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 

of State 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 

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 

of State Law and is subject to enforcement action. 

Any interested person aggrieved by a Department detetmination 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 ofWater Quality Management 

Bureau of Water Quality 

Enc. 

cc: Clarissa Trasko, DEP/EMRO Lori Mitchell, DEP/CMRO 

Sandy Mojica, USEP A Marelyn Vega, USEP A 

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 et seq., and applicable regulations, the·Depat1ment of 

Environmental Protection (the Depattment hereinafter) has considered the application of the 

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 of combination 

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 of up to a monthly average 

flow of0.93 million gallons per day (MGD) of secondary 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 of the most current 60 months of analytical 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 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 (A WQC). 
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 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 A WQC. 

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 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 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 of water 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 of classification ofthe 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 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 of any 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 subject to effluent limitations that require application of best 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 of 0.93 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 Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Standard Conditions Applicable To All Permits," 

revised July I, 2002, copy attached. 

2. 	 The attached Special Conditions, including any effluent limitations and monitoring requirements. 

3. 	 This permit becomes effective upon the date ofsignature below and expires at midnight five (5) years after 

that date. If a renewal application is timely submitted and accepted as complete for processing prior to the 

expiration ofthis 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 ofApplications and Other Administrative Matters, 06-096 CMR 2(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 of application ------'-F-"e,br"'u"'a"-'ryL9"-','-'2"-'0'-'1-"5_____ 


Date of application 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 9/9/15 
ME0102032 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 lbsiDaypoy 114 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 /24j 

E. coli Bacteria (1)/3/633/ ___ 

--- — 64/100 m1(2) 

[151 

--- 427/100 ml 

1131 

1/Week [01,07j 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 JUR] 

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- Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, 

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 3 0) 

-­ -­ - 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 fGRJ 
ME0102032 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/Lpsl --- — 2/Year /927yR1 Composite r24/ 

Composite Chromium (Total) [2 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 

L281 -

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- Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 410, Subpart G (Stock & Yam 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~ 

·­

Daily 

Maximum 

Monthly 

Average 

Report ug/L r-s1 

Weekly 

Avera!'e 

Daily 

Maximum 

Measurement 

Frequencv 

2Near f021YRJ 

SampleTVPe 

Composite Ammonia (as Nl f006JOJ 13 lbs/Day f26J ··­ --­ -­ 1241

(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 

--­ - 2Near !021YR7 

INear [OJIYR] 

Composite 1241 

Composite - 4.llbs/Day 1241 

1261 

0.09 lbs/Day f26f 

--­ Report ug/L 

{28} 

Report ug/L 

118! 

Copper (Total) f01042J -­ --­ 2Near 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 1241 

Total PhosQhorus (4) _1oo66SJ 

(June ]-September 30) 

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- 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 Weekly Daily Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement 

Avera2:e Avera2:e Maximum Averaae Average Maximum Frequencv SampleTvoe 

Flow f50050J 0.465 MGDro11 --­ Report MOD f03J --­ --­ - Continuous Recorder fRCJ 

!991997 

Biochemical Oxygen 305 lbs/Day f26J --­ 582lbs/Day 79 mg!L f19J --­ 150 mg!L J19J 2/W eek 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/W eek 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/W eek f02I07J Composite f2'l 

(COD) rRo1os7 {267 {267 f191 

E !" B . (l) . co z actena f3I633J -·· - -­ 64/100 ml(2

) -­ 4271100 ml 2/W eek ro21o71 Grab fGRJ 

(May15 -September 30) 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/L12si --- --- 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 

I281 

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- 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 

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/L m 1 --­ -­ 2Near JOVY8L Composite 1241 

Antimony roro977 3.4 lbs/Day f26t -­ -­ Report~, --­ --­ 2Near_[J!2lY!iJ. COl!lJlOSiteJHL 

Chromium (Total) fOIONJ 3.4lbs/Day -­ 6.9lbs/Day Report ug/L --­ Report ug/L INear roiiYRJ Composite f24J 

!i61 /26/ _128/ f1!1L 

Copper (Total) fOI097J -­ --­ 0.09 lbs/Day £261 Report ug/L --­ Report ug/L 2Near 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!Month1oiiJOJ Composite f24J Total PhosQhorus .f0066SJ 

(June 1- September 30) lbs/Day !26/ lbs/Day !267 JJ.2L _fl.91 
MEO 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 Chemistry R8) 

[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 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 testing as follows: 


TIER lA and TIER IIA 

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] 

(Brook trout) 

-­

-­

-

--­

--­

-­

-­

--­

-­

-­

--­

--­

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/Y ear [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 Monitoring Requirements 

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 

1281 

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 lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration 

(Year 4 ofthe term ofthe 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 lA and 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 

(Water Flea) 

Salve linus fontina/is [l'DA6F1 

(Brook trout) 

C-NOEL 

Ceriodaphnia dubia [I'BP3B1 

(Water Flea) 

Salve linus fontinalis [I'BQ6F1 

(Brook trout) 

--­

-­

-­

--­

--­

-­

-

-

--­

-­

-­

-­

Report % [231 

Report % [231 

4.0% [231 

4.0% [231 

2Near [021YR1 

2Near [021YR1 

2Near [021YR1 

2Near [021YR1 

Composite [241 

Composite [241 

Composite [241 

Composite [241 

Analytical Chemistry (

7

'

8

) 

(51477/ 

-­ -­ -­ Report ugiL [281 1/Quarter [011901 Composite/ 

Grab [24/GR1 

Priority Pollutants(&) 

(50008/ 

-­ --­ --­ Report ugiL 

[281 

lNear 

[011YR1 

Composite/Grab 

[24!GR1 
ME0102032 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 [24] 

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 im 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 Discharge Limitations 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 MOD roJJ --­ Report MOD f03J --­ --­ - Continuous 

{991997 

Recorder fRCJ 

Biochemical Olc-ygen 

Demand (BODs) roo3101 

258 lbs/Day 12a1 --­ 478lbs/Day 

!261 

33 mg!L /19! --­ 62 mg!L !191 2/W eek ro21o7; Composite ru1 

Total Suspended Solids 

(TSS) roo5301 

Chemical Oxygen Demand 

(COD) r&owsT 

441 lbs/Day f26J --­ 845 lbs/Day [261 57 mg!L f19J --­ I 09 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/W eek ro21o7; Composite f2'l 

E l" B . (I) . co z actena f3I633J 

(May 15-September 30) 

- --­ -­ 64/1 00 ml(Z) 

{131 

--­ 427/100 ml 

[13/ 

2/W eek f02I07J Grab [GR] 

Total Residual Chlorine<3

l 

{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 pilyiv 

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 

1281 

--- Report ug/L 

-1281 

1/Year [01/YR] Composite 12$] 

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, 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 

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/L f2BI --­ -­ 2Near f021YRI Composite rw 

Antimony ro1om 

Chromium {Total) f01034J 

3.4 lbs/Day 116, 

2.1 lbs/Day 

!261 

- - Report ugfL1281 

Report ugfL 

128/ 

--­ --­ 2Near romRr Composite m r 

INear f011YRJ Composite f24J - 4.llbs/Day 

/261 

--­ Report ugfL 

rm 

Copper (Total) f01097J -­ - 0.09 lbs/Day f26J Report ugfL f2B --­ Report ugfL 

{281 

2Near f021YRJ Composite f24J 

(5) Mercury {Total) !71900J --­ -­ - 25.8 ngfL 

3.W 

- 38.7 ngfL 

13M! 

I Near 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 !-September 30) 

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. tali Bacteria (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, 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 

Avera(Te 

Daily 

Maximum 

Monthly 

Average 

Weekly 

Average 

Daily 

Maximum 

Measurement 

Frequencv Sample Tvoe 

Flow f5oo5oJ 0.93 MGD1

,,1 -­ Report MGDro3J --­ --­ -­ Continuous 

J99/99f 

2/W eek £02I07J 

Recorder £RCJ 

Biochemical Oxygen 

Demand (BODs) 10o3JOf 

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/W eek f02107J Grab fGRJ 

May 15 -September 30 

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/Dayi26/ 

--- 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 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

TIER #liB- 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 

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!L 1281 --­ -­ 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{ 

--­ --­ 2Near ;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 

2Near £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 

!Near fOIIYRJ Composite £24J 

(4) Total PhosJlhorus _f00665J 

_(June 1-Sevtember 30) 

Report 

lbs/Day r261 

--­ Report 

lbs/Day r267 

Reportmg!L 

fl91 

-­ Report mg!L 

fl91 

!!Month[oii30J Composite f24J 
ME0102032 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 Monitoring Requirements 

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 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 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} 

(Water Flea) 

Salvelinus fontinalis [FDA6F} 

(Brook trout) 

C-NOEL 

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3B] 

(Water Flea) 

Salvelinus fontinalis [TBQ6F] 

(Brook trout) 

-­

-­

-­

-­

--­

--­

-­

-­

--­

-­

-­

-­

I I% [23] 

Report % [23] 

7.7% [23} 

7.7% [23} 

2Near [02/YRJ 

2Near [02/YR] 

2Near [02/YR} 

2Near [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 prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months prior to permit expiration 

(Year 4 ofthe 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 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] 

(Water Flea) 

Salvelinus fontinalis [TDA6F] 

(Brook trout) 

C-NOEL 

Ceriodaphnia dubia [TBP3BJ 

(Water Flea) 

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 BOD5and 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 of Maine 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 BOD 5 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) Pat1136, b) alternative methods approved by the 

Depattment in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR Pat1136, 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 ofMaine'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, 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 

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 lA and Tier IB (as well as Tier IIA & Tier liB) are differentiated by the monthly 


average flow limitations of 0.465 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 treatment plant 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 of 

each 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 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 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 by the Department. 

5. 	 Mercury- All mercury sampling (1/Y ear) required to determine compliance with 

interim limitations established pursuant to Interim Effluent Limitations and Controls for 

the Discharge ofMercwy, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 200 I) 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 Mercwy 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 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 IIA and 11% and 

7.7% respectively for Tier IB and Tier IBI), which provides a point estimate of toxicity in 

terms ofNo Observed Effect Level, commonly referred to as NOEL or NOEC. It is noted 

the critical thresholds were derived as the mathematical inverse ofthe 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 lA & 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 ofthe permit) and 

commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term of the 

permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum 

frequency of once per year (!/Year) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the 

brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). 

Screening level testing -Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting 

through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe 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 (Salve linus 

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 of the term of the permit) and 

commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term of the 

permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level WET testing at a minimum 

frequency of twice per year (2Near) utilizing the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and 

the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). 

Screening level testing - Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting 

through 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 4 of the term ofthe 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 

quatter (1/Quarter) for the water flea (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and the brook trout 

(Salve linus 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 of the 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 of this permit for the Department protocol. 

a. 	 Sh01t 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 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 of the 

Depmtment form entitled, Alaine Department ofEnvironmental 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 ofthis permit. 

Tier lA & 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 ofthe permit) and 

commencing again 12 months prior to permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe term of the 

permit), the permittee shall conduct surveillance level analytical chemistry testing at a 

minimum frequency of twice per year (2/Y ear). 

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 qumter (l/Quarter) for four consecutive calendar qumters. 

Tier IB & Tier liB 

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 once 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 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/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'hof 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 of chemicals in Attachment E of this 

permit. 

Tier IA, Tier IIA, Tier 1B & Tier liB 

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/Y ear), 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 Depatiment. 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 I 0 business days of their 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 ofDMR reporting, enter a "I" for~. 

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 1/1 01

h of a 

foot. 

I0. 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 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 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 ofthis 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 ifthe 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 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 

Regulationsfor 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. 
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 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 ofpollutants, any Significant Industrial Users discharging into the POTW subject to 

Pretreatment Standards under section 307(b) of the federal Clean Water Act, 40 CFR Patt 

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: I) 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 Depattment 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 ofpermit 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 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 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 ofthe 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 oftransport, 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 Depatiment 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 

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 

permit fICIS 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 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 

permit [!CIS Code 75305]: See Attachment F of the Fact Sheet of this permit for an 

acceptable cettification form to satisfy this Special Condition. 

I. 	 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 ofthe 

discharge; and 

3. 	 Changes in industrial manufacturing processes 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 of hauled wastes accepted by the facility. 

The Depmtment reserves the right to modify the Chapter 530 testing requirements if new 

infmmation 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 ofthe 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 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 if results 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 15thday 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 15thday 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 by the 

Department and shall be postmarked by the thilteenth (13 1

h) day of the month or handdelivered to a Department Regional Office such that the DMRs are received by the 

Department by the fifteenth (15 1

h) 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 Depattment's facility inspector at: 

Department ofEnvironmental 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 Depattment by a facility authorized DMR Signatory not 

later than close of business on the 151 

h day of the month following the completed repmting 

period. Hard Copy documentation submitted in suppott ofthe eDMR must be postmarked on 

or before the thirteenth (131

h) day 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 (151

h) 

day of the month following the completed reporting period. Electronic documentation in 

suppott ofthe eDMR must be submitted not later than close of business on the 151

h day of the 

month following the completed reporting period. 

L. SEVERABILITY 

ln 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 patt thereof, 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 of glass or polyethylene. Botlles and/or jugs 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). 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· 

H2S04 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 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 C1 
ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B 

calendar 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 of Facility: 	 Federal Permit# ME 

Purpose of this 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 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 

ANALYTICAL RESULT FOR EFFLUENT MERCURY 


Name ofLaboratory: 

Date of analysis: 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. If duplicate 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 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. 

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 

l 
Effhadni 

PAIOnAte(17, 

suits j :• PIC 

A-NOEL 

A-NOEL C-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 information provided is true, accurate, and complete. 

p4iVANTitrit 041.03V004: 

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." 

DEPLW 0741-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 of my knowledge that the information proylded is true, accurate, and complete. 

'l;:{:·::::::Emhent iihlU3.t!OhS1I 

': 

QC standard 

lab control 

receiving water 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 % incr for 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, Salvelinus fontinalis, 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% of body weight 3 times daily (15%/day) 

Temperature- 12° ± I °C 

Dissolved Oxygen - 6.5 mg/1 ,aeration if needed with large bubbles (> 1 mm 

diameter) at a rate of <1 00/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 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 


! 

I 
Receiving 

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)Ii 

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,.10,Nli, ' '.622Rill agalia0141. p. ,J p "NlitAii!x-W141411.5gigifiliiIMERIPU 

Effluent Limits, % WET Result, % Reporting Possible Exceedence (7) 

Acute Chronic Do not enter % sign Limit Check Acute Chronic 

Trout - Acute 

Trout - Chronic 

Water Flea -Acute 

Water Flea - Chronic 

11 Trig WET CHEMISTRY kiagfERTAIRIFIEEEMPRE-m[M,:,..A:TRMIEERITEigilig lilog: 11.31.ZTrNTILf TadamiffillialEgia416JF •

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 -iir7 u

Reporting 

Limit Check 

1116rEfilk,TI,Ititijj''"' vratigaii . ,42.,iillal .igi'll,gi:I 1 l 

Possible7 Exceedence (7) 

r, 'rl,,,, '''`;'Al'IA ,Lt 1-‘/TICAL. CHEMISTRY (3) jgrg:2:111'.6111:514;" 

Also do these tests on the effluent with 

l

r. 

lwliF4Igic7„1„Eittltoriul ''.,:''',k.,Lvii. '' ,,i401,,:1L-4.LAIREL-97-4 ,1:LI171 '',1ailit:" 

Effluent Limits, ug/L WET. Testing on the receiving water is 

optional RepOrting Limit Acute). Chronic(s) Health 63 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 is for reporting laboratory data and facility information. Official compliance reviews will be done by DEP. 

Facility Name---------- MEF>DES# ---­

F>ipe#____ 

Facility Representative Signature 

To the best of my lm:;<m:;lod:::;:g:;e,;;:!h:;;l,c;rn:<to::;rma;::;;tro::;.:;n'-isc;tru:::::e,-;=:;:;:;:::,..:;:,.~an;::;;d:;co::m::p::l.,.::::-. 

Chronic 

Ucensed 

Acute dUution 

dilution 

Flow(MGO) factor 

factor 

~ 

_ 

Human health dilutfon factor 

Crlterla type: M(arine} or F(resh) f 

l!!lll!l~!lllliWll!HIIl!iiml~l\1ijill201i)i!) 

Flow for Day (MGD)111 ,_I____,I Flow Avg. for Month (MGD)10I I 

Date Sample Collected r~----,1 Date Sample Analyzed I I 

Laboratory------------------Telephone-------­

Address---------------­

ERROR WARNING l ~ntial facility" 

information is missing. Please check 

required entries In bold above. 

--~~~~~~~~--~bCon~a-=;=====~:::;;:::::::;----- FRESH WATER VERSION 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[ 

I 

LVER 

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-frp475QPURTili fliggF77017'n ' '1 ''''' '''''''''.`v; ':'''''.1c.,;a:.,„: 4'''.41/1- 4 il '''',''' '. ,1 

compliance reviews 

liT z+17?-eirir,74 rtpre-ft;mii 

''' 1,,, . il '1, ` 4,-,,1 11 v-1' , : ',ILI wa - ' I'' 

will be done by DEP. 

4.;:i., 3ril , ..,, ,1 q 1 i.,ripFpr. r:, rlir.11P1 -:' 

1 11:1`khEt . A'A l'Al0 IL 'Llja!! l '' ' i]!; -5 ,t6z, 

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.tglItMlittiSlilirftlMliglallitVlairMitttlliittAMMIMMILO iiiiftiattatifillaltnillailf tiltmotiritOlOn fotcutlitiogiNgaigir, fiAtillmVARMA:$041474011trMiptikpgalegt t

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 Department of 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: ii­

,... 

lRC 

~-~

' ",' ' ' POLLUTANTS (

4

) 

25 

I :HJORC 

~ENE 

~E 

.5 

I 

iH:: 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 ;--­

.­

~~ 

--'" I 3

' 

' I~ 

?-2-l •v· '(1,2· 

5 

l '{1,3­

"VlNYL ETHER 

IACR rTRlLE 

Revised July 1, 2015 Page3 DEPLW0740-H2015 

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

--~--- ·---···-------·· ---­
Printed 711312015 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, 

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 41MikillMaTaMer 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 

t 

Printed 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) Flow average for day pertains to WETIPP composite sample day. 

(2) Flow average for month is for month in which WETIPP sample was taken. 

(3) Analytical chemistrY parameters must be done as part of the 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 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 wetershed wide allocations for fresh water discharges. ­

(8) These tests are optional for the receiving weter. However, where possible samples ofthe receiving water should be preserved and saved 


for the duration ofthe WET test. In the event of questions about the receiving wate(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 Page4 DEPLW 0740-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 POLLUTANT DISCHARGE 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 - power failure 9 


Spill prevention 10 


Removed substances 10 


Connection to municipal sewer 10 


DEFINTIONS 10 


Revised July 1, 2002 Page I 

MAINE 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. 	 GENERAL PROVISIONS 

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 of this 

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 of the 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 of Sections 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 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 

ifthe 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 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 of compliance or other provisions which 

may be authorized under 38 MRSA, §414-A(5). 

Revised July I, 2002 	 Page 2 
MAINE 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 


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 I 06 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 ofthis permit, the pennittee 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 ofother 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 mmmer as to 

Revised July I, 2002 	 Page 3 
MAINE 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 

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 Depatiment. 

(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 oftreatment 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 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 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) ofthis 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 I, 2002 	 Page4 
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 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 in paragraph D(I)(f), below. (24-hour notice). 

(d) Prohibition of bypass. 

(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) of this 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) 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 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 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(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 of an upset has the burden of proof. 

Revised July I, 2002 	 Page 5 
MAINE 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 of monitoring 

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 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 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 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 ofmonitoring 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, repOii or application. This period may be extended by 

request ofthe Depatiment 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 l, 2002 Page 6 
MAINE 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 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 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 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 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 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 

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 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 homs. 

(iii) The Department may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis for reports under 

paragraph (f)(ii) ofthis 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 (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 of reports. 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 of criminal 

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, of any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that 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 8 
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 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 ( l 0) 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 treatment works. 

(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 30 I 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 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 pennitted 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 thitty days after the effective date ofthis permit, the 

permittee shall notifY the Depattment of facilities and plm1s 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 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 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 I, 2002 	 Page 9 
MAINE 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 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 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 or resulting 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. For the purposes ofthis 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 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 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 ofpractices, 

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 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. For pollutants 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 10 
MAINE 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 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 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 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 ofwhich commenced: 

(a) After promulgation of standards of performance under section 306 of CW A which are 

applicable to such source, or 

(b) After proposal of standards of performance in accordance with section 306 of CW A 

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 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 II 
MAINE 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 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 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. 

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)(l) 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 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 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. Box370 


Guilford, Maine 04443 


COUNTY: 	 Piscataquis County 

NAME AND ADDRESS WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: 

22 Dean Road 

Guilford, Maine 04443 

RECEIVING W A TERICLASSIFICA TION: 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 ofup 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 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 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 (BODs), 14% ofthe 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 l 00% 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 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 and provides for a detention time of 65 days at the maximum monthly average design 

flow of0.93 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 effiuent 

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 

6/11110 permit except that this permit: 

I. 	 Eliminating water quality based concentration limits for ammonia and total copper pursuant 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 of analytical 

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 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 (A WQC). 

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) of 30 ug/L. 

5. 	 Establishing a monthly average mass limit for total antimony as a statistical evaluation ofthe most 

current 60 months of analytical chemistty 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 A WQC. 

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 !Week for Tier IA (production at True Textiles is <42,000 lbs/day and dty weather flows are .::;0.465 

MGD) as a result of a statistical evaluation oftest results for said parameters during the term ofthe 

previous permit. 

b. 	 Histow: The most current relevant regulatory activities include the following: 

August 28, 1997- The Depatiment issued WDL renewal #W006792-47-F-R for a 

five-year term. 

Februwy 11, 1998- The EPA issued NPDES 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 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 refen·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 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. 

Februmy 6, 2006- The Department issued a minor revision to the 8/11104 permit by reducing the 

monitoring frequency for mercury from 4/Y ear 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 new Department 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 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 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 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 Depmiment rule 06-096 CMR Chapter 530, Swface Water Toxics Control Program, require the 

regulation of toxic 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 of surface 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 at 

full 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 of Class B waters as follows: 

Class B waters must be ofsuch quality that they are suitable for the designated uses ofdrinking 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 habitatforftsh and other aquatic life. The habitat must be characterized as 

unimpaired. 

The dissolved oxygen content ofClass B waters may not be less than 7parts per million or 75% of 

saturation, whichever is higher, except that for the periodji·om October 1 sf to May 14th, in order to 

ensure spawning and egg incubation ofindigenous 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 ofEscherichia coli bacteria ofhuman and domestic animal origin 

in these waters may not exceed a geometric mean of64 per 100 milliliters or an instantaneous level of 

236per 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 ofsufficient 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 Survev. Januarv 2002. DEPLW0465, with the results ofthe sampling events. 

The 2012 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, published by the Depmiment (often 

referred to as the 305b Report) lists a 13.44 mile segment ofthe 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 (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 of municipal 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. If the TMDL indicates that at 

full 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 ()[The Permit For Modifications, 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% of the total flow (at full production), 97% 

of the total biochemical oxygen demand (BODs) 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, Patt 410, Textile Mills Point Source 

CategoiJ' for facilities such as Interface. Applicable subparts of 40 CFR Patt 410 include: 

Subpart B- Wool Finishing Subcategmy- Is applicable to process waters resulting from textile mills 

that are wool finishers including processes such as carbonizing, fulling, 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 (BA T)]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 

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 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 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 Subcategmy- 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: 

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 petmit 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, Patt 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 I 0 production days during a calendar month. 

Tier IA and Tier IB (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 dry weather flow >0.465 MGD. 

TIER IIA- 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 dty weather flow >0.465 MGD. 

It is noted the permittee has been operating under the TIER IA criteria for the full term of the 8111/04 

permit. 

b. 	 Flow: As a result of the imposition ofwater 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 8/11/04 permit established a monthly 

average limit of0.465 MGD (Yz of the 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 

Acute: 1Q10 = 11.5 cfs (11.5 cfs)(0.6464(1)) + (0.465 MGD) = 17:1 

(0.465 MGD) 

Chronic: 7Q10 = 17.3 cfs f17.3 cfs)(0.6464) + (0.465 MGD) = 25:1 

(0.465 MGD) 

Harmonic Mean: = 135 cfst2 = (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 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 (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 & TIER IIA 

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 Point Source 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 

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- 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. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

TIER I - Applicable when 40 CFR, Pati 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) ofProduction 

40 CFR 410 Subpart B- 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/1 000 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 

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 Dailx Maximum Monthlx Average Daily Maximum Monthlx Average 

4,000 lbs/day lbs/1 000 lbs lbs/1 000 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) 

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/1 000 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 lbs/day lbs/1 000 lbs lbs/1 000 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 Tier II 

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) 

TIER II- Applicable when 40 CFR, Pmt 430, Subpatt G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is 

~42,000 lbs/day. 

TIER II- Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits 

EPA Guidelines expressed in 

(lbs/1 000 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/1 000 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 

TIER II- Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits 

EPA Guidelines expressed in 

(lbs/1 000 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/1 000 lbs lbs/1 000 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) 

TIER II -Applicable when 40 CFR, Part 430, Subpart G (Stock & Yarn finishing) production level is 

2::42,000 lbs/day. 

TIER II - Calculation of GSSD Effluent Limits 

EPA Guidelines expressed in 

(lbs/1 000 lbs) of Production 

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/1 000 lbs lbs/1 000 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 

Domestic Waste Water Only- Applicable for Tier I and Tier II 

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 I 6 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 calculating the 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) 

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 

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 

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

TIER IA & TIER IB TIER IIA & TIER liB 

Daily Maximum Monthly Average Daily Maximum 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 of other 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 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 liB a flow limitation of 0.93 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 

Dailx Maximum 

4 78 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: 

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

TIERIIA TIER liB 

Dailx Maximum Monthlx Average Dailx Maximum Monthlx Average 

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: 

TIER liA- BODs 

Dailx Maximum 

582 lbs/dax = 150 mg/L 

(0.465 MGD)(8.34) 

TIER liB - -BODs 

Dailx Maximum 

1,206 lbs/dax = !55 mg/L 

(0.93 MGD)(8.34) 

Monthlx Average 

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 

478 I0- 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 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 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- 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) 

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 

Pe1jormance Based Reductions ofNPDES Permit Monitoring Frequencies (USEPA Guidance April 

1996). In addition, the Department has supplemented the EPA guidance with its own guidance entitled, 

Pe1jormance Based Reduction ofMonitoring Frequencies- Modification ofEPA 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 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 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/Week for 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 ugit, 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 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 6.9lbs/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 of water 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 

Daily Maximum Monthly Average 

C4.1 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% 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 (<)values were reduced by a factor of two for calculation purposes. 

g. 	 E. coli bacteria- The previous permitting action established seasonal (May l51h- September 301h) 

monthly average and daily maximum limits of 64 colonies/! 00 ml and 427 colonies/l 00 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 protect the health, safety and welfare of the 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/1 00 ml) Mean ( col/1 00 ml) 

Monthly Average 64 3-62 28 

Daily Maximum 427 8-488 97 

EPA's 1996 Guidance recommends evaluation ofthe 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. coli 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 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 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 ofthe ambient water quality criteria 

(A WQC) 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 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 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 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. 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 ofthe GSSD, for 

Tier lA & Tier IIA, 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 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 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 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 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 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 of 8.6 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 !/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 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) 

206-096 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 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 Depatiment 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 USEP A 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. 

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 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. 

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

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 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 ofthe Gold Book value of 

0.1 mg!L for use in the RP calculation will enable the Depatiment 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 

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 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 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 =effiuent pollutant concentration 2.2 mg/L (6/07- 9/09) 


Qs = 7Q10 flow of receiving 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, but pursuant to a Department guidance established in a letter to 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 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 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 (A WQC) 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 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 by the aggregate effect ofthe 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 A WQC 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: I. 

2) 	 Level II- chronic dilution factor of:>:20:1 but <100:1. 

3) 	 Level Ill- chronic dilution factor :>:1 00:1 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 chemistry testing. 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 of the permit and lasting through 24 months prior 

to permit expiration (Years!, 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 1 per year None required 2 per year 

Screening level testing- Beginning 24 months prior to permit expiration and lasting through 12 months 

prim· to permit expiration (Year 4 ofthe 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 chemishy 

II 2 per year 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 of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to 

permit expiration (Yem· 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 ofthe term ofthe 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 

I 4 per year I per year 4 per year 
ME0102032 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 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 ofthe 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 IImay reduce surveillance 

testing to one WET or specific chemical series eve1y 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)." 

Chapter 530 §(3)(E) states "For ejjluent monitoring data and the variability ofthe pollutant 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 ofWater, Washington, D.C.) to data to determine whether water-quality 

based ejjluent 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 ofwater 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, ejjluent 

limits and monitoring requirements in waste discharge licenses ifa 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 ofa numeric or narrative water quality criteria or that may impair existing 

or designated uses. The licensee must also control whole ejjluent 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 ifejjluent limits are required, the Department shall consider all 

information onfile and ejjluent testing conducted during the preceding 60 months. However, testing 

done in the petformance ofa 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 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 or had a reasonable potential to exceed critical chronic WET thresholds of 4.0% 

7.7% respectively for Tier !A and Tier IIA 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 of the chronic 

dilution factors of25:1 and 13:1 and the A-NOEL for Tier IB and Tier liB 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 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 (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 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 of7.7% 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. Being that the number of tests of concern, this permitting 

action is establishing a routine surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Y ear 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 of the term of the permit) and commencing again 12 months prior to 

permit expiration (Year 5 ofthe 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/Y ear. 

Tier IB & Tier liB- 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 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 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 of7.7% and the 

A-NOEL limit II% 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 

Depatiment establishes these frequencies based on the timing, severity and frequency ofthe tests of 

concern. Given the number of tests of concern, this permitting action is establishing a routine 

surveillance level monitoring frequency of 1/Y ear 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 (Yeat· 5 of the 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 of the term ofthe 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 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 background concentration ofspecific chemicals must be included in all 

calculations using the following procedures. The Department may publish andperiodically update a list 

ofdefault background concentrations for specific pollutailts 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 4(D) to determine background concentrations. For pollutants not listed by the Department, an 

assumed concentration of10% ofthe applicable water quality criteria must be used in calculations." 

The Depat1ment has limited information on the background levels of metals 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 toxic pollutants, the Department shall 

hold a portion ofthe total capacity in an unallocated reserve to allow for new or changed discharges 

and non-point source contributions. The unallocated resen•e must be reviewed and restored as 

necessmy at intervals ofnot more than five years. The water quality reserve must be not less than 15% 

ofthe 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 ofwater 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 ofthose 

discharges when determining the needfor and establishment ofthe level ofeffluent limits. The 

Department shall calculate the total allowable discharge quantity for specific pollutants, less the water 

quality reserve and background concenh·ation, necessmy to achieve or maintain water quality criteria 

at all points ofdischarge, 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 ofconcern in each watershed or segment to assure 

that water quality criteria are met at all points in the watershed and, ifappropriate, 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 the 

Piscataquis 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 and background concentration, may be 

allocated among the discharges according to the past discharge quantities for each as a percentage of 

the total quantity ofdischarges, or another comparable method appropriate for a specific situation and 

pollutant. Past discharges ofpollutants must be determined using the average concentration discharged 

during the pastfive years and the facility's licensed flow. 

The amount ofallowable discharge quantity may be no more than the past discharge quantity calculated 

using the statistical approach referred to in section 3(E) [Section 3.3.2 and Table 3-2 ofUSEPA's 

"Technical Support Docwnentfor Water Quality-Based Taxies Control''] ofthe rule, but in no event 

may allocations cause the water quality reserve amount to fall below the minimum referred to in 4(E) 

[15% ofthe total assimilative capacity]. Any difference between the total allowable discharge quantity 

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 Depatiment's Chapter 530 testing requirements discharge to the 

Piscataquis River. The waste water treatment facilities are the Milo Water District, the Town ofDoverFoxcroft 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 A WQC 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% ofAWQC) and a reserve (15% ofAWQC). 

On August 21,2014, the Depatiment conducted statistical evaluations based on 15% of the ambient 

water quality criteria reserve being withheld (Rep01i 10 706) and 0% ofthe reserve of the criteria being 

withheld (Report 10 705) 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 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 (A WQC) for ammonia and has 

four test results that have a reasonable potential to exceed both the acute and chronic A WQC 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. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

Tier lA & 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 

A WQC for ammonia, two (2) test results for antimony that have a reasonable potential to exceed the 

human health (water & organisms) A WQC 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 Depat1ment'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)(l) 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 

opportunitiesfor flow reductions andpollution 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 ofthe treatment facilities that will keep the discharge ofpollutants 

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 

limitationsfor 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 US EPA for metals 

from a publicly owned treatment works. 

Tier lA & Tier IIA- 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 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 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

Tier lA & Tier IIA- Flow of 0.465 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 of ammonia discharged by OSSD 

is 3.18% of the ammonia discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD'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: 

* 7Ql0 = 27.7 cfs (0.6464) = 17.90528 MOD 

27.7 cfs is the 7Ql0 at Milo. 

Chronic A WQC = 3,006 ug!L or 3.006 mg/L 

Taking into consideration 0% of the A WQC reserve and I 0% 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/day or 13Ibs/day 


Antimony 


Mean concentration= 351 ug!L or 0.351 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 of antimony discharged by OSSD 

is I 00% of the antimony discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD's 

segment allocation for antimony is calculated as 100% of the 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. 	 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (cont'd) 

Tier lA & Tier IIA- Flow of 0.465 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)(% of total 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 of copper discharged by OSSD is 

32.4% of the copper discharged by the three facilities on the Piscataquis River. Therefore, OSSD'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: 

IQl 0 = 	18.5 cfs (0.6464) = 11.9584 MOD 

Acute A WQC = 3.07 ug/L or 0.00307 mg!L 

Taking into consideration 0% of the A WQC 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: 


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 
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 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 ofthe receivng 

water based on IQIO, 7QI 0 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). 

J. 	 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 ofMercwy, 06-096 CMR 519 (last amended October 6, 200 I), the Department issued a 

Notice oflnterim Limits for the discharge of mercury 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 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 !/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 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 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) of 3.7 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 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 ofthe 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 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 of the 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 1.2-3.2 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 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 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. 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, 

Reopening ofThe 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 Daily News 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 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 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 of Water Quality Management 


Bureau of Water 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 of July 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/Week to !/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 Depatiment 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 

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 of 85 percent for BODs and TSS for secondary treated wastewaters. True Textiles 

contributes approximately 73% of the total flow, 97% ofthe total biochemical oxygen demand (BODs), 

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. 
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 


I 

INFLUENT 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 

l 
GUILFORDISANGERVILLE 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 

-------

GUILFORD/SANGERVILLE NPDES= ME010203

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 


i 
toRI5 -AN 

444 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 some pollutants 

Water quality tables 

Calculate water quality criteria: Acute, Chronic, Health 

II. 	Segment Assimilative Capacity 

Get facility information: location, stream flows 

~ . Identify lowermost facility 

~ Get stream flows for Acute, Chronic, Health (!QlO, 7Ql0, HM) 

Calculate segment capaciJby pollutant and cdterion: 


Stream flow X enteron 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 critelion 


Page I 
Maine 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 with Historical 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 


Data input and edits 
 1 

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

~ Bypass pollutants ifall results are "less than" 


. Average concentratioj and calculate pounds: 


Ave concentration x license flow x 8.34 =Historical Average 


Determine reasonable poJntial (RP) using algorithm 


J 

Calculate RP adjusted pounds: 


Historical Average x R1' factor= RP Historical Allocation 


l 

Save for comparative evaluation 

Calculate adjuste)maximum pounds: 


Highest concentration x RP factor x license flow x 8.34 = RP Maximum Value 


IV. Determine Facility History Percentaue 

By pollutant, identify facilitieS .with Historical Average 

~ Sum all Historical Averages within segment 

~ . 

By facility, calculate percent of total: 

Facility pounds I Total pounds= Facility History% 

} 

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 

By pollutant and criterion, select !Segment Assimilative Capacity 

. 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, catulate 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 


! 


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 asFacJty Allocation 

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 either Segment Allocation or Individual 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 

If Segment Allocation equals Effluent Limit, move to next facility downstream 

If not, subtract Facility Allocation from Segment Allocation 

Save difference 

Select n ext faci ity downstream if 

Figure remaining Segment Assimilative Capacity at and below facility, less tributaries 

Add saved difference to get an adjusted Segment Assimilative Capacity 

Reallocate Segment Assimilative Capacity among downstream facilities per step V 

Jr 

Repeat process for each facility downstream in turn 

Page 4 

Maine Department of Environmental Protection 

General Processing Steps in "DeTox" 

VIII. Evaluate Need for Effluent Limits 

By facility, pollutant and criterion select 


Segment Allocation, Individual Allocation and RP Maximum value 


! 	 . 

If RP Maximum value is greater than either Segment Allocation or Individual Allocation, 

use lesser value as Ejj/uent Limit 

! . 

Save Ejj/uent Limit for comparison 

IX. 	Reallocation of Assimllative Capacity 

Starting at top of segment, get Segment Allocation, Facility Allocation and Ejjluent Limit 

~ IfSegment Allocation equals Ejj/uent Limit, move to next facility downstream 

! 


If not, subtract Facility Allocation from Segment Allocation 

! 


Save difference 


Select next facJity downstream 


! 


Figure remaining Segment Assimilative Capacity at and below facility, less tributaries 

! 


Add saved difference to get an adjusted Segment Assimilative Capacity 

! 


Reallocate Segment Assimilative 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.govor 287-7788. 

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 

****************************************************************************** 

Following the requirements ofDEP's rules, Chapter 530, section 4(F), the Department is 

evaluating discharges of toxic pollutants into a freshwater river system in order to prevent 

cmnulative impacts from multiple discharges. This is being through the use of a computer 

program known internally as "DeTox". The enclosed package ofinformation 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 conjtmction 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 offand newer ones are added. The intent ofthis process is to maintain I 


I current, 1miform 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 ofpollutant testing on their 

effluent. This means, statistically, the fewer tests done, the greater the possibility ofeffluent 

limits being necessary based on the facility's small amount ofdata. To avoid this situation, most 

facilities, especially those with low dilution factors, should 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 pollutant reports 

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. 

Maine Department ofEnvironmental 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 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 ofstatistical certainty. The 

RP factor is multiplied by the historical average to determine an allocation based on past 

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 the river segment in comparison to the sum of all discharges ofthe · 

pollutant. This percent multiplied by the total assimilative capacity becomes 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 

the past to 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 in three ways. The methods are: 

1. 	 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 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 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 oftotal past discharges. This method 


would be used when multiple discharges ofthe 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 tributary segment with the sum ofdischarge 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 tmuscd quantity is rolled do\vnstream 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 oftests. 

It is generally to a facility's long-term benefit to have more tests on file since their RP factor will 

be reduced. 

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 background amounts. 

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 

potential factor). 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 of Terms Used in the DeTox System. 

Allocation. The ammmt ofpollutant 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 ejjluent limits. Allocation may be made in three 

ways: historical allocation, individual allocation or segment allocation. 

Assimilative capacity. The amount ofapollutant 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 hmnan 

health criteria as applicable for each pollutant. Calculation ofthis capacity includes factors for 

reserve and background ammmts. 

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% ofthe 

applicable water quality criterion. 

Ejjluent limit. A numeric limit in a discharge permit specifically restricting the amotmt ofa 

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 ofthree 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 ejjluentlimit. 

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 

potential factor). The amounts for all facilities are added together and a percent ofthe 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 ofthree 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. Ifthe RP-adjusted ammmt is larger, the water quality amount 

may become an ejjluentlimit. 

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. 
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's historical 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. 

Reasonable potential (RP). A statistical method to detennine the highest amount ofa 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 ofvariation and the number oftests. 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% ofthe 

applicable water quality criterion. 

Segment allocation. One of three ways of developing an allocation. The amount is set by 

multiplying a facility's historical 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 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 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 ofpollutants. These 

are established in tbe Department's Chapter 584 and are expressed as concentrations in ug/L. 

There may be separate standards for acute and chronic protection aquatic life and/or human 

health. Each criterion becomes a separate standard. Different stream flows are used in the 

calculation of each. 
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 2ndQuarter 3rdQuarter 4thQuarter 

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 of industrial, 

commercial, or domestic discharges to the facility that in the 

judgment of the 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 of the discharge? 0 0 

3 Changes in storm water collection or inflow/infiltration 

affecting the facility that may increase the toxicity ofthe 

discharge? 

0 0 

4 Increases in the type or volume of hauled 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 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 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 

Priority Pollutant Testing 0 0 0 0 

Analytical Chemistty 0 0 0 0 

Other toxic parameters ' 0 0 0 0 

Please place an "X" in each ofthe 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. 

"\UGUSTA 

17 STATE HOUSE STATION BANGOR PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE 

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 106 HOGAN ROAD, SUITE 6 312 CAN CO 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 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 

seekjudicialreview 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-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 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. §§ 341-0(4) & 346, the lvfaine 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 11001, and the DEP's Rules Concerning the Processing of 

Applications and Other Administrative Mailers ("Chapter 2"), 06-096 CMR 2 (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 of the date on which the Commissioner's 

decision was filed with the Board will be rejected. 

HOW TO SUBMIT AN APPEAL TO TilE 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 04333-00 17; faxes are 

acceptable for purposes of meeting 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 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 Bom·d 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 
Appealing 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 YOU FILE A TIMELY 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. 	 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 ofthe 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 ofthe objections or challenge. If possible, 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 on the license or 

permit to changes in specific permit conditions. 

5. 	 All/he mailers lobe contested. The Board will limit its consideration to those arguments specifically 

raised in the written notice of appeal. 

6. 	 Requestfor 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 of the notice of appeal. 

7. 	 New or additional 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 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 

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 and laws under which the application was processed, and the 

procedural rules governing your appeal. DEP staffwill provide this information on request and 

answer questions regarding applicable requirements. 

3. 	 The filing ofan 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 ofthe decision being reversed or modified as a result of the appeal. 

WHAT TO EXPECT ONCE YOU FILE A TiMELY 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 ofthe 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/90-1/r/95/r98/r99/r00/r04/r12 
Appealing 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 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 patty's appeal must be filed with the Superior Court within 30 days ofreceipt 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 INFORMATION 

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. •____:cc____ 

0 C F /90 -1/r/95/r98/r99/r0 O/r04/r12