### IB & 

### Tier liB- Flow of0.93 MGD
For these two tiers, the dilution factors are reduced by approximately one halfwhich results in all the same parameters being ofconcern (ammonia, antimony and copper). The limitations for ammonia, antimony and copper remain the same as the limitations established for Tier IA & Tier IIA were based on the segment allocation methodology and not the individual allocation methodology. In other words, the higherflow limitation resulting in lower dilution factors is irrelevant when establishing the water quality based limits based on the segment allocation methodology. Allowable mass loadings for a facility based on the segment allocation methodology are determined by assimilative capacity ofthe receivng water based on IQIO, 7QI0 and the harmonic mean flows (unchanged from tier to tier), facility specific historic loadings discharged (unchanged) and each facilty's percentage ofthe total historic mass discharged for a pollutant in a watershed (unchanged).
J. Mercury: 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 EffluentLimitations and Controls for the Discharge of Mercwy, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 200I), the Department issued a Notice oflnterim Limits for the discharge ofmercury to the permittee on May 23, 2000, thereby administratively modifying MEPDES #MEOI02032iWDL # W002689-5L-G-R by establishing interim monthly average and daily maximum effluent concentration limits of25.8 parts pertrillion (ppt) and 38.7 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 !/Year. Maine law 38 M.R.S.A., §420 1-B,(B)(I) states that a facility is not in violation ofthe AWQC for mercury ifthe facility is in compliance with an interim discharge limit established by the Department pursuant to section 413, subsection 11. A review ofthe Department's database for the previous 60­ month period indicates the permittee has been in compliance with the interim limitations for mercury as test results reported have ranged from 1.9 ppt to 7.8 ppt with an arithmetic mean (n=20) of3.7 ppt.

1. Ground Water Monitoring Program- On June 9, 1986, the Department's Land Bureau issued Site Location Order #L-011197-26-A-N to the GSSD requiring a monitoring program that included quarterly sampling ofsurface waters in Maxfield Brook as well as five monitoring wells around the lagoons. The purpose ofthe program was to ensure that the newly constructed secure lagoons were not leaking and that the integrity ofthe surface waters and ground waters in the vicinity ofthe lagoons was maintained. Sampling to date indicates that the lagoon system is performing as designed. The Depmtment is carrying · forward the ground water monitoring program forward in this permitting action.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 35 of 36 W006792-6C-K-R 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) A summary of the ground water quality monitoring data for the period May 2012 — May 2014 is as follows: MW-1 (3-DMRs) Parameter Limit Range Mean Temperature Report 8.4— 12°C 11°C Specific Conductance Report 135 — 220 umhos/cm 156 umhos/cm pH Report 7.0 — 8.2 s.u. N/A TSS Report 2.1 — 5.2 mg/L 3.2 mg/L Nitrate-Nitrogen 10 mg/L 0.05 - 0.2 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Depth to water table Report 0 — 2.0 ft 1 feet MW-4 (3-DMRs) Parameter Limit Range Mean Temperature Report 8 — 11°C 9°C Specific Conductance Report 155 - 250 umhos/cm 215 umhos/cm pH Report 7.1 — 8.3 s.u. N/A TSS Report 1.2 — 3.2 mg/L 2.5 mg/L Nitrate-Nitrogen 10 mg/L 0.05 — 0.2 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Depth to water table Report 1.8 — 8.0 ft 3.9 ft.
7. DISCHARGE IMPACT ON RECEIVING WATER QUALITY The monthly average and or daily maxmum limitations in this permit are equal to or more stringent than the limits in the previous permit. The Department has made a best professional judgment determination that as permitted, the discharge will not cause or contribute the failure of the receiving water to meet the standards of its ascribed classification and the designated uses of the river will continue to be maintained and protected. If future modeling runs determine that at full permitted discharge limits, the permittee's discharge is causing or contributing to the non-attainment, this permit will be re-opened per Special Condition L, Reopening of The License For Modifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meet water quality standards. 8. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public notice of this application was made in the Bangor Daily News newspaper on or about February 9, 2015. The Department receives public comments on an application until the date a final agency action is taken on that application. Those persons receiving copies of draft license shall have at least 30 days in which to submit comments on the draft or to request a public hearing, pursuant to Chapter 522 of the Department's rules. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 35 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 

### 6. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd)
A summary ofthe ground water quality monitoring data for the period May 2012- May 2014 is as follows: 

### MW-1 (3-DMRs)

Parameter Limit Ranee Mean Temperature Report 8.4- l2°C ll°C Specific Conductance Report 135- 220 umhos/cm !56 umhos/cm pH Report 7.0- 8.2 s.u. 

### NIA TSS Report 2.1-5.2 mg/L 3.2 mg/1 Nitrate-Nitrogen 10 mg/L 0.05

- 0.2 mg/L 0.1 mg/1 Depth to water table Report 0-2.0 ft I feet 

### MW-4 (3-DMRs)

Parameter Limit Ranee Mean Temperature Repmt 8- l1°C 9°C Specific Conductance Report !55- 250 umhos/cm 215 umhos/cm pH Report 7.1

- 8.3 s.u. N/A TSS Repmt 1.2-3.2mg/L 2.5 mg/L Nitrate-Nitrogen 10 mg/L 0.05

- 0.2 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Depth to water table Repmt 1.8- 8.0 ft 3.9 ft.
7. 

### DISCHARGE IMPACT ON RECEIVING WATER QUALITY The monthly average and or daily maxmum limitations in this permit are equal to or more stringent than the limits in the previous permit. The Department has made a bestprofessionaljudgmentdetermination that as permitted, the discharge will not cause or contribute the failure ofthe receiving waterto meet the standards ofits ascribed classification and the designated uses ofthe river will continue to be maintained and protected. lffuture modeling runs determine that at full permitted discharge limits, the permittee's discharge is causing or contributing to the non-attainment, this permit will be re-opened per Special Condition L, 

### ReopeningofThe License For Modifications, to impose more stringent limitations to meet water quality standards. 

### 8. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public notice ofthis application was made in the Bangor DailyNews newspaper on or about February 9, 2015. The Depattment receives public comments on an application until the date a final agency action is taken on that application. Those persons receiving copies ofdraft license 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.

### ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 36 of 36

W006792-6C-K-R 9. DEPARTMENT CONTACTS Additional information concerning this permitting action may be obtained from and written comments should be sent to: Gregg Wood Division of Water Quality Management Bureau of Water Quality Department of Environmental Protection 17 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0017 e-mail: gregg,wood@maine.gov 10.RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Telephone (207) 287-7693

During the period of July 10, 2015, through the issuance date of the permit/license, the Department solicited comments on the proposed draft permit/license to be issued for the discharge(s) from the GSSD facility. The Department did not receive any comments from state or federal agencies or interested parties. The Department did receive comments from the permittee in a letter dated July 10, 2015. Responses to the permittee's comments are as follows: Comment #1:

The permittee requested the Department consider reducing the monitoring frequency for pH for 3/Week to 1/Week to be consistent with the monitoring frequency reduction for BOD and TSS given there has never been an excursion of the pH limitation range of 6.0 — 9.0 standard units. Response #1:

The Department is granting the permittee's request to reduce the monitoring frequency for pH given the historical compliance record but is only reducing the frequency to 2/Week to be consistent with the Department's guidance that states monitoring frequencies cannot be reduced by more than 50%. Comment #2:

The permittee is requesting the Department waive the 85% removal requirement from the permit because of the significant contribution of flow and loadings from True Textiles, a manufacturer of polyester/woolen products. Response #2:



## . 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(111)(b)(3) specifies a requirement to achieve a minimum 30-day average removal of 85 percent for BOD5 and TSS for secondary treated wastewaters. True Textiles contributes approximately 73% of the total flow, 97% of the total biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), 14% of the total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% of the chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. As a result, the GSSD facility is what is often referred to as a "captive POTW" similar to the Anson-Madison Sanitary District (AMSD) facility located in Madison, Maine. The AMSD facility is dominated by pulp and paper mill waste water in which the Department waived the percent removal requirement. The Department is making a best professional judgment determination that the percent removal requirement is not applicable for the GSSD facility due to the significant industrial wastewater introduced into the facility. Therefore, the percent removal requirement is being removed from the permit. ME0102032 FACT SHEET Page 36 of36 W006792-6C-K-R 9. DEPARTMENT CONTACTS Additional information concerning this permitting action may be obtained from and written comments should be sent to: Gregg Wood Division ofWater Quality Management Bureau ofWater Quality Department ofEnvironmental Protection 17 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0017 Telephone (207) 287-7693 e-mail: gregpvood@maine.gov 10. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS During the period ofJuly 10,2015, through the issuance date ofthe permit/license, the Depatiment solicited comments on the proposed draft permit/license to be issued for the discharge(s) from the GSSD facility. The Depatiment did not receive any comments from state or federal agencies or interested patties. The Depatiment did receive comments from the permittee in a letter dated July 10,2015. Responses to the permittee's comments are as follows: 

### Comment #1: The permittee requested the Department consider reducing the monitoring frequency for pH for 3/Weekto !/Weekto be consistent with the monitoring frequency reduction for BOD and TSS given there has never been an excursion ofthe pH limitation range of6.0- 9.0 standard units. 

### Response #1: The Depatiment is grantingthe permittee's request to reduce the monitoring frequency for pH given the historical compliance record but is only reducing the frequency to 2/Week to be consistent with the Depatiment's guidance that states monitoring frequencies cannot be reduced by more than 50%. 

### Comment #2: The permittee is requesting the Department waive the 85% removal requirement from the permit because ofthe significant contribution offlow and loadings from True Textiles, a manufacturer of polyester/woolen products. 

### Response #2:. 06-096 CMR Chapter 525(3)(III)(b)(3) specifies a requirement to achieve a minimum 30-day average removal of85 percent for BODs and TSS for secondary treated wastewaters. True Textiles contributes approximately 73% ofthe total flow, 97% ofthe total biochemical oxygen demand (BODs), 14% ofthe total suspended solids (TSS) and 92% ofthe chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading to the treatment facility. As a result, the GSSD facility is what is often referred to as a "captive POTW" similar to the Anson-Madison Sanitary District (AMSD) facility located in Madison, Maine. The AMSD facility is dominated by pulp and paper mill waste water in which the Department waived the percent removal requirement. The Department is making a best professionaljudgment determination that the percent removal requirement is not applicable for the GSSD facility due to the significant industrial wastewater introduced into the facility. Therefore, the percent removal requirement is being removed from the permit.

# ATTACHMENT A 

# ATTACHMENT A

I

# Copyrighted page(s) removed. Copyrighted material is not available in Regulations.gov since it may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder. Removed pages can be viewed at the USEPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room.
Address: 1301 Constitution Ave, NW Room 3334 Washington, DC 20004 Telephone: 202-566-1744 Email: docket-customerservice@epa.gov

# ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B**~** 

# r 

# IINFLUENT INDUSTRIAL

INFLUENT DOMESTIC

GRIT CHANNEL

CONTROL STRUCTURE

LAGOON 2 Attachment. 2A

CHLORINATION DECHLORINATION FACILITY AGOON 3

BLOWER & CONTROL BUILDING

OUTFALL TO PISCATAQUIS RIVER

FIGURE 2 G.S.S.D. GUILFORD, MAINE 

### Pro IAGRA/41 • G.S.S.D. TREATMENT PLANT EFFLUENT FLOW METER AttachmenL 2A INFLUENT INDUSTRIAL

.. _,., **----~~~~~~~-~**

GRIT CHANNEL

CONTROL STRUCTURE

**~** LAGOON 2



# ~1 LAGOON 3 

# ~,......--lL-L_A_G_o_o_N_4_.

.,

**~-** CHLORINATION DeCHLORINATION
r FACILITY

ci'FLUEHT FLOW METER BLOWER & CONTROL BUILDING

OUTFALL TO PISCATAQUIS RIVER

FIGURE 2 G.S.S.D. GUILFORD, MAINE

PCOW DIAGRAM G.S.S.D. TREATMENT PLANT ·· 

## .

# ATTACHMENT C 

# ATTACHMENT C

'

# ~ r 

# I lGUILFORDISANGERVILLE NPDES= ME010203 Effluent Limit: Acute (%) = 5.881 Chron'c (%) = 4.002 Species Test Percent Sample date Critical 0 /0 Exception RP TROUT A_NOEL 50 09/19/2010 5.881 TROUT A_NOEL 100 09/18 /2011 5.881 TROUT A_NOEL 100 09/19/2012' 5.881 TROUT A_NOEL 100 07/25/2013 5.881 TROUT A_NOEL 100 10/07/2014 5.881 TROUT A_NOEL 100 02/17/2015 5.881 TROUT C_NOEL 50 09/19/2010 4.002 TROUT C_NOEL. 100 09/18/2011 4.002 TROUT C_NOEL 100 09/19/2012 4.002 TROUT C_NOEL 100 07 /25/2013 4.002 TROUT C_NOEL 100 10/07/2014 4.002 TROUT C_NOEL 100 02 /17/2015 4.002 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 50 06/05 /2011 5.881 WATER FLEA A NOEL 1430 09 /18/2011 5.881 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 09 /19/2012 5.881 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 06/20/2013 5.881 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 10/07/2014 5.881 WATER FLEA A_NOEL 100 02/17/2015 5.881 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 25 06/05/2011 4.002 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 2 09 / 18/2011 4.002 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 50 09/19/2012 4.002 WATER. FLEA C_NOEL 100 06/20/2013 4.002 WATER, FLEA C_NOEL 100 10/07/2014 4.002 WATER FLEA C_NOEL 100 02 /17/2015 4.002

------- NPDES= ME010203 GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE Species TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT TROUT WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER FLEA WATER, FLEA WATER FLEA Test A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL A_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL C_NOEL 5.881 Critical Ofo 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 5.881 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 4.002 Chronic (%) = 4.002 Exception RP

y Percent 50 100 100 100 100 100 50 100 100 100 100 100 50 14.30

100 100 100 100 25 2 50 100 100 100 Effluent Umit: Acute (%) = Sample date

09/19/2010 09/18/2011 09/19/2012

. 07/25/2013 10/07/2014 02/17/2015 09/19/2010 09/18/2011 09/19/2012 07/25/2013 10/07/2014 02/17/2015 06/05/2011 09/18/2011 09/19/2012 06/20/2013 10/07/2014 02/17/2015 06/05/2011 09/18/2011 09/19/2012 06/20/2013 10/07/2014 02/17/2015

# ATTACHMENT D

I 

# ATTACHMENT D

I 

### !



# ~ I L I



## I

/ I I I 

### j

I 

# r

itoRI5 - 

### AN

44 4 of 110

. Facility Name: GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE NPDES: ME0102032 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number 14 V ON P 0 A Clean Hg 09/19 /2010 0.26 0.17 21 10 0 0 0 11 0

Monthly Daily Total Test Test # BY Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 06/05 /2011 0.20 0.18 24 12 0 0 0 11 1 F 0

Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V UN P 0 A Clean Hg 09/18 /2011 0.27 0.13 23 12 0 0 0 11 0 F 0

Monthly pally Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 09/19/2012 0.30 0.44 22 10 0 0 0 11 1 F 0 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN p 0 A Clean Hg 11/19/2012 0.32 0.12 11 10 0 0 0 1 0 F 0

Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V UN P 0 A Clean Hg 02/06/2013 0.22 0.15 14 10 0 0 0 4 0 F 0 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 06/20/2013 0.28 0,24 22 10 0 0 0 11 1 ' F Monthly Daily Total Test Test #I By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 07/25/2013 0.20 0.48 21 10 0 0 0 11 0 F 0 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN p 0 A Clean Hg 01/23 /2014 0,27 0.41 11 10 0 0 0 1 0 F 0

Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 06/25/2014 0.34 0.30 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 F 0 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN p 0 A Clean Hg 10/07/2014 0.25 0.16 135 14 28 46 25 11 11 F 0 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 02/17/2015 0,21 0.07 21 10 0 0 • 0 11 0 F 0 . 

### ________ ___ 

## ___ __ Facility Name: GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE NPDES: ME0102032 Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**9?L!~(2_o_l_o_**

### ________ **9,~~** 

### _____ o_.g________ **--~!** 

### ________

## J-.9

..__Q

___Q

___

### 9

___

## !!

___ o________ **~**

### _______o __ Monthly Daily Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**P_6LQ~,i2_D_!l.**

### ________ **p,~Q** 

### _____ D_·!?

_

_________

### 2_4_

_________ 12

___

### Q

___

## 9

___9_

__ !!

___L_

_____ _______ 

### Q

__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 

### 9?f18L201.!

_________9,2:7

_____ 0,_1_3

__________**2_~** 

### _12

___Q Q_

.._ 

## 9

__ !! o____ **----~** 

### _______ Q


### 2_2_ 1.9 Q

___

## 9

__ !! 

## _ Monthly I;laily Total Test Test# By Group Te.st Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**9?L!~,/2_D_!2_**

### ________ **.!J,~Q**

### _____ o_.jj

_

_________ 

### _________ ___ ___ **~** 

## _ ___!._

______ _______ 

### Q

__ Monthly Dally Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**!.1L!~£2.D_l.2_**

### ____ .____ **9,~~** 

### _____ o_._1_2

__________!!

_________ 1.9

___Q_

__

## 9

___9

___}-

____ o________ _______

### 9

__ Monthly Dally Total Test Test# By Group · Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

. 

### 9.2LQ§,/2_0.1.3.

________ **.9,~~**

### ____..0.·!.?

.._________!4_

_________ 1.9

___g
___ Q

___ 

## .9

_

___ 4_

___ 

### o_______ **-~** 

### _______ Q

__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 

### 9_6@,/2_()_!3_-
. _

**_!),~~--** 

### --

### _()_._2j

--- .------2_2_-------- _1_0_-

### _Q

--

**-~---9** 

### ___ 

## !!

-- _1_-------

**~--** 

## -----9-. Monthly Daily Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 

### 9? 

### L?!5,12_D_l.3_

_ ------

**9,~Q** 

### __-

__O,.j?

__ -------

### _2_!

------___1.9_- _Q

___ **~---** 

## p_-- !!

___ o_-_____

## L_--

..-- Q-. Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**9.!-f?~,/2_0.1.4** 

### ________.9,2_:7

_____ o_.j_i

__________!!

_________ 1.9

___Q

___Q

___9

____1

____ 

### o________f'

_______ Q _. Monthly Daily Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg

**.9.6!?~,/2_()_1_4_------** 

### ___ **o,~~-----()_·.?9** 

### ___________1

_____ 0 0 0 0 0 1 f 0

**---------------------------------------~--~** Monthly Daily · Total Test Test # By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 

### _1QLQ?,t2_o_1_4

_ -- .. --

**_!),~!;** 

### ---- 

### _()_.]._6_---

--____1_3_?_-

-----

__ 

### 14

___ 2_8_- _4_6_

__**~~--!!** 

## ___1_1_

__----

**~--** 

### ----

## _9

__ Monthly Daily Total Test Test# By Group Test Date (Flow MGD) Number M V BN P 0 A Clean Hg 

### .9.2!!?,12_0,1_5_---

-----_9,2_!_--

__ ()_.Q?_------

--

**-~!---** 

### --

____ 1_9_--Q--- Q--

**~**

## 9

..-_!!

___ ()_

_______f'
----- --

## 9_.Facility name: GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE Permit Number: ME0102032

Parameter AMMONIA Test date Result (ug/l) Lsthan 09/19/2010 2000.000 N 06/05/2011 3400.000 N 09/18/2011 1300.000 N 09/19/2012 537.000 N 11/19/2012 209.000 N 02/06/2013 2600.000 N 06/20/2013 1360.000 N 07/25/2013 416.000 N 01/23/2014 2100.000 N 10/07/2014 490,000 N 02/17/2015 5730.000 N Parameter; ANTIMONY Test date Result (ugh!) Lsthan 06/05/2011 135.000 N 09/16/2011 323.000 N 10/07/2014 221.000 N

-- • Parameter; COPPER Test date Result (ug/1) Lsthan 09/19/2010 12.000 06/05/2011 .4.000 09/18/2011 6.000 09/19/2012 10.500 11/19/2012 11.600 02/06/2013 17.500 06/20/2013 11.700 07/25/2013 10.400 01/23/2014 16.900 10/07/2014 9.480 02/17/2015 19.900 Facility name: GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE Permit Number: ME0102032

\ .• Parameter: AMMONIA

Parameter: ANTIMONY Test date Result (ug/1) Lsthan



# ----------------------------------------------­ 09/19/2010 2000.000 N 06/05/2011 3400.000 N 09/18/2011 1300.000 N 09/19/2012 537.000 N 11/19/2012 209.000 N 02/06/2013 2600.000 N 06/20/2013 1360.000 N 07/25/2013 416.000 N 01/23/2014 2100.000 N 10/07/2014 490.000 N 02/17/2015 5730,000 N
Test date Result (ug/1) Lathan 

## ------------------· _____________ ., 

### ·------------­ 06/05/2011 135.000 N 09/18/2011 323.000 N 10/07/2014 221.000 N

Parameter: COPPER Test date
---------·---· 09/19/2010 06/05/2011 09/18/2011 09/19/2012 11/19/2012 02/06/2013 06/20/2013 07/25/2013 01/23/2014 10/07/2014 02/17/2015 Result (ug/1) Lsthan

-------­

## ------------------------­ 12.000 N .4.000 N 6.000 N 10.500 N 11.600 N 17.500 N 11.700 N 10.400 N 16.900 N 9.480 N 19.900 N

### Maine Department of Environmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"

L Preparation Select Watershed
Select values for PH, Temp, hardness, Background %, Reserve % Algorithms for sonic pollutants Water quality tables ---------*

. Calculate water quality criteria: Acute, Chronic, Health

IL Segment Assimilative Capacity

Get facility information: location, stream flows
. Identify lowermost facility
Get stream flows for Acute, Chronic, Health (1Q10, 7Q10, HM)
Calculate segment capacity by pollutant and criterion: Stream flow x criterion x 8.34 = pounds
Set aside Reserve and Background: Segment capacity x (1.— background — reserve) = Segment Assimilative Capacity
Save Segment Assimilative Capacities by pollutant and criterion

Page 1 Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"

I. Pre aration
Select Watershed 

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

### %, Reserve 

### % Algorithms for somepollutants Waterqualitytables Calculate water quality criteria: Acute, Chronic, Health

II. SegmentAssimilative Capacity
Get facility information: location, stream flows

# ~

. Identify lowermost facility

# ~ Get stream flows for Acute, Chronic, Health 

### (!QlO, 7Ql0, HM)

Calculate segment capaciJbypollutant and cdterion: Stream flow X enteron X 8.34 =pounds

Set asideReserve and Background: Segment capacity

### x (1- background- reserve)=

### SegmentAssimilative Capacity

Save SegmentAssimilative Capacities bypollutant and critelion

Page IMaine Department of Environmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox" III. Evaluate History by Pollutant

Select each facility effluent data for each facility Data input and edits

Identify "less than" results and assign at 1/2of reporting limit
Bypass pollutants if all results are "less than"
Average concentrations and calculate pounds: Ave concentration x license flow x 8.34 = Historical Average
Determine reasonable potential (RP) using algorithm

Calculate RP adjusted pounds; Historical Average x RP factor=RP Historical Allocation

Save for comparative evaluation
Calculate adjusted maximum pounds: Highest concentration x RP factor x license flow x 8.34 =RP Maximum Value

IV. Determine Facility History Percentage

By pollutant, identify facilities withHistorical Average
Sum all Historical Averages within segment
By facility, calculate percent of total: Facility pounds I Total pounds = Facility History %

Page 2 

# I 

# , I

Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox" 

### I 

# I
III. Evaluate Histor b Pollutant 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"

. Average concentratioj and calculatepounds: Ave concentration x license flow x 8.34 =HistoricalAverage

Determinereasonable poJntial 

### (RP) using algorithm 

# J Calculate RP adjusted pounds: Historical Average x 

### R1' factor=RPHistoricalAllocation 

# l
Save for comparative evaluation

Calculate adjuste)maximum pounds: Highest concentration x RP factor x license flow x 8.34 = RPMaximum Value



### IV. Determine Facility HistoryPercentaue Bypollutant, identifyfacilitieS .withHistoricalAverage

# ~ Sum all Historical Averages within segment

# ~ . Byfacility, calculatepercent oftotal: Facilitypounds ITotal pounds= FacilityHistory% }

Page 2

### Maine Department of Environmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTex" V. Segment Allocation

By pollutant and criterion, select Segment Assimilative Capacity



# I Select individual Facility History %
Determine facility allocation: Assimilative Capacity x Facility History % = Segment Allocation

Save for comparative evaluation

VI. Individual Allocation

Select individual facility and dilution factor (DF)
Select pollutant and water quality criterion
By pollutant and criterion, ca culate individual 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



# 4 Save for comparative evaluation

VII. Make Initial Allocation By facility, pollutant and criterion, get: Individual Allocation, Segment Allocation, RP Historical Allocation

Compare allocation and select the smallest

Save as Facility Allocation

Page 3 Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection General Processing Steps 

### in "DeTox" V. Segment Allocation Bypollutant and criterion, select 

# !SegmentAssimilative Capacity



# . Selectindividual FacilityHistory% 

# ! Determinefacility allocation: Assimilative Capacityx FacilityHistory%= SegmentAllocation 

# ! Save for comparative evaluation



### VI. Individual Allocation
Select individual facility and dilution factor (DF) 

# ! Selectpollutant and water quality criterion
Bypollutant and criterion, catulateindividual allocations: [DF 

### x 0.75 

### x criterion]+ [0.25 

### x criterion] =Individual Concentration 

# ! Determine individual allocation: Individual Concentration x license flow x 8.34 =IndividualAllocation 

# ! Save for comparative evaluation



### VII. Make InitialAllocation

. By facility, pollutant and criterion, get: IndividualAllocation, SegmentAllocation, RPHistoricalAllocation 

# ! Compare allocation and selectthe smallest 

### ) Save asFacJtyAllocation

Page3

### Maine Department of Environmental Protection General Processing Steps in "DeTox"
VIM Evaluate Need for Effluent Limits By facility, pollutant and criterion select Segment Allocation, Individual Allocation and RP Maximum value
1! , If RP blaximum value is greater than eitherSegment Allocation orIndividual Allocation, use lesser value as Effluent Limit

Save Effluent Limit for comparison

IX. Reallocation of Assimilative Capacity Starting at top of segment, get Segment Allocation, Facility Allocation and Effluent Limit

IfSegment Allocation equalsEffluent Limit, move to next facility downstream
If not, subtract Facility Allocation from Segment Allocation

Save difference

i f Select n ext faci ity downstream
Figure remainingSegment Assimilative Capacity at and below facility, less tributaries
Add saved difference to get an adjusted Segment Assimilative Capacity

ReallocateSegment Assimilative Capacity among downstream facilities per step V
Jr Repeat process for each facility downstream in turn

Page 4 

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

VIII. Evaluate Need for Effluent Limits Byfacility, pollutant and criterion select SegmentAllocation,IndividualAllocation 

### and RPMaximum value 

# ! 	 . IfRPMaximum value 

### is greater than eitherSegmentAllocation 

### orIndividualAllocation, 

### use lesser value as Ejj/uentLimit 

# ! . Save Ejj/uentLimit 

### for comparison

IX. 

### Reallocation ofAssimllative Capacity Starting at top ofsegment, get SegmentAllocation, FacilityAllocation 

### and EjjluentLimit

# ~ IfSegmentAllocation 

### equals Ejj/uentLimit, 

### move to next facility downstream 

# ! Ifnot, subtract FacilityAllocation 

### from SegmentAllocation 

# ! Save difference

Select next facJity downstream 

# ! Figure remaining SegmentAssimilative Capacity 

### at and below facility, less tributaries 

# ! Add saved difference to get an adjusted SegmentAssimilative Capacity 

# ! ReallocateSegmentAssimilative CapacitY

### among downstream facilities per step V 

# ! Repeat

### process for each facility downstream in turn }



### Page4

### MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MEMORANDUM DATE: October 2008 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Dennis Merrill, DEP SUBJECT: DEP's system for evaluating toxicity from multiple discharges ***************************4************************************************* Following the requirements of DEP's rules, Chapter 530, section 4(F), the Department is evaluating discharges of toxic pollutants into a freshwater river system in order to prevent cumulative impacts from multiple discharges. This is being through the use of a computer program known internally as "DeTox", The enclosed package of information is intended to introduce you to this system.' Briefly, the DeTox program evaluates each wastewater facility within a watershed in three different ways in order to characterize its effluent: I) the facility's past history of discharges, 2) its potential toxicity at the point of discharge on an individual basis, and 3) the facility's contribution to cumulative toxicity within a river segment in conjunction with other facilities. The value that is most protective of water quality 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 a five-year "rolling" data window. This means that, over time, old test results drop off and newer ones are added. The intent of this process is to maintain current, uniform facility data to estimate contributions to a river's total allowable pollutant loading prior to each permit renewal. Many facilities are required to do only a relatively small amount of pollutant testing on their effluent. This means, statistically, the fewer tests done, the greater the possibility of effluent limits being necessary based on the facility's small amount of data. To avoid this situation, most facilities, especially those with low dilution factors, should consider conducting more than the minimum number of tests required by the rules. Attached you will find three documents with additional information on the DeTox system:

• Methods for evaluating the effects of multiple discharges of toxic pollutants • Working definitions of terms used in the DeTox system • Reviewing DeTox Reports • Prototype facility and pollutant reports If you have questions as you review these, please do not hesitate to contact me at Dennis.L.Merrill@maine.gov or 287-7788. 

### MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MEMORANDUM DATE: October 2008 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Dennis Merrill, DEP SUBJECT: DEP's systemfor evaluating toxicity from multiple discharges 

### ****************************************************************************** Following the requirements ofDEP'srules, Chapter 530, 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 ofinformation is intended to introduce you to this system.' Briefly, the DeTox program evaluates each wastewaterfacility within a watershed in three different ways in orderto characterize its effluent: I) the facility's past history ofdischarges, 2) its potential toxicity at the point ofdischarge on an individual basis, and 3) the facility's contribution to cumulative toxicity within ariver segmentin conjtmction with otherfacilities. The value that is most protective ofwaterquality becomes the value that is held in the DeTox system as an allocationfor the specific facility and pollutant. The system is not static and uses afive-year "rolling" data window. This means that, over time, old test results drop offand newer ones are added. The intent ofthisprocess is to maintain 

# I I current, 1miformfacility data to estimate contributions to ariver's total allowable pollutant loading priorto eachpermitrenewal.

·Many facilities are required to do only arelatively small amount ofpollutant testing 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 withlow dilution factors, should consider conducting more than the minimum munber oftests required by the rules. Attached you will find three doctunents with additional infonnation on the DeTox system:

• Methods for evaluating the effects ofmultiple discharges oftoxic pollutants • Working definitions ofterms used in the DeTox system • Reviewing DeTox Reports • Prototype facility and pollutantreports Ifyou have questions as you review these, please do not hesitate to contact me at Dennis.L.Merrill@maine.gov or 287-7788.

### Maine Department of Environmental Protection Methods for evaluating the effects of multiple discharges of toxic pollutants.

Reference: DEP Rules, Chapter 530, section 4(F) To evaluate discharges of toxic pollutants into a freshwater river system and prevent cumulative impacts from multiple discharges, DEP uses a computer program called "DeTox that functions as a mathematical evaluation tool. It uses physical information about discharge sources and river conditions on file with the Department, established water quality criteria and reported effluent test information to perform these evaluations. Each toxic pollutant and associated water quality criterion for acute, chronic and/or human health effects is evaluated separately. Each facility in a river drainage area has 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 are performed in pounds per day to allow analysis on a mass balance. Pollutants are considered to be conservative in that once in the receiving water they will not easily degrade and have the potential to accumulate. The process begins with establishing an assimilative capacity for each pollutant and water quality criterion at the most downstream point 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 of assimilative capacity is available for allocation among facilities on the river. Each facility is evaluated to characterize its past discharge quantities. The historical discharge, in pounds per day, is figured using the average reported concentration and the facility's permitted flow. As has been past practice, a reasonable potential (RP) factor is used as a tool to estimate the largest discharge that may occur with a certain degree of statistical certainty. The RP factor is multiplied by the historical average to determine an allocation based on past discharges. The RP factor is also multiplied by the single highest test to obtain a maximum day estimate. Finally, the direct average without RP adjustment is used to determine the facility's percent contribution to the river segment in comparison to the sum of all discharges of the pollutant. This percent multiplied by the total assimilative capacity becomes the facility's discharge allocation used in evaluations of the segment loadings. Additionally, individual facility discharges are evaluated as single sources, as they have been in the past to determine if local conditions are more limiting than a segment evaluation. MaineDepartmentofEnvironmental Protection Methods for evaluating the effects ofmultiple discharges oftoxic pollutants. Reference: DEP-Rules, Chapter 530, section 4(F) To evaluate discharges oftoxic pollutants into a freshwater river system and prevent cumulative impacts from multiple discharges, DEP uses a computerprogram called "DeToxthat functions as a mathematical evaluation tool. Ituses physical information about discharge sources and river conditions on file with the Department, established water quality criteria and reported effluent test informationtoperform · these evaluations. Each toxic pollutant and associated water quality criterion for acute, chronic and/orhuman health effects is evaluated separately. Each facility in a river drainage areahas an assigned position code. This "address" is used to locatethe facility on the river segment and inrelation to otherfacilities and tributary streams. All calculations areperformed inpoundsper day to allow analysis on a mass balance. Pollutants are considered to be conservative in that once inthe receiving water they will noteasily degrade and have the potential to accumulate. The process begins with establishing an assimilative capacity for each pollutant and water quality criterion atthe most downstream point in the river segment. This calculation includes set-aside amounts for background andreserve quantities and assumed values for receiving water pH, temperature and hardness. The resulting amount ofassimilative capacityis available for allocation among facilities on theriver. Each facility is evaluated to characterize its past discharge quantities. Thehistorical discharge, inpoundsperday, is figured using the average reported concentration andthe facility's permitted flow. Ashas beenpastpractice, a reasonable potential (RP) factor is used as a tool to estimate the largest discharge thatmay occur with 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 single highest test to obtain a maximum day estimate. Finally, the direct average without RP adjustment is used to determine the facility's pereent contribution to theriver segment in comparison tothe sum ofall discharges ofthe · pollutant. This percent multiplied bythe total assimilative capacitybecomes the facility's discharge allocation used in evaluations ofthe segment loadings. Additionally, individual facility discharges are evaluated as single sources, as they have been in thepastto determine iflocal conditions are more limiting than a segment evaluation.

### With all of this information, facilities are evaluated in three ways. The methods are:

. The facility's past history. This is the average quantity discharged during the past five years multiplied by the applicable RP factor. This method is often the basis for an - 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 are present and the allowable quantity is the total available assimilative capacity. This method may be used when a local condition such as river flow at the point of discharge is the limiting factor. 3. A segment wide evaluation. This involves allocating the available assimilative capacity within a river segment based on a facility's percent of total past discharges. This method would be used when multiple discharges of the same pollutant to the same segment and the available assimilative capacity is relatively limited. The value that is most protective of water quality becomes the facility's allocation that is held in the system for the specific facility and pollutant. It is important to note that the method used for allocation is facility and pollutant specific and different facilities on the same segment for the same pollutant can have different methods used depending on their individual situations. Discharge amounts are always allocated to all facilities having a history of discharging a particular pollutant. This does not mean that effluent limits will be established in a permit. Limits are only needed when past discharge amounts suggest a reasonable potential to exceed a water quality based allocation, either on an individual or segment basis. Similar to past practices for single discharge evaluations, the single highest test value is multiplied by a RP factor and if product is greater than the water quality allowance, an effluent limit is established. It is important to remember an allocation is "banking" some assimilative capacity for a facility even if effluent limits are not needed. Evaluations are also done for each tribtitary segment with the sum of discharge quantities in tributaries becoming a "point source" to the next most significant segment. In cases where a facility does not use all of its assimilative capacity, usually due to a more limiting individual water quality criterion, the unused quantity is rolled doWnstream and made available to other facilities. The system is not static and uses a five-year rolling data window. Over time, old tests drop off and newer ones are added on. These changes cause the allocations and the need for effluent limits to Shift over time to remain current with present conditions. The intent is to update a facility's data and relative contribution to a river's total assimilative capacity prior to each permit renewal. Many facilities are required to do only minimal testing to characterize their effluents. This creates a greater degree of statistical uncertainty about the true long-term quantities. Accordingly, with fewer tests the RP factor will be larger and result in a greater possibility of effluent limits being necessary. To avoid this situation, most facilities, especially those with relatively low dilution factors, are encouraged to conduct more that a minimum number of tests. It is generally to a facility's long-term benefit to have more tests on file since their RP factor will be reduced.

With all ofthis infotmation, facilities are evaluated inthree ways. Themethods are: 1. Thefacility's past history. Thisis the average quantity discharged during the past five years multiplied bythe applicable RP factor. This method is often the basis for

# an

· allocation when the discharge quantity is relatively small in comparisonto the water

quality based allocation. 2. 

### An individual evaluation. This assmnes no other discharge sources are present and the allowable quantity is the total available assimilative capacity. This method may be used when a local condition such as river flow atthepoint ofdischarge is the limiting factor. 3. A segment wide evaluation. This involves allocating the available assimilative capacity within a river segment based on a facility's percent oftotal past discharges. This method would beused when multiple discharges ofthe same pollutantto the same segment and the available assimilative capacity is relatively limited. The valuethat is mostprotective ofwater quality becomesthe facility's allocation that is held in the system for the specific facility and pollutant. Itis important to note thatthe method used for allocationis facility and pollutant specific and different facilities onthe same segment for the same pollutant canhave different methods used depending on their individual situations. Discharge amounts are always allocated to all facilities having a history ofdischarging a particularpollutant. This does notmean that effluent limits will be established in apermit. Limits are only needed whenpastdischarge amounts suggest areasonablepotential to exceed a water qualitybased allocation, either on an individual or segment basis. Similarto pastpractices for single discharge evaluations, the single highest test value is multiplied by a RP factor and if product is greaterthan the water quality allowance, an effluentlimitis established. Itis importantto remember an allocation is "banking" some assimilative capacity for a facility even if effluent limits are notneeded. · Evaluations are also done for each tributary segment withthe sum ofdischarge quantities in tributaries becoming a "point source" to thenextmost significant segment. In cases where a facility does notuse all ofits assimilative capacity, usually due to a more limiting individual water quality criterion, the tmuscd quantity is rolled do\vnstream andmade available to other facilities. The system is not static and uses a five-year rolling data window. Over time, old tests drop off and newer ones are added on. These changes cause the allocations and the need for effluent limits to 

### shift over time to remain current with presentconditions. Theintent is to update a facility's data andrelative contributionto a river's total assimilative capacity priorto eachpermit renewal. Many facilities are required to do only minimal testing to characterizetheir effluents. This creates a greater degree ofstatistical uncertainty aboutthe true long-term quantities.

. Accordingly, with fewer teststhe RP factor 

### will belarger and result in a greaterpossibility of effluent limits being necessary. To avoid this situation, most facilities, especiallythose with relatively lowdilution factors, are encouraged to conductmore that a minimumnumber oftests. 

### Itis generally to a facility's long-term benefit to have more tests on file since their RP factor will bereduced. 

# I

I 

# I

I

### Maine Department of Environmental Protection Working Definitions of Terms Used in the DeTox System.



### Allocation. The amount of pollutant loading set aside for a facility. Separate amounts are set for each

### water quality criterion. Each pollutant having a history of being discharged will receive an allocation, but not all allocations become 

### effluent limits. Allocation may be made in three ways: 

### historical allocation, individual allocation or

### segment allocation. Assimilative capacity. The amount of a pollutant that river segment can safely accept from point source discharges. It is determined for the most downstream point in a river segment using the 

### water quality criterion and river flow. Separate capacities are set for acute, chronic and human health criteria as applicable for each pollutant. Calculation of this capacity includes factors for 

### reserve and 

### backgroundamounts. 

### Background. A concentration of a pollutant that is assumed to be present in a receiving water but not attributable to discharges. By rule, this is set as a rebuttable presumption at 10% of the applicable

### water quality criterion. Effluent limit. A numeric limit in a discharge permit specifically restricting the mount of a pollutant that may be discharged. An effluent limit is set only when the highest discharge, including an adjustment for 

### reasonable potential, is greater than a facility's water quality based 

### allocation for a pollutant. 

### Historical allocation (or

### RP history). One of three ways of developing an 

### allocation. The facility's average history of discharges, in pounds at design flow, is multiplied by the appropriate 

### reasonable potential factor. An allocation using this method does not become an 

### effluent limit. Historical discharge percentage. For each pollutant, the average discharge concentration for each facility in a segment is multiplied by the permitted flow (without including a 

### reasonable potentialfactor). The amounts for all facilities are added together and a percent of the total is figured for each facility. When a facility has no detectable concentrations, that pollutant is assumed to be not present and it receives no percentage. 

### Individual allocation. One of three ways of developing an

### allocation. The facility's single highest discharge on record multiplied by the appropriate 

### reasonable potential factor is compared to a water quality based quantity with an assumption that the facility is the only point source to that receiving water. If the RP-adjusted amount is larger, the water quality amount may become an 

### effluent limit. Less than. A qualification on a laboratory report indicating the concentration of a pollutant was below a certain concentration. Such a result is evaluated as being one half of the Department's reporting limit in most calculations. Maine Department ofEnvironmental Protection Working Definitions ofTerms Used intheDeTox System.



### Allocation. The ammmt ofpollutant loading setaside for a facility. Separate amounts are set for each

### water quality criterion. Eachpollutanthaving a history ofbeing dischargedwill receive an allocation, but not all allocations become 

### ejjluent limits. Allocation may bemade inthree ways: 

### historicalallocation, individualallocation or

### segment allocation. Assimilative capacity. The amount of

# a pollutant thatriver segment can safely accept from point source discharges. Itis determined for the most downstreampoint ina river segmentusing the

. 

### water quality criterion and river flow. Separate capacities are setfor acute, chronic and hmnan health criteria as applicable for each pollutant. Calculation ofthis capacity includes factors for 

### reserve and 

### backgroundammmts. 

### Background. A concentration ofa pollutant that is assumed to be present in a receiving water but not attributable to discharges. Byrule, this is set as a rebuttable presumption at 10% ofthe applicable

### water quality criterion. Ejjluent limit. A numeric limit in a discharge permit specificallyrestricting the amotmt ofa pollutantthatmay be discharged. An effluent limitis set only when the highest discharge, including an adjustment for 

### reasonablepotential, is greaterthan a facility's water qualitybased 

### allocation for a pollutant. 

### Historical allocation (or

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

### allocation. The facility's average history ofdischarges, inpounds at design flow, is multiplied bythe appropriate 

### reasonablepotential factor. 

### An allocation using this method does not become an 

### ejjluentlimit. Historicaldischargepercentage. For each pollutant, the average discharge concentration for each facility in a segmentis multiplied by the permittedflow (without including a 

### reasonable potential factor). The amounts for all facilities are added together and apercent ofthe total is figured for each facility. When a facility has no detectable concentrations, that pollutant is assumedto be not present anditreceives no percentage. 

### Individual allocation. One ofthree ways ofdeveloping an

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

### reasonablepotential factor is compared to a water quality based quantity with an assumption that the facility isthe only point source to that receiving water. Ifthe RP-adjusted ammmtis larger, the water quality amount may become an 

### ejjluentlimit. Less than. A qualification on a laboratory report indicating the concentration ofapollutantwas below a certain concentration. Such a result is evaluated as being one halfofthe Department's reporting limit in most calculations.

### Reasonable potential (RP). A statistical method to determine the highest amount of a pollutant

likely to be present at any time based on the available test results. The method produces a value or RP factor that is multiplied by test results. The method relies on an EPA guidance document, and considers the coefficient of variation and the number of tests. Generally, the fewer number of tests, the higher the RP factor. Reserve. An assumed concentration of a pollutant that set aside to account for non-point source of a pollutant and to allow new discharges of a pollutant. By rule this is set at 15% of the applicable water quality criterion. Segment allocation. One of three ways of developing an allocation. The amount is set by multiplying a facility'shistorical discharge percentage,for a specific pollutant by the assimilative capacity for that pollutant and criterion. A facility will have different allocation percentages for each pollutant. This amount may become an effluent limit. Tributary, A stream flowing into a larger one. A total pollutant load is set by adding the all facilities allocations on the tributary and treating this totaled amount as a "point source" to the next larger segment. Water quality criteria_ Standards for acceptable in-stream or ambient levels of pollutants. These axe established in the Department's Chapter 584 and are expressed as concentrations in ug,fL. There may be separate standards for acute and chronic protection aquatic life andfor human health. Each criterion becomes a separate standard. Different stream flows are used in the calculation of each.

Reasonablepotential (RP). A statistical method to detennine the highest amount ofa pollutant likelyto bepresent at any time based onthe available test results. Themethod produces a value or RP factor that is multiplied bytest results. The method relies on an EPA guidance document, and considers the coefficient ofvariation and the number oftests. Generally, the fewer number oftests, thehigher the RP factor. Reserve. An assumed concentration ofapollutantthat set aside to account for non-point source ofa pollutant and to allow new discharges ofa pollutant. Byrule this is set at 15% ofthe applicable water quality criterion. Segment allocation. One ofthree ways ofdeveloping anallocation. The amount is set by multiplying a facility's historicaldischargepercentagefor a specificpollutant by the assimilative capacity for that pollutant and criterion. A facility will have different allocation percentages for each pollutant. This amotmt may become an effluent limit. Ii·ibutary. A stream flowing into a larger one. A total pollutant load is set by adding the all facilities allocations onthe tributary 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 tbe Department's Chapter 584 and are expressed as concentrations inug/L. Theremaybe separate standards for acute and chronic protection aquatic life and/or human health. Each criterion becomes a separate standard. Different stream flows are used in the calculation ofeach.STATE OP MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

CHAPTER 530.2(D)(4) CERTIFICATION

PAUL R. LEPAGE GOVERNOR MEPDES# Facility Name PATRICIA W. *110 Commissioner
Since the effective date of your permit, have there been; NO YES Describe in comments section 1 Increases in the number, types, and flows of industrial, commercial, or domestic discharges to the facility that in the judgment of the Department may cause the receiving water to become toxic? ❑

2 Changes in the condition or operations of the facility that may increase the toxicity of the discharge? ❑ 0 3 Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity of the discharge? ❑ ❑

4 Increases in the type or volume of hauled wastes accepted by the facility? 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 of Chapter 530.2(D)(4). This Chapter requires all dischargers having waived or reduced toxic testing to file a statement with 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 calendar year Test Conducted ls' Quarter 2nd Quarter 3r

dQuarter 4th

Quarter WET Testing ❑ ❑ n ❑ Priority Pollutant Testing ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Analytical Chemistry o ❑ ❑ ❑ Other toxic parameters 1 o ❑ ❑ ❑ Please place an "X" in each of the boxes that apply to when you will be conducting any one of the three test types during the next calendar year. 1 This only applies to parameters where testing is required at a rate less frequently than quarterly.

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 STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

CHAPTER 530.2(D)(4) CERTIFICATION

PAUL R. f_,EPAGE PATRICIA W.AIIO GOVERNOR Commissioner MEPDES#

______Facility Name.

_______________ Since the effective date ofyour permit, 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 Department may cause the receiving water to 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 orvolume 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. Tl:tis form may beused to meet the requirements ofChapter 530.2(D)(4). This Chapter requires all dischargers having waived orreduced toxic testing to file a statement with 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 infonnation. Scheduled Toxicity Testing for the next calendar year Test Conducted 

### 1" Quarter 2"" Quarter 3m Quarter 41 " Quarter WET Testing 0 0 0 0 PriorityPollutant Testing 0 0 0 0 Analytical Chemistty 0 0 0 0 Other toxic parameters ' 0 0 0 0 Pleaseplace an "X" in each of the boxes that apply to whenyou will be conducting any one of the three test types during the next calendaryear. · 1 This only applies to parameters where testing is required at a rate less frequently than quarterly.

"\UGUSTA 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 '<veb site: www.maine.go,·/dep

# DEP INFORMATION SHEET

Appealing a Department Licensing Decision

Dated: March 2012 Contact: (207) 287-2811

SUMMARY There are two methods available to an aggrieved person seeking to appeal a licensing decision made by the Department of Environmental Protection's ("DEP") Commissioner: (1) in an administrative process before the Board of Environmental Protection ("Board"); or (2) in a judicial process before Maine's Superior Court. An aggrieved person seeking review of a licensing decision over which the Board had original jurisdiction may seek judicial review in Maine's Superior Court. A judicial appeal of final action by the Commissioner or the Board regarding an application for an expedited wind energy development (35-A M.R.S.A. § 3451(4)) or a general permit for an offshore wind energy demonstration project (38 M,R.S.A. § 480-H1-1(1) or a general permit for a tidal energy demonstration project (38 M.R.S.A. § 636-A) must be taken to the Supreme Judicial Court sitting as the Law Court. This INFORMATION SHEET, in conjunction with a review of the statutory and regulatory provisions referred to herein, can help a person to understand his or her rights and obligations in filing an administrative or judicial appeal.
I. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TO THE BOARD
LEGAL REFERENCES The laws concerning the DEP's Organization and Powers, 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 341-D(4) & 346, the Maine Administrative Procedure Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 11001, and the DEP's Rules Concerning the Processing of Applications and Other Administrative Matters ("Chapter 2"), 06-096 CMR 2 (April 1, 2003).
HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD The Board must receive a written appeal within 30 days of the date on which the Commissioner's decision was filed with the Board. Appeals filed after 30 calendar days of the date on which the Commissioner's decision was filed with the Board will be rejected.
HOW TO SUBMIT AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD Signed original appeal documents must be sent to: Chair, Board of Environmental Protection, c/o Department of Environmental Protection, 17 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333-0017; faxes are acceptable for purposes of meeting the deadline when followed by the Board's receipt of mailed original documents within five (5) working days. Receipt on a particular day must be by 5:00 PM at DEP's offices in Augusta; materials received after 5:00 PM are not considered received until the following day. The person appealing a licensing decision must also send the DEP's Commissioner a copy of the appeal documents and if the person appealing is not the applicant in the license proceeding at issue the applicant must also be sent a copy of the appeal documents. All of the information listed in the next section must be submitted at the time the appeal is filed. Only the extraordinary circumstances described at the end of that section will justify evidence not in the DEP's record at the time of decision being added to the record for consideration by the Board as part of an appeal.
WHAT YOUR APPEAL PAPERWORK MUST CONTAIN Appeal materials must contain the following information at the time submitted: OCF/90-1/r95/r98/r99/r00/r04/r12 

# DEP INFORMATION SHEET Appealing a Department Licensing Decision

Dated: March 2012 Contact: (207) 287-2811

SUMMARY There are two methods available to au aggrieved person seeking to appeal a licensing decision made by the Depm1ment ofEnvironmental Protection's ("DEP") Commissioner: (l) in an administrative process before the Board ofEnvironmental Protection ("Board"); or (2) in ajudicial process before Maine's Superior Court. An aggrieved person seeking review ofa licensing decision over which the Board had originaljurisdiction may seekjudicialreview in Maine's Superior Court. Ajudicial appeal offinal action by the Commissioner or the Board regarding an application for an expedited wind energy development (35-A M.R.S.A. § 3451(4)) or a general permit for an offshore wind energy demonstration project (38 M.R.S.A. § 480-HH(l) or a general permit for a tidal energy demonstration project (38 M.R.S.A. § 636-A) must be taken to the Supreme Judicial Court sitting as the Law Court. This INFORMATION SHEET, in conjunction with a review ofthe statut01y and regulatory provisions referred to herein, can help a person to understand his or her rights and obligations in filing an administrative orjudicial appeal.

I. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TO THE BOARD
LEGAL REFERENCES The laws concerning the DEP's Organization andPowers, 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 341-0(4) & 346, the lvfaine Administrative ProcedureAct, 5 M.R.S.A. § 11001, and the DEP'sRules Concerning the Processing of Applications and OtherAdministrative Mailers ("Chapter 2"), 06-096 CMR2 (April!, 2003).
HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD The Board must receive a written appeal within 30 days ofthe date on which the Commissioner's decision was filed with the Board. Appeals filed after 30 calendar days ofthe date on which the Commissioner's decision was filed with the Board will be rejected.
HOW TO SUBMIT AN APPEALTO TilE BOARD Signed original appeal documents must be sent to: Chair, Board ofEnvironmental Protection, c/o Department ofEnvironmental Protection, 17 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333-00 17; faxes are acceptable for purposes ofmeeting the deadline when followed by the Board's receipt ofmailed original documents within five (5) working days. Receipt on a particular day must be by 5:00PM at DEP's offices in Augusta; materials received after 5:00PM are not considered received until the following day. The person appealing a licensing decision must also send the DEP's Commissioner a copy ofthe appeal documents and ifthe person appealing is not the applicant in the license proceeding at issue the applicant must also be sent a copy ofthe appeal documents. All ofthe information listed in the next section must be submitted at the time the appeal is filed. Only the extraordinary circumstances described at the end ofthat section willjustify evidence not in the DEP's record at the time ofdecision being added to the record for consideration by the Bom·d as part ofan appeal.
WHAT YOUR APPEAL PAPERWORK MUST CONTAIN Appeal materials must contain the following information at the time submitted: OCF/90-1/r95/r98/r99/r00/r04/r12Appealing a Commissioner's Licensing Decision March 2012 Page 2 of 3 1. Aggrieved Status. The appeal must explain how the person filing the appeal has standing to maintain an appeal. This requires an explanation of how the person filing the appeal may suffer a particularized injury as a result of the Commissioner's decision. 2, The findings, conclusions or conditions objected to or believed to be in error. Specific references and facts regarding the appellant's issues with the decision must be provided in the notice of appeal. 3. The basis of the objections or challenge. If possible, specific regulations, statutes or other facts should be referenced. This may include citing omissions of relevant requirements, and errors believed to have been made in interpretations, conclusions, and relevant requirements. 4. The remedy sought. This can range from reversal of the Commissioner's decision on the license or permit to changes in specific permit conditions. 5. All the matters to be contested. The Board will limit its consideration to those arguments specifically raised in the written notice of appeal. 6. Request for hearing. The Board will hear presentations on appeals at its regularly scheduledmeetings, unless a public hearing on the appeal is requested and granted. A request for public hearing on an appeal must be filed as part of the notice of appeal. 7. New or additional evidence to be offered. The Boaid may allow new or additional evidence, referred to as supplemental evidence, to be considered by the Board in an appeal only when the evidence is relevant and material and that the person seeking to add information to the record can show due diligence in bringing the evidence to the DEP's attention at the earliest possible time in the licensing process or that the evidence itself is newly discovered and could not have been presented earlier in the process. Specific requirements for additional evidence are found in Chapter 2. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS IN APPEALING A DECISION TO THE BOARD 1. Be familiar with all relevant material in the DEP record. A license application file is public information, subject to any applicable statutory exceptions, made easily accessible by DEP. Upon request, the DEP will make the material available during normal working hours, provide space to review the file, and provide opportunity for photocopying materials. There is a charge for copies or copying services. 2. Be familiar with the regulations and laws under which the application was processed, and the procedural rules governing your appeal. DEP staff will provide this information on request and answer questions regarding applicable requirements. 3. The filing of an appeal does not operate as a stay to any decision. If a license has been granted and it has been appealed the license normally remains in effect pending the processing of the appeal. A license holder may proceed with a project pending the outcome of an appeal but the license holder runs the risk of the decision being reversed or modified as a result of the appeal. WHAT TO EXPECT ONCE YOUFILEATIMELY APPEAL WITH THE BOARD The Board will formally acknowledge receipt of an appeal, including the name of the DEP project manager assigned to the specific appeal. The notice of appeal, any materials accepted by the Board Chair as supplementary evidence, and any materials submitted in response to the appeal will be sent to Board members with a recommendation from DEP staff. Persons filing appeals and interested persons are notified in advance of the date set for Board consideration of an appeal or request for public hearing. With or without holding a public hearing, the Board may affirm, amend, or reverse a Commissioner decision or remand the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings. The Board will notify the appellant, a license holder, and interested persons of its decision.

OCF/90-1111951r98/r99/00/r04/11 2 Appealing aCommissioner's Licensing Decision March 2012 Page 2of 3 1. AggrievedStatus. The appeal must explain how the person filing the appeal has standing to maintain an appeal. This requires an explanation ofhow the person filing the appeal may suffer a particularized injury as a result ofthe Commissioner's decision. 2. Thefindings, conclusions or conditions objectedto or believedto be in error. Specific references and facts regarding the appellant's issues with the decision must be provided in the notice ofappeal. 3. The basis of the objections orchallenge. Ifpossible, specific regulations, statutes or other facts should be referenced. This may include citing omissions ofrelevant requirements, and errors believed to have been made in interpretations, conclusions, and relevant requirements. 4. The remedy sought. This can range from reversal ofthe Commissioner's decision onthe license or permit to changes in specific permit conditions. 5. All/hemailers lobe contested. The Board will limit its consideration to those arguments specifically raised in the written notice ofappeal. 6. Request for hearing. The Board will hear presentations on appeals at its regularlyscheduled meetings, unless a public hearing on the appeal is requested and granted. A request for public hearing on an appeal must be filed as part ofthe notice ofappeal. 7. New oradditional evidence to be offered. The Boai'd may allow new or additional evidence, referred to as supplemental evidence, to be considered by the Board in an appeal only when the evidence is relevant and material and that the person seeking to add information tothe record can show due diligence in bringing the evidence to the DEP's attention atthe earliest possible time in the licensing process or that the evidence itselfis newly discovered and could not have been presented earlier in the process. Specific requirements for additional evidence are found in Chapter 2.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS INAPPEALING A DECISIONTO THE BOARD I. Be familiar with all relevant material in the DEP record. A license application file is public information, subject to any applicable statutory exceptions, made easily accessible by DEP. Upon request, the DEP will make the material available during normal working hours, provide space to review the file, and provide opportunity for photocopying materials. There is a charge for copies or copying services. 2. Be familiar with the regulations andlaws under which the application wasprocessed, andthe proceduralrules governingyourappeal. DEP staffwill provide this information on request and answer questions regarding applicable requirements. 3. Thefiling of an appeal does not operate as a stay to anydecision. Ifa license has been granted and it has been appealed the license normally remains ineffect pending the processing ofthe appeal. A license holder may proceed with a project pending the outcome ofan appeal but the license holder runs the risk ofthe decision being reversed or modified as a result ofthe appeal.
WHAT TO EXPECT ONCE YOU FILEA TiMELY APPEAL WITHTHE BOARD The Board will formally acknowledge receipt ofan appeal, including the name ofthe DEP project manager assigned to the specific appeal. The notice ofappeal, any materials accepted by the Board Chair as supplementary evidence, and any materials submitted in response to the appeal will be sent to Board members with a recommendation from DEP staff. Persons filing appeals and interested persons are notified in advance ofthe date set for Board consideration ofan appeal or request for public hearing. With or without holding a public hearing, the Boardmay affirm, amend, or reverse a Commissioner decision or remand the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings. The Board will notify the appellant, a license holder, and interested persons ofits decision.

OCF/90-1/r/95/r98/r99/r00/r04/r12Appealing a Commissioner's Licensing Decision March 2012 Page 3 of 3 IL JUDICIAL APPEALS Maine law generally allows aggrieved persons to appeal final Commissioner or Board licensing decisions to Maine's Superior Court, see 38 M.R.S.A. § 346(1); 06-096 CMR 2; 5 M.R.S.A. § 11001; & M.R. Civ. P 80C. A party's appeal must be filed with the Superior Court within 30 days of receipt of notice of the Board's or the Commissioner's decision. For any other person, an appeal must be filed within 40 days of the date the decision was rendered. Failure to file a timely appeal will result in the Board's or the Commissioner's decision becoming final. An appeal to court of a license decision regarding an expedited wind energy development, a general permit for an offshore wind energy demonstration project, or a general permit for a tidal energy demonstration project may only be taken directly to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. See 38 M.R.S.A. § 346(4). Maine's Administrative Procedure Act, DEP statutes governing a particular matter, and the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure must be consulted for the substantive and procedural details applicable to judicial appeals.
ADDITIONAL INF'ORMATION If you have questions or need additional information on the appeal process, for administrative appeals contact the Board's Executive Analyst at (207) 287-2452 or for judicial appeals contact the court clerk's office in which your appeal will be filed. Note: The DEP provides this INFORMATION SHEET for general guidance only; it is not intended for use as a legal reference. Maine law governs an appellant's rights.

0 CF/90-1/r/95/r98/r99/r00/r041r12 Appealing aCommissioner's licensing Decision March 2012 Page 3of 3
II. JUDICIAL APPEALS Maine lawgenerally allows aggrieved persons to appeal final Commissioner or Board licensing decisions to Maine's Superior Court, see 38 M.R.S.A. § 346(1); 06-096 CMR 2; 5 M.R.S.A. § 11001; & M.R. Civ. P 80C. A patty's appeal must be filed with the Superior Court within 30 days ofreceipt ofnotice ofthe Board's or the Commissioner's decision. For any other person, an appeal must be filed within 40 days of the date the decision was rendered. Failure to file a timely appeal will result in the Board's or the Commissioner's decision becoming final. An appeal to court ofa license decision regarding an expedited wind energy development, a general permit for an offshore wind energy demonstration project, or a general permit for a tidal energy demonstration project may only be taken directly to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. See 38 M.R.S.A. § 346(4). Maine's Administrative Procedure Act, DEP statutes governing a particular matter, and the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure must be consulted for the substantive and procedural details applicable tojudicial appeals.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Ifyou have questions or need additional information on the appeal process, for administrative appeals contact the Board's Executive Analyst at (207) 287-2452 or forjudicial appeals contact the court clerk's office in which your appeal will be filed.
Note: The DEP provides this INFORMATION SHEET for general guidance only; it is not intended for use as a legal reference. Maine law governs an appellant's rights.

•____:cc____

0 C F /90-1/r/95/r98/r99/r0O/r04/r12