Permit No. UT0000051 

STATE OF UTAH 

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 

AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE 

UTAH POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM 

(UPDES) 

In compliance with provisions of the Utah Water Quality Act, Title 19, Chapter 5, Utah Code 

Annotated ("UCA '') 1953, as amended (the ''Act'~, 

KENNECOTT UTAH COPPER LLC 

is hereby authorized to discharge from its facility located near Magna and in western Salt Lake County, Utah, 

with the outfalls located at the following: 

Outfall Latitude Longitude To receiving waters named 

002 40° 44'30" 112 ° 05'15" C-7 Ditch 

004 40° 44'06" 112° 11'49" I-80 Culvert to Great Salt Lake 

005 40° 36'30" 111 ° 55'20" Jordan River 

007 40° 46'15" 112 ° 07'00" C-7 Ditch 

008 40° 44'12" 112° 10'25" Great Salt Lake 

009 40° 32'07" 112° 11'39" Pine Canyon Creek, Tooele County 

010 40 ° 29'33" 112 ° 07'20" Butterfield Creek 

011 40° 42'52" 112 ° 06'57" Ritter-Utah Salt Lake Canals 

012 40° 45'20" 112 ° 10'02" Great Salt Lake 

SW3 40° 42' 02" 112 ° 06'38" Little Valley 'Wash 

SW4 40° 32'51" 112 ° 12'22" Pine Canyon Creek, Tooele County 

in accordance with discharge points, effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set 

forth herein. 

This modified permit shall become effective on November 12, 2009. 

This modified permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, 

January 31, 2012. 

Signed this 12th day ofNovember, 2009. 

alter L. Baker, P .E. 

Executive Secretary 

Utah Water Quality Board 
Permit No. UTOOOOOSl 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page No. 

I. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ................................................. ................ .3 

A. De:fmitions ..................................................................................................................................... .3 

B. Description of Discharge Points ..................................................................................................... ? 

C. Narrative Standard .......................................................................................................................... S 

D. Specific Limitations and Self-monitoring Requirements ................................................................ S 

E. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ........................................................................................ 22 

II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................... 34 

A. Representative Sampling ............................................................................................................. .34 

B. Monitoring Procedures ................................................................................................... ............. .34 

C. Penalties for Tampering ............................................................................................................... .34 

D. Reporting of Monitoring Results ................................................................................................. .34 

E. Compliance Schedules ................................................................................................................. .34 

F. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee ...................................................................................... .34 

G. Records Contents ......................................................................................................................... .35 

H. Retention of Records ................................................................................................................... .3 5 

I. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting ............................................................. .35 

J. Other Noncompliance Reporting ................................................................................................. .36 

K. Inspection and Entry .................................................................................................................... .36 

ill. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES .................................................................................................................... .37 

A. Duty to Comply ........................................................................................................................... .37 

B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions ............................................................................. .37 

C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense ........................................................................... .37 

D. Duty to Mitigate ............................................................................................................................ 37 

E. Proper Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................................. .37 

F. Removed Substances ................................................................................................................... .37 

G. Bypass ofTreatmentFacilities .................................................................................................... .37 

H. Upset Conditions ......................................................................................................................... .3 8 

I. Toxic Pollutants ........................................................................................................................... .39 

J. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances ................................................................................. .39 

K. Industrial Pretreatment ................................................................................................................ .40 

IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................... .41 

A. Planned Changes ............ , ............................................................................................................. .41 

B. Anticipated Noncompliance ......................................................................................................... 41 

C. Permit Actions ............................................................................................................................. .41 

D. Duty to Reapply ................................................................................................. : ......................... .41 

E. Duty to Provide Information ......................................................................................................... 41 

F. Other Infonnation ........................................................................................................................ .41 

G. Signatory Requirements ............................................................................................................... .41 

H. Penalties for Falsification ofReports ........................................................................................... .42 

I. Availability of Reports ................................................................................................................ .43 

J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability ......................................................................................... 43 

K. Property Rights ............................................................................................................................ .43 

L. Severability .................................................................................................................................. .43 

M. Transfers ...................................................................................................................................... .43 

N. State Laws ................................................................................................................................... .43 

0. Water Quality-Reopener Provision ..................................................................... ~ ........................ .43 

P. Toxicity Limitation -Reopener Provision .................................................................................... .44 

2 
Permit No. UTOOOOOSl 

I. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 

A. Definitions 

1. The "30-day (and monthly) average" is the arithmetic average of all samples 

collected during a consecutive 30-day period or calendar month, whichever is 

applicable. The calendar month shall be used for purposes of reporting selfmonitoring data on discharge monitoring report forms. 

2. The "7-day (and weekly) average" is the arithmetic average of all samples 

collected during a consecutive 7-day period or calendar week, whichever is 

applicable. The 7-day and weekly averages are applicable only to those effluent 

ch~acteristics for which there are 7-day average effluent limitations. The 

calendar week which begins on Sunday and ends on Saturday, shall be used for 

purposes of reporting self- monitoring data on discharge monitoring report forms. 

Weekly averages shall be calculated for all calendar weeks with Saturdays in the 

month. If a calendar week overlaps two months (i.e., the Sunday is in one month 

and the Saturday in the following month), the weekly average calculated for that 

calendar week shall be included in the data for the month that contains the 

Saturday. 

3. "Daily Maximum" ("Daily Max.") is the maximum value allowable in any single 

sample or instantaneous measurement. 

4. "Composite samples" shall be flow proportioned. The composite sample shall, as 

a minimum, contain at least four ( 4) samples collected over the composite sample 

period. Unless otherwise specified, the time between the collection of the first 

sample and the last sample shall not be less than six ( 6) hours nor more than 24 

hours. Acceptable methods for preparation of composite samples are as follows: 

a. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume proportional to 

flow rate at time of sampling; 

b. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume proportional to 

total flow (volume) since last sample. For the first sample, the flow rate at 

the time the sample was collected may be used; 

c. Constant sample volume, time interval between samples proportional to 

flow (i.e., sample taken every "X" gallons of flow); and, 

d. Continuous collection of sample, with sample collection rate proportional 

3 
Permit No. UT0000051 

to flow rate. 

5. A "grab" sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single "dip and 

take" sample collected at a representative point in the discharge stream. 

6. An "instantaneous" measurement, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a 

single reading, observation, or measurement. 

7. "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. 

8. "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a 

treatment facility. 

9. "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. · 

10. "Executive Secretary" means Executive Secretary of the Utah Water Quality 

Board. 

11. "EPA" means the United States Environmental Protection Agency. 

12. "Acute toxicity" occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for either 

test species at any effluent concentration. 

13. "Act" means the "Utah Water Quality Act". 

14. "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. 

4 
Permit No. UT0000051 

15. "CWA" means The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, by The 

Clean Water Act of 1987. 

16. "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. 

17. "Illicit discharge" means any discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer that 

is not composed entirely of storm water except discharges pursuant to a UP DES 

permit (other than the UP DES permit for discharges from the municipal separate 

storm sewer) and discharges from fire fighting activities, fire hydrant flushings, 

potable water sources including waterline flushings, uncontaminated ground 

water (including dewatering ground water infiltration), foundation or footing 

drains where flows are not contaminated with process m&terials such as solvents, 

springs, riparian habitats, wetlands, irrigation water, exterior bqilding wash down 

where there are no chemical or abrasive additives, pavement wash waters where 

spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous materials have not occurred and where 

detergents are not used, and air conditioning condensate. 

18. "Landfill" means an area ofland or an excavation in which wastes are placed for 

permanent disposal, and which is not a land application unit, surface 

impoundment, injection well, or waste pile. 

19. "Land application unit" means an area where wastes are applied onto or 

incorporated into the soil surface (excluding manure spreading operations) for 

treatment or disposal. 

20. "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, 

landfill leachate collection system, vessel or other floating craft from which 

pollutants are or may be discharges. This term does not include return flows 

from irrigated agriculture or agriculture storm water runoff. 

21. "Runoff coefficient" means the fraction of total rainfall that will appear at a 

conveyance as runoff 

22. "Significant materials" includes, but is not limited to: raw materials; fuels; 

materials such as solvents, detergents, and plastic pellets; finished materials such 

as metallic products; raw materials used in food processing or production; 

hazardous substances designated under Section 101 (14) of CERCLA; any 

5 
Permit No. UT0000051 

chemical the facility is required to report pursuant to EPCRA Section 313; 

fertilizers; pesticides; and waste products such as ashes, slag and sludge that have 

the potential to be released with storm water discharges. 

23. "Significant spills" includes, but is not limited to: releases of oil or hazardous 

substances in excess of reportable quantities under Section 311 of the Clean 

Water Act (see 40 CFR 110.10 and 40 CFR 117.21) or Section 102 ofCERCLA 

(see 40 CFR 302.4). 

24. "Storm water" means storm water runoff, snow melt runoff, and surface runoff 

and drainage. 

25. "Time-weighted composite" means a composite sample consisting of a mixture of 

equal volume aliquots collected at a constant time interval. 

26. "Waste pile" means any noncontainerized accumulation of solid, nonflowing 

waste that is used for treatment or storage. 

27. "1 0-year, 24-hour precipitation event" means the maximum 24-hourprecipitation 

event with a probable reoccurrence interval of once in 10 years. This information 

is available in Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 40, May 1961 and NOAA 

Atlas 2, 1973 for the 11 Western States, and may be obtained from the National 

Climatic Center of the Environmental Data Service, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. 

28. "Section 313 water priority chemical" means a chemical or chemical categories 

that: 

a. Are listed at 40 CFR 372.65 pursuant to Section 313 of the Emergency 

Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (also known as 

Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 

1986); 

b. Are present at or above threshold levels at a facility subject to EPCRA 

Section 313 reporting requirements; and 

c. Meet at least one of the following criteria: 

1. Are listed in Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 122 on either Table II (organic 

priority pollutants), Table III (certain metals, cyanides, and phenols) or 

Table V (certain toxic pollutants and hazardous substances); 

6 
Permit No. UTOOOOSl 

n. Are listed as a hazardous substance pursuant to Section 311 (b )(2)(A) ofthe 

CWA at 40 CFR 116.4; or 

iii. Are pollutants for which EPA has published acute or chronic water quality 

criteria. See Appendix Ill ofthis permit. This appendix was revised based 

on final rulemaking EPA published in the Federal Register November 30, 

1994. 

B. Description of Discharge Points 

The authorization to discharge provided under this permit is limited to those outfalls specifically 

designated below as discharge locations. Discharges at any location not authorized under a 

UP DES permit is a violation of the Act and may be subject to penalties under the Act. Knowingly 

discharging from an unauthorized location or failing to report an unauthorized discharge may be 

subject to criminal penalties as provided under the Act. 

Discharge Points 

Outfall Number · Location of Discharge Points Receiving Waters 

002 Latitude 40° 44' 30" Longitude 112° 05' 15" Tailings pond outfall to C-7 ditch 

004 Latitude 40° 44' 06" Longitude 112° 11' 49" 1-80 Culvert to Great Salt Lake 

005 Latitude 40° 36' 30" Longitude 111° 55' 20" Alternate mine water discharge to the 

Jordan River 

007 Latitude 40°46'15" Longitude 112°07'00" Toe Ditch Pond to C-7 ditch 

008 Latitude 40°44'12" Longitude 112°10'25" Artesian well water, refinery storm water to 

the Great Salt Lake 

009 Latitude 40°32'07" Longitude 112°11'39" Pine Canyon Tunnel, Tooele County 

010 Latitude 40°29'33" Longitude 112°07'20" Butterfield Tunnel to Butterfield Creek 

011 Latitude 40°42'52" Longitude 112°06'57" Adamson Springs to the Ritter-Utah Salt 

Lake Canals 

012 Latitude 40° 45' 20" Longitude 112° 10' 02" Tailings discharge to the Great Salt Lake 

104 Latitude 40°43'27" Longitude 112°11'50" Internal discharge from Hydrometallurgical 

Plant 

SW3 Latitude 40°42' 02" Longitude 112°06'38" Little Valley Wash 

SW4 Latitude 40°32'51 " Longitude 112°12'22" Pine Canyon Creek, Tooele County 

C. Narrative Standard 

It shall be unlawful, and a violation of this permit, for the permittee to discharge or place any 

waste or other substance in such a way as will be or may become offensive such as unnatural 

deposits, floating debris, oil, scum or other nuisances such as color, odor or taste, or cause 

conditions which produce undesirable aquatic life or which produce objectionable tastes in edible 

aquatic organisms; or result in concentrations or combinations of substances which produce 

undesirable physiological responses in desirable resident fish, or other desirable aquatic life, or 

undesirable human health effects, as determined by bioassay or other tests performed in 

7 
Permit No. UT000051 

accordance with standard procedures. 

D. Specific Limitations and Self-monitoring Requirements 

1. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to 

discharge from Outfalls 002 and 007. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by 

the permittee as specified below: 

EIDuent Limitations, Self-Monitori~ and Reporting Requirements Outfall 002 and 00'1 

Discharge Lim:itati0ns ID Menit0ring ~equirements 

Parameter Maximum Daily Daily Frequency SamP,le Unit~ 

Monthly Average Ma~um Minimum TYPe 

Flow NA NA NA Continuous Recorder MGD 

TSS 20 30 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L 

'f~ta] As 0.25 0.50 NA 3 XWeeldy Composite mg!L 

T0tal Cd 0.05 0.10 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg!L 

T0tal Cu 0.15 0.30 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L 

T0tal Pb 0.30 0.60 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg!L 

Total Hg 0.001 0.002 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg!L 

TetalZn 0.224 0.50 NA Monthly Composite mg!L 

T oral S.e e/' 0.012 b/ NA NA Monthly Grab mg!L 

Total Cyamde 0.1 0.2 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

T0tal Dissolve<!l NA NA NA Monthly Composite mg!L 

Solids (IDS.) 

OiJ an.~ Gre:ase NA 10 NA dl Composite Dig/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 3X Weekly Grab su 

There shall be no untreated sanitary wastewater discharged into the tailings impoundment. 

There shall be no or floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 

N.A.- Not Applicable. 

a/ See Definitions, Part !A for definition of terms. 

b/ 0.012 mg!L is consistent with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

404 Permit #199450301 and shall not be exceeded at the Lower Lee Creek location 

north oflnterstate 80 during a discharge from outfalls 002 and 007. 

c/ Selenium will be analyzed by the Kennecon modified elenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 

200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

8 
I 

1 

_.._ 

Permit No. UT000051 

dl Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken 

at the outfall to the C-7 ditch prior to mixing with the receiving water. 

2. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to 

discharge from Outfall 004. Such discharges shall be monitored quarterly by the 

permittee for the same parameters as specified in the permit for Outfall 008. 

Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be 

taken at the outfall prior to mixing with the receiving water. 

3. During the period beginning immediately and lasting through the duration of this permit, 

the permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 005 (mine water). The discharge 

shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified: 

Effluent Limitations, Self-M.Qnitorin,g and Revottin Requirements Outfall 005. ·- Discharg.e __ Limitation~ a/ Monit_o~g Requirements 

Parameter M~imum Daily L>aily: 'f' reql:lency Sample l:Jnits 

M onthly Avetag~ ,Maximum Minim1!Ill T}'Fe 

flow NA NA NA Daily or Measured MGD Continuous b/ 

TSS 20 30 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

T~tal As NA 0.23 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

! etaLCd 0.0028 0.0198 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg!L 

'fro tal Cu NA 0.12 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

TotalPb 0.063 0.510 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

TotalHg r 0.00006 c/ 0.00077 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total Zn 0.75 1.50 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

T0tal Fe NA 3.06 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Seleruum d/ 0.014 0.056 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Teta:l IDissoJved NA 1200 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Solids 01"DS) 

Oil ancllliease NA 10 NA e/ Grab mg!L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 2 X Weekly Grab su 

NA- Not Applicable. 

a/ See definitions Part I. A. for definition of terms 

b/ For intermittent discharges, the duration of the discharge shall be reported. 

c/ Kennecott will voluntarily analyze mercury using a low level total mercury analysis. 

9 
Permit No. UT000051 

d/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberta Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 

200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

e/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 

There shall be no discharge of sanitary wastes or leach water from this outfall. 

During the first week of discharge, aluminum and silver shall also be sampled and the analyses 

submitted with the first discharge report. 

4. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to 

discharge from Outfall 008. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the 

permittee as specified below: 

EffiJtent Limitations, Self-Monitoring and Reportin Requirements Outfall 008 

Discharge Lj.mitatipns a; .Monjtoring Requirements 

Parameter Maximum Daily Daily SanJJ>le Units 

;Moi;ltlllY Average !vf~um Minimwn Frequeney Type 

Fl0W NA NA NA Quarterly Measured MGD 

TSS 20 30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total As 0.25 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Tota:l Cd 0.05 0.10 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

TotalCu 0.15 0.30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Pb 0.30 0.60 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Tota!Hg 0.001 0.002 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

1'0tatZn 0.224 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Seleniumb/ NA 0.054 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

T0tal Dis oived NA NA NA Quarterly Grab mg/L S'01ids (TDS} 

\@ il and Grease, NA 10 NA c/ Grab mg/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

There shall be no floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 

N.A.- Not Applicable. 

a/ See Definitions, Part !A for definition of terms 

10 
~ 

Permit No. UT000051 

b/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberta Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 

200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

c/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

5. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to 

discharge from Outfall 009. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the 

permittee as specified: · 

Effluent Limitations, SeH-Monitoring and Reportin Requirements Outfall 009 

D1schatge Limitations a/ M.~nitering Requirement$ 

Parameter M~ ,· urn Dail¥ Daily Sample Units 

Monthly Average Maximum Minimum 

Frequency Type 

Flew NA NA NA 2 X Yearly Measured MGD 

TSS 20 30 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

Total As 0.25 0.50 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

T9tal.Ca 0.05 0.10 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

.:r0'tal Cu 0.15 0.30 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

,totaJ,Pb 0.30 0.60 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

TotalHg 0.001 0.002 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

Tq,talZn 0.224 0.50 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

Selenium c/ 0.012 NA NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

T0tal Diss0l;ved NA NA NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L Sol~d~ (TDS) 

Oil and Grease NA 10 NA b/ Grab mg/L 

pll NA 9.0 6.5 2 X Yearly Grab su 

There shall be no floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 

NA- Not Applicable. 

w See Definitions, Part !A for definition of terms. 

b/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

c/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberta Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 

200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

11 

.. 
Permit No. UT000051 

6. During the period beginning immediately and lasting through the duration of this permit, 

the permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 010 (Butterfield Tunnel). The 

discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified: 

Effluent Lbnitations,Self-Monitori.ng and Reporiin Requirements Outfall 010 

Pisdhitrge Umitatipns a/ M0nit0ring Requirements 

Panimeter Maximum Daily Daily Sallilple Units· Eret:{U~ll9Y Monthly ~ verage Maxmiwn M.i.nimum. TYpe 

FleW.· NA NA NA Quarterly Measured MGD 

TSS "'" "'" -...TA 1'\ __ - _ __..,_ ___ 1 __ ,..., 1 - IT L.V JV 1 'jJ-\. '<Uilllt;Uy \.JTiiU lll)yL 

·Total As NA 0.10 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

'f'otarca 0.0044 0.015 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Cil 0.050 0.083 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

tQtalFe NA 1.52 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

']0tal'l>b 0.023 0.100 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

T0tal H~ 0.00002 b/ 0.00023 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Te:tal Zn 0.446 0.493 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

$eleniun:t. ct 0.007 0.029 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

J"0taJ J)isse1 vecl. NA 1200 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L Selids (TDS) 

Qi:l and Grease NA 10 NA d/ Grab mg/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

a/ See definitions Part LA. for definition of terms. 

b/ Kennecott will voluntarily analyze mercury using a low level mercury analysis. 

c/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberta Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 

200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

d/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

7. During the period beginning immediately and lasting through the duration of this permit, 

the permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 011 (Adamson Spring). The 

discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified: 

12 

i 
Permit No. UTOOOOSl 

E(fluentLimitations, Self-Monitorin~ and R.ep.ortin 'Requirements Outfall 011 

Qischarge Limitations~ a/ .Monit0ring Requirements 

Parameter MaximuJll Daicy Baily Sample Umts 

Monthly A~rage Mmcim.um Minim tun Frequ<mcy Type· . . 

Flew NA NA NA Quarterly b/ Measured MGD 

TSS 20 30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

T<:>:U!l:As NA 0.013 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

totaiCd NA 0.01 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

TetalCu t 0.15 0.30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Eb NA 0.01 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

T-0tal Zn 0.224 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Selenium e/ NA 0.013 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Qil aQ,d Grtras_e NA 10 NA d/ Grab mg/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

a/ See definitions Part I. A. for definition of terms 

b/ For intermittent discharges, the duration of the discharge shall be reported. 

c/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau ofLaboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742, EPA Method 200.8 

or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

d/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

8. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to 

discharge from Outfall 012. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the 

permittee as specified: 

13 
Pe:rmit No. UT000051 

Effluent Limitations, Self-Monitoring and Reportin ~ Re_quirements Outfall 012 

Diseharge Limitations a/ Monitotiog Requirements 

Parameter Maximum Daily Daily Frequency S~ple Units 

Montbl:Y A;verage Maximum Minimum Type 

Flow NA NA NA Continuous Recorder MGD 

TSS 20 30 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Total As 0.25 0.50 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Total Od 0.05 0.10 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Tatal Cn 0.15 0.30 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

TotalPb 0.30 0.60 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Total Hg 0.001 0.002 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

Total Zn 0.224 0.50 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Seleniumc/ NA 0.054 NA Daily b/ Composite mg/L 

Tofirl Cyanide 0.1 0.2 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

TDS NA NA NA Monthly Composite mg!L 

nil and Greas~ NA 10 NA d! Grab mg/L 

pll NA 9.0 6.5 Daily Grab su 

There shall be no untreated sanitary wastewater discharged into the tailings impoundment. 

There shall be no floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 

N.A.- Not Applicable. 

-g) See Definitions, Part IA for definition ofterms. 

Q! The monitoring frequency is two times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 1 MGD and 5 MGD, three times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 5 MGD and 10 MGD, five times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 10 MGD and 15 MGD, and daily when the weekly average flow is greater 

than 15 MGD. Measurement frequency is only required weekly when the Sunday 

through Thursday average flow is less than 1 MGD and the total flow for the week is 

less than 10 MGD for that discharge. The frequency of monitoring may be modified 

by the Executive Secretary after one year of monitoring demonstrates compliance with 

concentrations below permit limits. · 

c;j Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selePi u.rn hyd.ride procedure" as 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberta Lopez of the State of Utah 

Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742, EPA Method 200.8 

or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

14 
l~ 

_..~ 

~ 

~ 

Permit No. UT000051 

Improvement. 

d/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken 

at the outfall to the Great Salt Lake prior to mixing with the receiving water. 

9. Effective immediately the permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 104 

(Hydrometallurgical plant). The discharge lbs/day shall be limited and monitored by the 

permittee as specified below: 

Effluent Limita ion~, Self-Monitoring and .Reportin[! R.el:fuirements OutfalllO~ 

Parameter 

Fle:w 

TSS 

Tot~ 

J'p~al Cd' 

'fetal Cu 

Xotal RID 

Total ZR 

Disc:Qax;ge Limitations aJ .M0nit0riflg Requirements 

Units 

MctXimV:In Manthly Daily' M·aximum Fil'equeney Sample 

.Average Type 

NA NA Continuous Recorder MGD 

236 295 Weekly Composite lb/day 

11.2 27.3 Weekly Composite lb/day 

1.57 3.93 Weekly Composite lb/day 

12.0 25.2 Weekly Composite lb/day 

2.56 5.51 Weekly Composite lb/day 

8.26 20.1 Weekly Composite lb/day 

a/ See definitions Part LA. for definition of terms 

10. Except as provided for in Part I.D.11.b of the permit, there shall be no discharge of process 

wastewater to navigable water from the active copper dump leach operations. 

11. Storm Exemptions 

a. If, as a result of precipitation or snowmelt Outfalls 002, and/or 012 has an 

overflow or excess discharge of effluent which does not meet the limitations 

contained in Part I.D.1 and 8, pursuant to 40 CFR 440.131(b), Outfalls 002 and/or 

012 may qualify for an exemption from such limitations if the permittee notifies the 

Executive Secretary of the event in writing within thirty days of the event and the 

following conditions are met: 

1. The facility is designed, constructed and maintained to contain 6053 acre 

feet at the North expansion impoundment. This is the volume which would 

be generated by the permittee in a 24-hour period without an increase in 

volume from precipitation plus the maximum volume of wastewater 

resulting from a 1 0-year, 24-hour precipitation event. The Facility must be 

capable of storing the above volumes or be capable of treating the 

15 
Permit No. UTOOOOSl 

maximum flow associated with these volumes. 

11. The permittee takes all reasonable steps to maintain treatment of the waste 

water such as adding lime to maintain pH in the range of 6.5 to 9.0 in the 

effluent and minimizes the amount of overflow such as not discharging 

leach water to the tailings pond except for storm runoff at the mine 

exceeding the 1 0 year 24-hour storm volume and the conditions of Part 

I.D.ll.b. 

iii. The discharge is analyzed for the parameters listed in Part I.D .1. 

IV. The discharge is reported pursuant to Part II.I.1-4 and Part II.D. 

v. The storm exemption is designed to provide an affirmative defense to an 

enforcement action. Therefore, the permittee has the burden of 

demonstrating to the Executive Secretary that the above conditions have 

been met. 

b. If, as a result of precipitation or snowmelt, other areas of the mine operations have 

an overflow or discharge which does not meet the limitations established pursuant 

to 40 CFR 440.131(b), as deemed applicable, the permittee may qualify for an 

exemption from such limitations with respect to such discharge if the permittee 

notifies the Executive Secretary of the event in writing within thirty days of the 

event and the following conditions are met: 

1. The facility is designed, constructed, and maintained to contain the 

maximum volume of waste water stored by the facility during normal 

operating conditions (without an increase in volume from precipitation) 

plus the maximum volume of waste water resulting from a 1 0-year, 24-

hour precipitation event. In computing the maximum volume of waste 

water which would result from a 1 0-year, 24-hour precipitation event, the 

permittee must include the volume which would result from all areas 

contributing runoff to the facility, i.e., all runoffthat is not diverted from 

the area, or process subject to zero discharge, and other runoff that is 

allowed to commingle with the influent to the treatment system. 

11. The permittee takes all reasonable steps to minimize the overflow or excess 

discharge such as containment and reuse where practical. 

iii. There is no discharge ofleach water to Bingham Creek or the Jordan River. 

IV. The permittee complies with the notification requirements of the permit. 

The storm exemption is designed to provide an affirmative defense to an 

enforcement action. Therefore, the operator has the burden of 

demonstrating to the appropriate authority that the above conditions have 

been met. 

16 
Permit No. UT000051 

12. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing -Acute Toxicity. Effective immediately, and 

lasting through the life of this permit, there shall be no acute toxicity for Ceriodaphnia 

dubia in outfall 002 or 005 discharges, and no acute toxicity for Cryprinodon variegatus 

(sheepshead minnow) in outfalls 007 or 012 discharge as defined in Part lA and 

determined by test procedures described below. 

Effective immediately, the permittee will sample monthly the calcium concentration of the 

012 outfall. If the calcium. concentration drops below 350 mg/L, a 96-hour acute toxicity 

test · using Mysidopsis bahia (mysid shrimp) will be conducted to determine the 

appropriateness of this species for the 012 outfall. 

Starting on the effective date of this permit, when the maximum individual weekly average 

flow for outfalls 002 and 005 is greater than 10 MGD, the permittee shall monthly, 

conduct acute static replacement toxicity tests on composite samples of the final effluent. 

The samples shall be collected at outfalls 002 and 005. Sampling is only required 

quarterly if the quarterly average flow is less than 10 MGD and not required if the 

quarterly average flow has not exceeded 1 MGD. The permittee will also conduct acute 

static replacement toxicity tests on composite samples of the final effluent on a quarterly 

basis for outfall 012. Sampling is not required if the quarterly average flow has not 

exceeded 1 MGD. A yearly spring time acute biomonitoring test using Ceriodaphnia 

dubia is also required for outfall 010. Acute biomonitoring testing using Cryprinodon 

variegatus (sheepshead minnow) will be required at outfall 007 if the quarterly average 

flow has exceeded 1 MGD. Sampling is not required if the quarterly average flow has not 

exceeded 1 MGD. 

The monitoring frequency for acute tests shall be as specified in the previous paragraph 

unless a sample is found to be acutely toxic during a routine test. If that occurs, the 

monitoring frequency shall become weekly (See Part 1D.12.a, Accelerated Testing). 

Samples shall be collected on a two day progression; i.e., if the first sample is on a 

Monday, during the next sampling period, the sampling shall begin on a Wednesday, etc. 

In the event of an acute toxicity test failure, the Permittee shall still be in compliance with 

the permit, as long as the Permittee is complying with the requirements of Part 1.12 of this 

permit. 

The replacement static acute toxicity tests shall be conducted in general accordance with 

the procedures set out in the latest revision of Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of 

Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. Fourth Edition. 

August 1993, EPA/600/4-90/027F as per 40 CFR 136.3(a) TABLE !A-LIST OF 

APPROVED BIOLOGICAL METHODS, and the Region VIII EPA NPDES Acute Test 

Conditions -Static Renewal Whole Effluent Toxicity Test (August, 1997). In the case of 

conflicts, the Region VIII procedures will prevail. The permittee shall conduct the 96-hour 

static replacement toxicity test for outfall 012 using Cyprinodon variegatus, and for 

outfalls 002, 005 and 010 48-hour tests using Ceriodaphnia dubia. 

17 
Permit No. UT000051 

Acute toxicity occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for either species at 

any effluent concentration. Mortality in the control must simultaneously be 10 percent or 

less for the results to be considered valid. If more than 10 percent control mortality occurs, 

the test shall be repeated until satisfactory control mortality is achieved. A variance to this 

requirement may be granted by the Executive Secretary if a mortality of less than 10 

percent was observed in higher effluent dilutions. 

If the permit contains a total residual chlorine limitation greater than 0.20 mg/L, the 

permittee may request from the Executive Secretary approval to dechlorinate the sample, 

or collect the sample prior to chlorination. 

Quarterly test results shall be reported along with the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR.) 

:submitted for the end of the reporting quarter, e.g., biomonitoring results for the calendar 

quarter ending March 31 shall be reported with the DMR due April28, with the remaining 

biomonitoring reports submitted with DMRs due each July 28, October 28, and January 

28. Monthly test results shall be reported along with the DMR submitted for that month. 

The format for the report shall be consistent with the latest revision of the Region VIII 

Guidance for Acute Whole Effluent Reporting (August, 1997) and shall include all 

chemical and physical data as specified. 

If the results for one year of testing indicate no acute toxicity, the permittee may request a 

reduction in testing frequency and/or reduction to one species. The Executive Secretary 

may approve, partially approve, or deny the request based on results and other available 

information. If approval is given, the modification will take place without a public notice. 

a. Accelerated Testing. When acute toxicity is indicated during routine 

biomonitoring as specified in this permit, the permittee shall notify the Executive 

Secretary in writing within 5 days after becoming aware of the test result. The 

permittee shall perform an accelerated schedule of biomonitoring to establish 

whether a pattern of toxicity exists. Accelerated testing will begin within seven 

days after the permittee becomes aware of the test result. Accelerated testing shall 

be conducted as specified under Part ID.12.b, Pattern of Toxicity. If the 

accelerated testing demonstrates no pattern of toxicity, routine monitoring shall be 

resumed. 

b. Pattern ofToxicity. A pattern of toxicity is defined by the results of a series of up 

to five biomonitoring tests pursuant to the accelerated testing requirements using 

100 percent effluent on the species being tested, once every week for up to five 

consecutive weeks. 

If two (2) consecutive tests (not including the scheduled quarterly or monthly test 

which triggered the search for a pattern of toxicity) do not result in acute toxicity, 

no further accelerated testing will be required and no pattern of toxicity will be 

found to exist. The permittee will provide written verification to the Executive 

Secretary within 5 days, and resume routine monitoring. 

18 
Permit No. UT000051 

A pattern of toxicity is established if one of the following occurs: 

1. If two (2) consecutive test results (not including the scheduled quarterly or 

monthly test which triggered the search for a pattern of toxicity) indicate 

acute toxicity, this constitutes an established pattern of toxicity. 

ii. If consecutive tests continue to yield differing results each time, the 

permittee will be required to conduct up to a maximum of five (5) acute 

tests (not including the scheduled quarterly or monthly test which triggered 

the search for a pattern of toxicity). If three out of five test results indicate 

acute toxicity, this will constitute an established pattern of toxicity. 

c. Preliminary Toxicity Investigation 

1. When a pattern of toxicity is detected the permittee will notify the 

Executive Secretary in writing within 5 days and begin an evaluation of the 

possible causes of the toxicity. The permittee will have 15 working days 

from demonstration of the pattern of toxicity to complete a Preliminary 

Toxicity Investigation (PTI) and submit a written report of the results to the 

Executive Secretary. The PTI may include, but is not limited to, additional 

chemical and biological monitoring, examination of pretreatment program 

records, examination of discharge monitoring reports, a thorough review of 

the testing protocol, evaluation of treatment processes and chemical use, 

inspection of material storage and transfer areas to determine if a spill may 

have occurred, and similar procedures. 

11. If the PTI identifies a probable toxicant and/or a probable source of 

toxicity, the permittee shall submit, as part of its final results, written 

notification of that effect to the Executive Secretary. Within thirty days of 

completing the PTI the permittee shall submit for approval a control 

program to control effluent toxicity and shall proceed to implement such 

plan within seven days following approval. The control program, as 

submitted to or revised by the Executive Secretary, may be incorporated 

into the permit. 

111. If no probable explanation for toxicity is identified in the PTI, the permittee 

shall notify the Executive Secretary as part of its final report, along _with a 

schedule for conducting a Phase I Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) 

(See Part 1D.12.d, Toxicity Reduction Evaluation). 

IV. If toxicity spontaneously disappears during the PTI, the permittee shall 

submit written notification to that effect to the Executive Secretary as part 

of the reporting requirements of paragraph i of this section. 

19 
Permit No. UT000051 

d. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE). If toxicity is detected during the life of this 

permit and it is determined by the Executive Secretary that a TRE is necessary, the 

permittee shall be so notified and shall initiate a TRE immediately thereafter. The 

purpose of the TRE will be to establish the cause of the toxicity, locate the 

source(s) of the toxicity, and control or provide treatment for the toxicity. 

A TRE may include but is not limited to one, all, or a combination of the 

following: 

Phase I- Toxicity Characterization 

Phase II- Toxicity Identification Procedures 

Phase III- Toxicity Control Procedures 

Any other appropriate procedures for toxicity source elimination and control 

If the TRE establishes that the toxicity cannot be immediately eliminated the 

permittee shall submit a proposed compliance plan to the Executive Secretary. The 

plan shall include the proposed approach to control toxicity and a proposed 

compliance schedule for achieving· control. If the approach and schedule are 

acceptable to the Executive Secretary, this permit may be reopened and modified. 

If the TRE shows that the toxicity is caused by a toxicant(s) that may be controlled 

with specific numerical limitations, the permittee may: 

1. Submit an alternative control program for compliance with the numerical 

requirements. 

n. If necessary, provide a modified biomonitoring protocol which 

compensates for the pollutant(s) being controlled numerically. 

If acceptable to the Executive Secretary, this permit may be reopened and modified 

to incorporate any additional numerical limitations, a modified compliance 

schedule if judged necessary by the Executive Secretary, and/or a modified 

biomonitoring protocol. 

Failure to conduct an adequate TRE, or failure to submit a plan or program as 

described above, or the submittal of a plan or program judged inadequate by the 

Executive Secretary, shall be considered a violation of this permit. 

e. Prohibition ofNon-Storm Water Discharges!. Except for process water discharges 

identified in the permit, the Statement of Basis and the discharges identified later 

in this paragraph, additional discharges from this facility are limited to storm water 

only. The following non-storm discharges may be authorized by this permit to be 

discharged with storm water discharges provided the non-storm water component 

of the discharge is in compliance with part IE.5.h (Measures and Controls for 

Non-storm Water Discharges): discharges from fire fighting activities; fire hydrant 

flushings; potable water sources including waterline flushings; irrigation drainage; 

lawn watering; routine external building wash down which does not use detergents 

20 
Permit No. UTOOOOSl 

or other compounds; pavement wash waters where spills or leaks of toxic or 

hazardous materials have not occurred (unless all spilled material has been 

removed) and where detergents are not used; air conditioning condensate; springs; 

uncontaminated ground water; and foundations or footing drains where flows are 

not contaminated with process materials such as solvents. 

E. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. It has been determined that the permittee has a regulated 

storm water discharge as per UA C R317. 8. Therefore, the permittee shall develop a storm water 

pollution prevention plan. However, if the permittee has provided storm runoff containment for 

the 25 year, 24 hour storm for new facilities or containment for the 10 year, 24 hour storm for 

existing facilities, the storm water pollution prevention plan may be modified for that portion of 

the facility. The plan shall be prepared and retained according to the following conditions. 

1. Deadlines for Plan Preparation and Compliance. The storm water pollution prevention 

plan from the previous permit, as required under Part IE., will remain in effect until the 

current plan is modified and implemented. The new plan shall be implemented within 90 

days of issuance of this permit unless the Executive Secretary gives written approval 

extending the implementation time for parts of the plan. 

2. Signature and Plan Review. 

a. The plan shall be signed in accordance with Part IV G. (Signatory Requirements), 

and be retained on site at the facility which generates the storm water discharge. 

b. The permittee shall make plans available upon request to the Executive Secretary, or 

authorized representative. 

c. Required modifications. The Executive Secretary may notify the permittee at any 

time that the plan does not meet one or more of the minimum requirements of this 

part. Such notification shall identify those provisions of the permit that are not 

being met by the plan and identify which provisions of the plan require 

modification~ in order to meet the minimum requirements of this part. Within 30 

days of such notification from the Executive Secretary the permittee shall make the 

required changes to the plan and shall submit to the Executive Secretary a written 

certification that the requested changes have been made. 

3. Pollution Prevention Team. Each plan shall identify a specific individual or individuals 

within the facility organization as members of a storm water Pollution Prevention Team 

that are responsible for developing the storm water pollution prevention plan and assisting 

the facility or plant manager in its implementation, maintenance, and revision. The plan 

shall clearly identify the responsibilities of each team member. The activities and 

responsibilities of the team shall address all aspects of the facility's storm water pollution 

prevention plan. 

4. Description of Potential Pollutant Sources. Each plan shall provide a description of 

21 
Permit No. UT000051 

potential sources which may reasonably be expected to add significant amounts of 

pollutants to storm water discharges or which may result in the discharge of pollutants 

during dry weather from separate storm sewers draining the facility. Each plan shall 

identify all activities and significant materials which may potentially be significant 

pollutant sources. Each plan shall include, at a minimum: 

a. Drainage. 

1. A site map indicating, an outline of the portions of the drainage area of 

each storm water outfall that are within the facility boundaries, each 

existing structural control measure to reduce pollutants in storm water 

runoff, surface water bodies, locations where significant materials are 

exposed to precipitation, locations where major spills or leaks have 

occurred, and the locations of the following activities where such activities 

are exposed to precipitation: fueling stations, vehicle and equipment 

maintenance and/or cleaning areas, loading/unloading areas, locations used 

for the treatment, storage or disposal of wastes, liquid storage tanks, 

processing areas and storage areas. 

n. For each area of the facility that generates storm water discharges 

associated with industrial activity with a reasonable potential for containing 

significant amounts of pollutants the permittee shall make a prediction of 

the direction of flow, and an identification of the types of pollutants which 

are likely to be present in storm water discharges associated with industrial 

activity. Factors to consider include the toxicity of chemicals; quantity of 

chemicals used, produced or discharged; the potential of contact with storm 

water; and history of significant leaks or spills of toxic or hazardous 

pollutants. Flows with a significant potential for causing erosion shall be 

identified. 

b. Inventory of Exposed Materials. An inventory of the types of materials handled at 

the site that potentially may be exposed to precipitation and discharged to surface or 

groundwater. Such inventory shall include a narrative description of significant 

materials that have been handled, treated, stored or disposed in a manner to allow 

exposure to storm water between the time of three years prior to the date of the 

issuance of this permit and the present; method and location of on-site storage or 

disposal; materials management practices employed to minimize contact of 

materials with storm water runoff between the time of three years prior to the date 

of the issuance of this permit and the present; the location and a description of 

existing structural and non-structural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm 

water runoff; and a description of any treatment the storm water receives. This 

description should also include areas with the potential for deposition activities. 

The description shall be updated whenever there is a significant change in the type 

or quantity of exposed materials or material management practices, which may 

affect the exposure of materials to storm water. Those updates will include any new 

22 
Permit No. UT000051 

exposures related to waste rock or overburden management. 

c. Spills and Leaks. A list of significant spills and significant leaks of toxic or 

hazardous pollutants that occurred at areas that are exposed to precipitation or that 

otherwise drain to a storm water conveyance at the facility after the date of three 

years prior to the effective date of this permit. Such list shall be updated as 

appropriate during the term of the permit. 

d. Sampling Data. A summary of existing discharge sampling data describing 

pollutants in storm water discharges from the facility, including a summary of 

sampling data collected during the term of this permit. 

e. Risk Identification and Summary of Potential Pollutant Sources. A narrative 

description of the potential pollutant sources from the following activities: loading 

and unloading operations; outdoor storage activities; outdoor manufacturing or 

processing activities; significant dust or particulate generating processes; and onsite waste disposal practices. The description shall specifically list any significant 

potential source of pollutants at the site and for each potential source, any pollutant 

or pollutant parameter (e.g. biochemical oxygen demand, etc.) of concerns shall be 

identified. 

5. Measures and Controls. Each facility covered by this permit shall develop a description of 

storm water management controls appropriate for the facility and implement such controls. 

The appropriateness and priorities of controls in a plan shall reflect identified potential 

sources of pollutants at the facility. The description of storm water management controls 

shall address the following minimum components, including a schedule for implementing 

such controls: 

a. Good housekeeping. Good housekeeping requires the maintenance of areas which 

may contribute pollutants to storm water discharges in a clean, orderly manner. The 

pollution prevention plan should consider implementation of the following 

measures where applicable: 

1. Establish a cleaning or maintenance program for all impervious areas of the 

facility where particulate matter, dust, or debris may accumulate, 

particularly areas of material loading/unloading, material storage and 

handling, and processing. 

n. Paved areas of vehicle traffic or material storage where vegetative or other 

stabilization methods are not practical. Institute sweeping programs in 

these areas as well. 

iii. For unstabilized areas of the facility where sweeping is not practical, storm 

water management devices such as sediment traps, vegetative buffer strips, 

filter fabric fence, sediment filtering boom, gravel outlet protection or other 

23 
Permit No. UT000051 

equivalent measures, that effectively trap or remove sediment should be 

considered. 

b. Source Controls. The permittee shall consider preventive measures to minimize 

the potential exposure of all significant materials (as described in Part I.E.4 of this 

section) to precipitation and storm water runoff. The permittee should consider in a 

narrative description the implementation of the following measures to reduce the 

exposure of all materials to storm water: 

1. Relocate all materials, including raw materials, intermediate products, 

material handling equipment, obsolete equipment, and wastes currently 

stored outside to inside locations. · 

n. Establishment of a schedule for removal of wastes and obsolete equipment 

to minimize the volume of these materials stored onsite that may be 

exposed to storm water. 

iii. Substitution of less hazardous materials, or materials less likely to 

contaminate storm water, or substitution of recyclable materials for 

nomecyclables whenever possible. 

tv. Constructing permanent or semipermanent covers, or other similar forms of 

protection over stockpiled materials, material handing and processing 

equipment. Options include roofs, tarps, and covers. This may also 

include the use of containment bins or covered dumpsters for raw 

materials, waste materials and nomecyclables waste materials. 

v. Dikes, berms, curbs, trenches, or other equivalent measures to divert run on 

from material storage, processing, or waste disposal areas. 

c. Preventive Maintenance. A preventive maintenance program shall involve 

inspection and.maintenance of storm water management devices (e.g. cleaning 

oil/water separators, catch basins) as well as inspecting and testing facility 

equipment and systems to uncover conditions that could cause breakdowns or 

failures resulting in discharges of pollutants to surface waters, and ensuring 

appropriate maintenance of such equipment and systems. 

d. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. Areas where potential spills which can 

contribute pollutants to storm water discharges can occur, and their accompanying 

drainage points shall be identified clearly in the storm water pollution prevention 

plan. Where appropriate, specifying material handling procedures, storage 

requirements, and use of equipment such as diversion valves in the plan should be 

considered. Procedures for cleaning up spills shall be identified in the plan and 

made available to the appropriate personnel. The necessary equipment to 

implement a clean up should be available to personnel. 

24 
Permit No. UT000051 

e. Inspections. In addition to or as part of the comprehensive site evaluation required 

under this permit, qualified facility personnel shall be identified to inspect 

designated equipment and areas of the facility at appropriate intervals specified in 

the plan. A set of tracking or follow up procedures shall be used to ensure that 

appropriate actions are taken in response to the inspections. Records of inspections 

shall be maintained. 

f. Employee Training. Employee training programs shall inform personnel 

responsible for implementing activities identified in the storm water pollution 

prevention plan or otherwise responsible for storm water management at all levels 

of responsibility of the components and goals of the storm water pollution 

prevention plan. Training should address topics such as spill response, good 

housekeeping and material management practices. A pollution prevention plan 

shall identify periodic dates for such training. In all cases training must be held at 

least annually. 

g. Record keeping and Internal Reporting Procedures. A description of incidents such 

as spills, or other discharges, along with other information describing the quality 

and quantity of storm water discharges shall be included in the plan required under 

this part. Inspections and maintenance activities shall be documented and records 

of such activities shall be incorporated into the plan. 

h. Non-Storm Discharges. 

1. The permittee's current certification will be accepted and considered 

complete. However, the plan shall include a certification that any new 

discharges have been tested or evaluated for the presence of non-storm 

water discharges. The certification shall include the identification of 

potential significant sources of non-storm water at the site, a description of 

the results of any test and/or evaluation for the presence of non-storm water 

discharges, the evaluation criteria or testing method used, the date of any 

testing and/or evaluation, and the on-site drainage points that were directly 

observed during the test. The certification must be signed in accordance 

with signatory requirements in Part IV.G Signatory Requirements of this 

permit. A discharger that is unable to provide certification required by this 

paragraph must notify the Executive Secretary. 

u. Except for flows from fire fighting activities, sources of non-storm water 

that are combined with storm water discharges associated with industrial 

activity must be identified in the plan. The plan shall identify and ensure 

the implementation of appropriate pollution prevention measures for the 

non-storm water component(s) of the discharge. 

iii. Failure to Certify. If the permittee is unable to provide the certification 

25 
Permit No. UT000051 

required for new discharges (testing for non-storm water discharges), the 

facility must notify the Executive Secretary within 3 0 days of construction 

of the new discharge. If the failure to certify is caused by the inability to 

perform adequate tests or evaluations, such notification shall describe: The 

procedure of any test conducted for the presence on non-storm water 

discharges; the results of such tests or other relevant observations; potential 

sources of non-storm water discharges to the storm sewer; and why 

adequate test from such storm sewers were not feasible. Non-storm water 

discharges to waters of the United States that are not authorized by an 

NPDES permit are unlawful and must be terminated. 

1. Sediment and Erosion Control. The plan shall identify areas which, due to 

topography, activities, or other factors, have a high potential for significant soil 

erosion, and identify structural, vegetative, and/or stabilization measures to limit 

erosion. The plan shall also contain a narrative consideration of the appropriateness 

of traditional storm water management practices (practices other than those that 

control the generation or sources of pollutants) used to divert, infiltrate, reuse, or 

otherwise mange storm water runoff in a manner that reduces pollutants in storm 

water discharges from the site. The plan shall provide that measures that the 

permittee determines to be reasonable and appropriate shall be implemented and 

maintained. The potential of various sources at the facility to contribute pollutants 

to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity (see paragraph Part 

I.E.4 of this section (Description ofPotential Pollutant Sources) shall be considered 

when determining reasonable and appropriate measures. Appropriate measures may 

include; vegetative swales and practices, reuse of collected water (such as for a 

process or irrigation source), inlet controls ( such as oil/water separators), snow 

management activities, infiltration deicers, and wet detention/retention devices. 

J. Management of Runoff. Facilities shall consider implementation of the following 

storm water management practices to address pollutants of concern: 

1. Vegetative buffer strips, filter fabric fence, sediment filtering boom, or 

other equivalent measures, that effectively trap or remove sediment prior to 

discharge through an inlet or catch basin. 

n. Media filtration such as catch basin filters and sand filters. 

iii. Oil/water separators or the equivalent 

1v. Structural BMPs such as settling basins, sediment traps, retention or 

detention ponds, recycling ponds or other equivalent measures. 

Appropriate measures may include: vegetative swales and practice, reuse of 

collected storm water (such as for a process or as an irrigation source), inlet 

controls (such as oil/water separators), snow management activities, infiltration 

26 
Permit No. UT000051 

deicers and wet detention/retention devices. 

6. Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation. Qualified personnel shall conduct site 

compliance evaluations at appropriate intervals specified in the plan, but, in no case less 

than once a year. Such evaluations shall provide: 

a. Areas contributing to a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity 

shall be visually inspected for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering 

the drainage system. Measures to reduce pollutant loadings shall be evaluated to 

determine whether they are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with 

the terms of the permit or whether additional control measures are needed. 

Structural storm water management measures, sediment and erosion control 

measures, and other structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan 

shall be observed to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of 

equipment needed to implement the plan, such as spill response equipment, shall be 

made. 

b. Based on the results of the inspection, the description of potential pollutant sources 

identified in the plan and pollution prevention measures and controls identified in 

the plan shall be revised as appropriate within two weeks of such inspection and 

shall provide for implementation of any changes to the plan in a timely manner, but 

in no case more than twelve weeks after the inspection. A longer time period may 

be approved by the Executive Secretary when justified by the permittee. 

c. A report summarizing the scope of the inspection, personnel making the inspection, 

the date(s) of the inspection, major observations relating to the implementation of 

the storm water pollution prevention plan, and actions taken shall be made and 

retained as part of the storm water pollution prevention plan for at least one year 

after coverage under this permit terminates. The report shall identify any incidents 

of non-compliance. Where a report does not identify any incidents of noncompliance, the report shall contain a certification that the facility is in compliance 

with the storm water pollution prevention plan and this permit. The report shall be 

signed in accordance with Part IV.G Signatory Requirements ofthis permit. 

Where significant settling or deposition from process emissions are observed during 

proper operation of existing equipment, the permittee shall consider ways to reduce 

these emissions including but not limited to: Upgrading or replacing existing 

equipment; collection runoff from areas of deposition for treatment or recycling; or 

changes in materials or processes to reduce the generation of particulate matter. 

d. Where compliance evaluation schedules overlap with inspections required under 

Part I.E.S.e, the compliance evaluation may be conducted in place of one such 

inspection. 

7. Consistency with other plans. Storm water pollution prevention plans may reflect 

27 
Permit No. UT000051 

requirements for Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure ("SPCC'~ plans developed 

for the facility under Section 311 of the CWA or Best Management Practices ("BMP'~ 

otherwise required by this permit for the facility as long as such requirement is 

incorporated into the storm water pollution prevention plan. 

8. Additional Requirements for Salt Storage. Storage piles of salt used for deicing or other 

commercial or industrial purposes and which generate a storm water discharge associated 

with industrial activity which is discharged to waters of the State shall be enclosed or 

covered to prevent exposure to precipitation, except for exposure resulting from adding or 

removing materials from the pile. 

9. Monitoring Requirements: During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting 

through the expiration date of this permit storm events greater than 0.1 inches and more 

than 72 hours after the previous measurable storm at sites SW3 and SW4 shall be 

monitored at least 2 times per year and sampled if discharge is present, for the same 

appropriate parameters as listed for the tailings impoundment outfall 012 in Part I.D.8. 

except for cyanide and biomonitoring. Where practical, samples must consist of a grab 

sample in the fust 30 minutes of the observed discharge for pH, total metals and if a sheen 

is present oil & grease. In addition to the parameters listed, the permittee shall provide the 

date and duration (in hours) of the storm events(s) sampled; rainfall measurements or 

estimates ( in inches) of the storm event which generated the sampled runoff; the duration 

between the storm event sampled and the end of the previous measurable (greater than 0.1 

inch rainfall) storm event; and an estimate of the total volume (in gallons) of the discharge 

sampled. Monitoring is not required after reclamation bond release or reclamation has 

reduced values to background levels. 

10. Sampling Waiver. When unable to collect samples due to adverse climatic conditions, the 

discharger must submit in lieu of sampling data a description of why samples could not be 

collected, including available documentation of the event. Adverse weather conditions 

which may prohibit the collections samples includes weather conditions that create 

dangerous conditions for personnel (such as local flooding, high winds, electrical storms, 

etc.) or otherwise make the collection of a sample impractical (drought, extended frozen 

conditions, etc). 

11. Reporting. Monitoring results shall be reported with the monthly Discharge Monitoring 

Report within 60 days of sampling. 

12. EPCRA Section 313 Requirements. In areas where Section 313 water priority chemicals 

are stored, processed or otherwise handled, appropriate containment, drainage control 

and/or diversionary structures shall be provided. At a minimum, one of the following 

preventive systems or its equivalent shall be used: 

a. Curbing, culverting, gutters, sewers, or other forms of drainage control to prevent or 

minimize the potential for storm water run-on to come into contact with significant 

sources of pollutants; or 

28 
Permit No. UT000051 

b. Roofs, covers or other forms of appropriate protection to prevent storage piles from 

exposure to storm water and wind. 

c. No tank or container shall be used for the storage of a Section 313 water priority 

chemical unless its material and construction are compatible with the material 

stored and conditions of storage such as pressure and temperature, etc. 

d. Liquid storage areas for Section 313 water priority chemicals shall be operated to 

minimize discharges of Section 313 chemicals. Appropriate measures to minimize 

discharges of Section 313 chemicals may include secondary containment provided 

for at least the entire contents of the largest single tank plus sufficient freeboard to 

allow for precipitation, a strong spill contingency and integrity testing plan, and/or 

other equivalent measures. 

Material storage areas for Section 313 water priority chemicals other than liquids 

that are subject to runoff, leaching, or wind shall incorporate drainage or other 

control features that will minimize the discharge of Section 313 water priority 

chemicals by reducing storm water contact with Section 313 water priority 

chemicals. 

e. Truck and rail car loading and unloading areas for liquid Section 313 water priority 

chemicals shall be operated to minimize discharges of Section 313 water priority 

chemicals. Protection such as overhangs or door skirts to enclose trailer ends at 

truck loading/unloading docks shall be provided as appropriate. Appropriate 

measures to minimize discharges of Section 313 chemicals may include: the 

placement and maintenance of drip pans (including the proper disposal of materials 

collected in the drip pans) where spillage may occur (such as hose connections, 

hose reels and filler nozzles) for use when making and breaking hose connections; a 

strong spill contingency and integrity testing plan; and/or other equivalent 

measures. 

f. Processing equipment and materials handling equipment shall be operated so as to 

minimize discharges of Section 313 water priority chemicals. Materials used in 

piping and equipment shall be compatible with the substances handled. Drainage 

from process and materials handling areas shall minimize storm water contact with 

Section 313 water priority chemicals. Additional protection such as covers or 

guards to prevent exposure to wind, spraying or releases from pressure relief vents 

from causing a discharge of Section 313 water priority chemicals to the drainage 

system shall be provided as appropriate. Visual inspections or leak tests shall be 

provided for overhead piping conveying Section 313 water priority chemicals 

without secondary containment. 

g. Drainage from areas covered by paragraphs a., b., c., or d (above) should be 

restrained by valves or other positive means to prevent the discharge of a spill or 

29 
Permit No. UT000051 

other excessive leakage of Section 313 water priority chemicals. Where 

containment units are employed, such units may be emptied by pumps or ejectors; 

however, these shall be manually activated. 

Flapper-type drain valves shall not be used to drain containment areas. Valves used 

for the drainage of containment areas should, as far as is practical, be of manual, 

open-and-closed design. 

If facility drainage is not engineered as above, the final discharge of all in-facility 

storm sewers shall be equipped to be equivalent with a diversion system that could, 

in the event of an uncontrolled spill of Section 313 water priority chemicals, return 

the spilled material to the facility. 

Records shall be kept of the frequency and estimated volume (in gallons) of 

discharges from containment areas. 

h. Other areas of the facility (those not addressed in paragraphs a., b., c., or d.), from 

which runoff that may contain Section 313 water priority chemicals or spills of 

Section 313 water priority chemicals could cause a discharge shall incorporate the 

necessary drainage or other control features to prevent discharge of spilled or 

improperly disposed material and ensure the mitigation of pollutants in runoff or 

leachate. 

1. All areas of the facility shall be inspected at specific intervals identified in the plan 

for leaks or conditions that could lead to discharges of Section 313 water priority 

chemicals or direct contact of storm water with raw materials, intermediate 

materials, waste materials or products. In particular, facility piping, pumps, storage 

tanks and bins, pressure vessels, process and material handling equipment, and 

material bulk storage areas shall be examined for any conditions or failures that 

could cause a discharge. Inspection shall include examination for leaks, wind 

blowing, corrosion, support or foundation failure, or other forms of deterioration or 

noncontainment. Inspection intervals shall be specified in the plan and shall be 

based on design and operational experience. Different areas may require different 

inspection intervals. Where a leak or other condition is discovered that may result 

in significant releases of Section 313 water priority chemicals to waters of the State, 

action to stop the leak or otherwise prevent the significant release of Section 313 

water priority chemicals to waters of the State shall be immediately taken or the 

unit or process shut down until such action can be taken. When a leak or 

noncontainment of a Section 313 water priority chemical has occurred, 

contaminated soil, debris, or other material must be promptly removed and disposed 

in accordance with Federal, State, and local requirements and as described in the 

plan. 

J. Facilities shall have the necessary security systems to prevent accidental or 

intentional entry that could cause a discharge. Security systems described in the 

30 
Permit No. UT000051 

plan shall address fencing, lighting, vehicular traffic control, and securing of 

equipment and buildings. 

k. Facility employees and contractor personnel that work in areas where Section 313 

water priority chemicals are used or stored shall be trained in and informed of 

preventive measures at the facility. Employee training shall be conducted at 

intervals specified in the plan, but not less than once per year. Training shall 

address: pollution control laws and regulations, the storm water pollution 

prevention plan and the particular features of the facility and its operation that are 

designed to minimize discharges of Section 313 water priority chemicals. The plan 

shall designate a person who is accountable for spill prevention at the facility and 

who will set up the necessary spill emergency procedures and reporting 

requirements so that spills and emergency releases of Section 313 water priority 

chemicals can be isolated and contained before a discharge of a Section 313 water 

priority chemical can occur. Contractor or temporary personnel shall be informed 

of facility operation and design features in order to prevent discharges or spills from 

occurnng. 

31 
Permit No. UT0000051 

II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. 

A. Representative Sampling. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements 

established under Part I shall be collected from the effluent stream prior to discharge into the 

receiving waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the volume and nature 

of the monitored discharge. Sludge samples shall be collected at a location representative of 

the quality of sludge immediately prior to the use-disposal practice. 

B. Monitoring Procedures. Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved 

under Utah Administrative Code ("UAC'') R317-2-1 0, unless other test procedures have been 

specified in this permit. 

C. Penalties for Tampering. The Act provides that any person who falsifies, tatnper:s with, ur 

knowingly renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained 

under this permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per 

violation, or by imprisonment for not more than six months per violation, or by both. 

D. Reporting of Monitoring Results. Monitoring results obtained during the previous month shall 

be summarized for each month and reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA 

No. 3320-1), post-marked no later than the 28th day ofthe month following the completed 

reporting period. The first report is due on November 28, 2006. If no discharge occurs during 

the reporting period, "no discharge" shall be reported. Legible. copies of these, and all other 

reports including whole effluent toxicity (WET) test reports required herein, shall be signed 

and certified in accordance with the requirements of Signatory Requirements (see Part IV. G), 

and submitted to the Director, Division of Water Quality and to EPA at the following 

addresses: 

original to: Department of Environmental Quality 

Division of Water Quality 

288 North 1460 West 

PO Box 144870 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870 

copy to: Technical Enforcement Program (8ENF-T) 

Office of Enforcement, Compliance Assistance & Environmental Justice 

US EPA Region VIII 

999 18th Street, Suite 500 

Denver, CO 80202-2466 

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. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee. If the permittee monitors any parameter more 

frequently than required by this permit, using test procedures approved under UAC R317-2-10 

32 
Permit No. UT0000051 

or as otherwise specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the 

calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR. Such increased frequency shall 

also be indicated. Only those parameters required by the permit need to be reported. 

G. Records Contents. Records of monitoring information shall include: 

1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements: 

2. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; 

3. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed; 

4. The individual(s) who performed the analyses; 

5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and, 

6. The results of such analyses. 

H. Retention of Records. The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, 

including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for 

continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this permit, and 

records of all data used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at least three 

years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be 

extended by request of the Executive Secretary at any time. A copy of this UP DES permit must 

be maintained on site during the duration of activity at the permitted location. 

I. Twenty-four Hour Notice ofNoncompliance Reporting. 

1. The permittee shall (orally) report any noncompliance which may seriously endanger 

health or environment as soon as possible, but no later than twenty-four (24) hours 

from the time the permittee first became aware of circumstances. The report shall be 

made to the Division of Water Quality, (801) 538-6146, or 24 ~our answering service 

(801) 536-4123. 

2. The following occurrences of noncompliance shall be reported by telephone (801) 536-

4123 as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours from the time the permittee 

becomes aware ofthe circumstances: 

a. Any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment; 

b. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit 

. (See Part III G, Bypass of Treatment Facilities.); 

c. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit (See Part IIIH, 

Upset Conditions.); or, 

d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants 

listed in the permit. 

3. A written submission shall also be provided within five days of the time that the 

33 
Permit No. UT0000051 

permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain: 

a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause; 

b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; 

c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if it has not been 

corrected; and, 

d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the 

noncompliance. 

t:. Steps taken, if any, tu mitigate the adverse impacts on the environment and 

human health during the noncompliance period. 

4. The Executive Secretary may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the 

oral report has been received within 24 hours by the Division of Water Quality, (801) 

538-6146. 

5. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part liD, Reporting of Monitoring 

Results. 

J. Other Noncompliance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not required to be reported 

within 24 hours shall be reported at the time that monitoring reports for Part liD are 

submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed in Part III3. 

K. Inspection and Entry. The permittee shall allow the Executive Secretary, or an authorized 

representative, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by 

law, to: 

1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or 

conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of the permit; 

2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the 

conditions of this permit; 

3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control 

equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit; and, 

4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of assuring permit compliance 

or as otherwise authorized by the Act, any substances or parameters at any location. 

34 
Permit No. UT0000051 

III. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES 

A. Duty to Comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit 

noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Act and is grounds fqr enforcement action; for 

permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit 

renewal application. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Executive Secretary of 

any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance 

with permit requirements. 

B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions. The Act provides that any person who 

violates a permit condition implementing provisions of the Act is subject to a civil penalty 

not to exceed $10,000 per day of such violation. Any person who willfully or negligently 

violates permit conditions of the Act is subject to a fine not exceeding $25,000 per day of 

violation; Any person convicted under UCA 19-5-115(2) a second time shall be punished by 

a fme not exceeding $50,000 per day. Except as provided at Part !JIG, Bypass of 

Treatment Facilities and Part IIIH, Upset Conditions, and possibly Part ID.11, Storm 

Exemptions nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the civil or 

criminal penalties for noncompliance. 

C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in 

an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted 

activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. 

D. Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any 

discharge in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely 

affecting human health or the environment. 

E. Proper Operation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times properly operate and 

maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) 

which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of 

this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls 

and quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or 

auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only when the 

operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. 

F. Removed Substances. Collected screening, grit, solids, sludges, or other pollutants 

removed in the course of treatment shall be buried or disposed of in such a manner so as to 

prevent any pollutant from entering any waters of the state or creating a health hazard. 

Sludge/digester supernatant and filter backwash shall not directly enter either the final 

effluent or waters of the state by any other direct route. 

G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities. 

1. Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur 

35 
; .. 0 

Permit No. UT0000051 

which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for 

essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject 

to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this section. Return of removed 

substances, as described in Part liiF, to the discharge stream shall not be 

considered a bypass under the provisions of this paragraph. 

2. Notice: 

a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a 

bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if possible at least ten (10) days before the 

date of the bypass. 

b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an unanticipated 

bypass as required under Part III, Twenty-four Hour Reporting. 

3. Prohibition ofbypass. 

a. Bypass is prohibited and the Executive Secretary may take enforcement action 

against a permittee for a bypass, unless: 

1. The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or 

severe property damage ; 

n. 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, 

iii. The permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph 2 of this 

section. 

b. The Executive Secretary may approve an anticipated bypass, after considering 

its adverse effects, if the Executive Secretary determines that it will meet the 

three conditions listed above in paragraph 3.a of this section. 

H. Upset Conditions. 

1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for 

noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of 

paragraph 2. of this section are met. The Executive Secretary's administrative 

determination regarding a claim of upset cannot be judiciously challenged by the 

36 
Permit No. UT0000051 

permittee until such time as an action is initiated for noncompliance. 

2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A permittee who wishes to 

establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, 

contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that: 

a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) ofthe upset; 

b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated; 

c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required under Part III, Twentyfour Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting; and, 

d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part IIID, 

Duty to Mitigate. 

3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the 

occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof. 

I. Toxic Pollutants: The permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions 

established under Section 307(a) of The Water Quality Act of 1987 for toxic pollutants within 

the time provided in the regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even if the 

permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement. 

J. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances. Notification shall be provided to the Executive 

Secretary as soon as the permittee knows of, or has reason to believe: 

1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge, on a 

routine or frequent basis, of any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if 

that discharge will exceed the highest of the following "notification levels": 

a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/L); 

b. 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-methyl4, 6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/L) for antimony; 

c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in 

the permit application in accordance with UAC R317-8-3.4(7) or (10); or, 

d. The level established by the Executive Secretary in accordance with UAC R317-

8-4.2(6). 

37 
Permit No. UT0000051 

2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in any discharge, on a 

non-routine or infrequent basis, of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, 

if that discharge will exceed the highest of the following "notification levels": 

a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/L); 

b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/L) for antimony: 

c. Ten (1 0) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in 

the permit application in accordance with UAC R317-8-3.4(9); or, 

d. Tne levei established by the Executive Secretary in accordance with [lAC R317-

8-4.2(6). 

K. Industrial Pretreatment. Any wastewaters discharged to the sanitary sewer, either as a direct 

discharge or as a hauled waste, are subject to Federal, State and local pretreatment .regulations. 

Pursuant to Section 307 of The Water Quality Act of 1987, the permittee shall comply with all 

applicable federal General Pretreatment Regulations promulgated at 40 CFR 403, the State 

Pretreatment Requirements at UAC R317-8-8, and any specific local discharge limitations 

developed by the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) accepting the wastewaters. 

In addition, in accordance with 40 CFR 403.12(p)(1), the permittee must notify the POTW, 

the EPA Regional Waste Management Director, and the State hazardous waste authorities, 

in writing, if they discharge any substance into a POTW which if otherwise disposed of 

would be considered a hazardous waste under 40 CFR 261. This notification must include 

the name of the hazardous waste, the EPA hazardous waste number, and the type of 

discharge (continuous or batch). 

38 
Permit No. UT0000051 

IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 

A. Planned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Executive Secretary as soon as 

possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. Notice is 

required only when the alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or 

increase the quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants which 

are not subject to effluent limitations in the permit. In addition, if there are any planned 

substantial changes to the permittee's existing sludge facilities or their manner of operation 

or to current sludge management practices of storage and disposal, the permittee shall give 

notice to the Executive Secretary of any planned changes at least 30 days prior to their 

implementation. 

B. Anticipated Noncompliance. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Executive 

Secretary of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in 

noncompliance with permit requirements. 

C. 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. 

D. Duty to Reapply. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit 

after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee shall apply for and obtain a new 

permit. The application shall be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of 

this permit. 

E. Duty to Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the Executive Secretary, within 

a reasonable time, any information which the Executive Secretary 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 Executive 

Secretary, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit. 

F. Other Information. When the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant 

facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or 

any report to the Executive Secretary, it shall promptly submit such facts or information. 

G. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information submitted to the 

Executive Secretary shall be signed and certified. 

1. All permit applications shall be signed by either a principal executive officer or 

ranking elected official. 

39 
Permit No. UTOOOOOSl 

2. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Executive 

Secretary shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized 

representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: 

a. The authorization is made in writing by a person described above and submitted 

to the Executive Secretary, and, 

b. The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having 

responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility, such as the 

position of plant manager, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, 

or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental 

matters. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named 

individual or any individual occupying a named position.) 

3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph IV. G. 2 is no longer 

accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall 

operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph 

Jv. G. 2 must be submitted to the Executive Secretary prior to or together with any 

reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative. 

4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section shall make the 

following certification: 

"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all 

attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision 

in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified 

personnel properly gather and evaluate the information 

submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons 

who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible 

for gathering the information, the information submitted is, 

to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and 

complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for 

submitting false information, including the possibility of fine 

and imprisonment for knowing violations." 

H. Penalties for Falsification of Reports. The Act provides that any person who knowingly makes 

any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted 

or required to be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of 

compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction be punished by a fine of not more than 

$10,000.00 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than six months per violation, or by 

both. 

40 
Permit No. UT0000051 

I. Availability of Reports. Except for data determined to be confidential under UAC R317-8-3.2, 

all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public 

inspection at the office of Executive Secretary. As required by the Act, permit applications, 

permits and effluent data shall not be considered confidential. 

J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude 

the permittee of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or 

penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under the Act. 

K. Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights of any sort, 

or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion 

of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local laws or regulations. 

L. Severability. The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provisions of this permit, 

or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, are held invalid, the 

application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall 

not be affected thereby. 

M. Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new permittee if: 

1. The current permittee notifies the Executive Secretary at least 20 days in advance of the 

proposed transfer date; 

2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and new permittees 

containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility, coverage, and liability 

between them; and, 

3. The Executive Secretary does not notify the existing permittee and the proposed new 

permittee of his or her intent to modify, or revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice 

is not received, the transfer is effective on the date specified in the agreement 

mentioned in paragraph 2 above. 

N. State Laws. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude· the institution of any legal 

action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established 

pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority preserved by UCA 19-5-117. 

0. Water Quality-Reopener Provision. This permit may be reopened and modified (following 

proper administrative procedures) to include the appropriate effluent limitations and 

compliance schedule, if necessary, if one or more of the following events occurs: 

1. Water Quality Standards for the receiving water(s) to which the permittee discharges 

are modified in such a manner as to require different effluent limits than contained in 

41 
' .. 

Permit No. UT0000051 

this permit. 

2. A final wasteload allocation is developed and approved by the State and/or EPA for 

incorporation in this permit. 

3. A revision to the current Water Quality Management Plan is approved and adopted 

which calls for different effluent limitations than contained in this permit. 

P. Toxicity Limitation -Reopener Provision. This permit may be reopened and modified 

(following proper administrative procedures) to include, whole effluent toxicity (WET) 

limitations, a compliapce date, a compliance schedule, a change in the whole effluent toxicity 

(biomonitoring) protocol, additional or modified numerical limitations, or any other conditions 

related to the control of toxicants if one or more of the following events occur; 

1. A pattern of toxicity is detected, as per Part I, D .4 14 of this permit, during the duration 

of this permit. 

2. The TRE results indicate that compliance with the toxic limits will require an 

implementation schedule past the date for compliance and the Executive Secretary 

agrees with the conclusion. 

3. The TRE results indicate that the toxicant(s) represent pollutant(s) that may be 

controlled with specific numerical limits, and the Executive Secretary agrees that 

numerical controls are the most appropriate course of action. 

4. Following the implementation of numerical control(s) oftoxicant(s), the Executive 

Secretary agrees that a modified biomonitoring protocol is necessary to compensate for 

those toxicants that are controlled numerically. 

5. The TRE reveals other unique conditions or characteristics which, in the opinion of the 

Executive Secr~tary, justify the incorporation of unanticipated special conditions in the 

permit. 

F:\WP\FACILITIES\KUCaPERMITMODIFICATION2009\MINOR.MODIFICATION.PERMJT.008.DOC 

42 
STATEMENT OF BASIS FILE COPV KENNECOTT UTAH COPPER CORPORTA TION 

RENEWAL PERMIT: DISCHARGE, BIOSOLIDS & STORM WATER 

UPDES PERMIT NUMBER: UT0000051 

UPDES MULTI-SECTOR STORM WATER GENERAL PERMIT NUMBER: UTROOOOOO 

MAJOR INDUSTRIAL 

FACILITY CONTACTS 

Contact Name: 

Position: 

Number: 

Contact Name: 

Position: 

Number: 

Contact Name: 

Position: 

Number: 

Facility Name: 

Mailing Address: 

Actual Address: 

Paula H. Doughty 

Environmental Affairs Director 

(801) 569-7120 

Reed Bodell 

Contact Name: 

Position: 

Number: 

Contact N arne: 

Superintendent of Water Resources Position: 

(801) 569-7915 Number: 

Steve Sands 

Permitting Manager 

(801) 569-6195 

Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

POBOX6001 

Magna, Utah 84044-6001 

8315 West 3595 South 

DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY 

Scott Lawson 

Vice President 

Engineering & Technical Services 

(801) 569-7111 

Hank Hanssen 

Lab Director 

(801) 569-7900 

The Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation (KUCC) is an integrated facility which includes an open pit copper mine, 

copper dump leach system that is in the process of being phased out, a· concentrator, a power plant, a smelter, a 

refinery, a reverse osmosis (RO) plant, the North Expansion Tailings Impoundment, and a sewage treatment plant. 

In addition, KUCC also has post-closure responsibility for management of heap leach rinsing and drain down from 

Bameys Canyon, an open pit gold mine and processing facility. 

The Copperton Concentrator typically processes approximately 170,000 tons of ore per day from the Bingham 

Canyon open pit mine by a froth flotation process to produce copper concentrate and by-product molybdenite 

concentrate. Approximately 170,000 tons per day of tailings from the concentrator is disposed in the tailings 

impoundment. 

The smelter processes copper concentrate to produce anode copper and by-product sulfuric acid. In the refinery, the 

anode copper is electrolytically refined to cathode copper. The main co-products include gold, silver, selenium, 

platinum, lead carbonate, and palladium. 

The North Tailings Impoundment is anticipated to meet operational needs for the next 25 to 30 years and is designed 

to store approximately 1.5 billion tons of tailings. The primary discharge from the North Impoundment reports 

directly to the Great Salt Lake via Outfall 012. The sediment pond and Outfall 002 will remain in place for the 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 2 

discharge of tailings water to the C-7 ditch as needed. Outfall 007 for the discharge of seepage and dike runoff water 

from the tailings impoundment to the C7 Ditch will also remain in place. 

The reliance on Outfall 012 as the primary discharge point triggers other water management improvements that were 

addressed in modifications to the 2001 permit. For example selenium contaminated soils were removed from the 

Garfield Wetlands and the artesian flows at Garfield Well No.5 and Kessler Springs were recycled into the process 

water circuit. Other flows such as Garfield Wetlands drainage that report to Outfall 008 were evaluated for quality, 

quantity and potential for recycle to minimize the volume of water discharged through Outfall 008. These 

evaluations ultimately result in lower concentrations of selenium reporting to the west C-7 ditch and the Great Salt 

Lake through Outfall 008. 

Prior to October 2000, parts of the waste rock were actively leached to recover copper by recycling water collected at 

the base of the dumps and placing it back on top of the waste rock. Impacted meteoric water and leach drain down 

continues to be collected in the leach collection system at the base of the waste rock. This impacted water is 

introduced into the tailings line at a rate of 500 to 2,000 gpm for treatment and is then discharged to the North 

Tailings Impoundment. KUCC will continue to collect and treat impacted waste rock flows throughout the term of 

this permit 

Groundwater in the alluvial aquifer in the southwest portion of the Salt Lake Valley has been contaminated by 

historic leach-water management practices. Groundwater cleanup is being conducted under an Administrative Order 

pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607, and involves extraction of low pH groundwater from two wells at a rate of 

1200 to 1800 gpm and introduction of this water to the tailings line via the Waste Water Disposal Pump Station. 

Excess neutralizing capacity in the tailings line resulting from lime added as a milling reagent and intrinsic 

neutralization capacity of the tailings provides adequate treatment of all acidic flows routed to the tailings line. 

KUCC will manage acidic groundwater in the tailings line throughout the term of this permit. 

KUCC also extracts neutral water with elevated sulfate concentrations from the leading edge ofthe plume (Zone A) 

and treats this water using RO membrane methods to produce drinking water. The Zone A RO Plant system is 

discussed further in subsequent portions of this Statement of Basis. Drinking water is provided to the public through 

the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District (JVWCD) in partial fulfillment of a settlement with the State of Utah 

under a Natural Resource Damage claim. RO treatment results in a concentrate wastewater from the RO process 

which reports to the tailings line. JVWCD is also constructing an RO treatment plant to treat historic mine 

contaminated water. Concentrate wastewater from the JVWCD treatment facility may potentially be introduced at 

the tailings impoundment during the term of this permit renewal. 

KUCC has conducted a pilot scale Solvent Extraction/Electrowinning (SXEW) project on a lined and monitored 

area on the Dry Fork dump. Future plans may include additional SXEW operations on the Dry Fork dump. This 

process involves leaching of low grade ore in waste rock with water, collecting the pregnant solution and processing 

it through a recovery circuit, that would be managed consistent with the current permitted practice of collecting drain 

down from leached and non-leached waste rock. 

Effluent from the sewage treatment plant (STP) adjacent to the Refinery is hard piped directly to Pump Station No.4 

and incorporated into the process water circuit. Pump Station No.4 directs flow to the Magna Reservoir where it is 

mixed with approximately 25,000 to 40,000 gpm of recycle water from the tailings impoundment and smelter. 

Water from the Magna Reservoir is pumped to the Copperton Concentrator where it is used for mineral processing. 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page3 

UPDES effluent limitations for the STP are riot necessary since KUCC is not authorized to discharge the effluent 

other than back into the process system. KUCC will demonstrate that the sewage plant is operated as designed by 

submitting monthly operating reports to the Construction Assistance Section of the Division of Water Quality. 

Outfall 011 was permitted through a modification to the permit effective April7, 1999. Outfall 011 was constructed 

to allow discharge of spring water from Adamson Springs when it is not needed in the process water circuit. 

Historically, Adamson Springs water was incorporated into the process water system at Pump Station No. 1. During 

reconstruction of Pump Station No. 1, Adamson Springs was segregated from tailings return water in the 

clarification canal and can now be directed to Outfall 011. Discharge of Adamson Spring water will reduce the 

amount of new source water into the process water circuit and reduce the amount of water that is discharged from 

the tailings impoundment via Outfall 012, during the winter months. 

FACILITY 

Copper Mine, Copperton Concentrator, Barneys Canyon, Power Plant, Leach Collection System, Magna 

Tailings Impoundment and North Expansion, RO plant, Sewage Treatment Plant, Smelter, Refinery and 

associated facilities. 

FACILITY LOCATION 

The company's active facilities are located in western Salt Lake County. The Bingham Canyon Mine, Leach 

Collection System, RO Plant, Barneys Canyon and Copperton Concentrator are located near Copperton, Utah. 

The Magna Tailings Impoundment and North Expansion, Power Plant, Sewage Treatment Plant, Smelter and 

Refinery are located near Magna, Utah. 

STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION (SIC) CODE 

The SIC codes are 1021 copper ore mining and milling and 3331 smelting and refining of copper. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCESS AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS 

In 1986, KUCC initiated a surface water management plan at the mine to segregate impacted and non-impacted 

waters. 

Impacted waters are collected and managed through a leach collection system, lined reservoirs for containment and 

storage, Small Bingham Reservoir and/or Large Bingham Reservoir, and various groundwater extraction wells from 

remediation activities. 

The leach water collection system consists of a series of cutoff walls, collection basins, pipes, toe drains, French 

drains and lined canals that collect and transport flows from leach drain down, meteoric and storm water runoff from 

leached and non-leached waste rock. Flows from the leached sections of the waste rock are piped to the precipitation 

plant for treatment and copper recovery, while flows from the non-leached waste rock are diverted directly into the 

Small and/or Large Reservoirs. 

The Small and Large Reservoirs are permitted to store water from waste rock drain down, storm water runoff from 

the mine and waste rock, certain mine tunnel flows and water from various extraction wells, including the Bingham 

Canyon Alluvial well, Bingham Creek cutoff wall, Curtis Spring, the Dry Fork extraction well, the acid plume wells 

and the Copperton channel well. This water can be stored in the Small and/or Large Reservoirs or pumped to the 

Waste Water Disposal Pump Station (WDPS) along with the RO treatment plant wastewater. The WDPS can pump 

up to 6,000 gpm to either the Copperton Concentrator thickeners for use in the process, or to the tai)jngs pipeline. 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page4 

Water is collected and used at the Copperton Concentrator and consists of water collected from tunnels, storm water 

runoff, extraction well water and meteoric flows from the mine. Sources of water collected and used at the 

Copperton Concentrator include: 

• Bingham Canyon mine pit water 

• Storm water from the Upper Bingham Canyon drainages surrounding the pit 

• Water from the North Ore Shoot (NOS) Shaft 

• Water pumped from the Carr Fork underground workings 

• Bingham Tunnel water 

• Water from deep wells 1193 and 1201 and the sulfate extraction well 

Water from the Lark Clean Water Well 

• Water from the Lark Shaft 

• Water from the Dry Fork clean water well and Mid-Valley clean water well 

• Treated sewage effluent water 

• Barneys Canyon mine pit drainage water and heap leach drain down water 

• Permeate and/or concentrate streams from membrane treatment facilitie~, associated with the treatment of 

contaminated groundwater 

• Meteoric water, including flows from dumps, leach water drain down or other sources of contaminated 

surface water or groundwater. 

Water from the NOS, upper Dry Fork drainages, Mid-Valley clean water well, Bingham Tunnel, Lark Well and Lark 

Shaft can be routed into the process water reservoir or into the Moly filter water tank. Other waters that are routed 

into the process water reservoir include about 15,000 gpm of overflow from the tailings thickeners and about 6,100 

gpm of overflow from the clarifier. When the mine water is commingled with Copperton concentrator tailings, the 

combined flow, which is piped 13 miles to the tailings impoundment, could be as much as 50,000 gpm. 

Water from deep wells 1193 and 1201 and the sulfate extraction wells primarily provide feed water to the Zone A 

RO plant. As indicated, treated water from this plant is delivered to a municipal drinking water purveyor for 

distribution to the public; concentrate reports to the process water system. On occasion, treated or untreated water 

from these wells may be directed to the process water system. 

The volume of water that may be discharged from the impoundment is consistent with the volume that could have 

been discharged prior to commingling with any zero discharge water and includes that volume of water incorporated 

into KUCC' s process system that is not necessary for process and could have been discharged prior to its integrated 

management. 

Additional flows to the tailings impoundment include approximately 1,500 gpm from the slag concentrator, 250 gpm 

from the hydrometallurgical plant, and 1,000 gpm of water contained in ash sluice and cooling tower blow down 

from the power plant. In addition, surface water drainage from wetlands can also be diverted into the Tailings water 

management system, and flows from Garfield wells, well #10 and the Riter-North Jordan Canal or the Utah-Salt 

Lake canal may be diverted into the Tailings water management system as needed to provide freshening or make-up 

water. 

Under normal operating conditions, water is pumped from the tailings impoundment decant pond to a clarification 

canal where up to 65,000 gpm can be recycled back to the concentrator. KUCC occasionally manages make-up 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 5 

water at the tailings impoundment transfer sump and the north impoundment decant pond. As needed, water from 

the C-7 ditch is imported to provide freshening and enhance treatment in the tailings system. Excess tailings decant 

water is discharged in accordance with UPDES conditions at the primary discharge point Outfall 012. Water 

reporting to Outfall 012 is pumped from the North Expansion via the floating decant barge pumps. The intake to 

these pumps has been designed to skim water from just below the surface in order to reduce the potential to suspend 

solids from the bottom of the decant pond. 

A toe ditch has been constructed along the outer perimeter of the North Expansion embankment with a central toe 

ditch retention pond. Outfall 007 is used to discharge from the toe ditch retention pond to the C-7 ditch when 

KUCC does not recycle this water for reuse in the concentrators. 

The modernized smelter has implemented a water management system that incorporates separate systems for smelter 

process water, acid plant blow down, slag mill effluent, hydrometallurgical plant effluent, sewage, storm water 

associated with industrial activity, and storm water not associated with industrial areas. Cooling water and plant 

wash down water from the Praxair oxygen plant is routed to the Smelter East Process Water Pond. As part of a site 

remediation plan approved by the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, approximately 100 gpm of water 

from an interceptor trench is also pumped to this pond. 

Smelter process water, such as granulation, slag pot cooling and casting contact cooling water, may be cooled in 

cooling towers prior to storage in the lined East and West Process Water Ponds prior to recycling. Operations at the 

modernized smelter are designed to reuse contact process water within the smelter, or to recycle the required blow 

down of contact process water to the ore concentrators via Pump Station No. 4, thereby meeting the zero discharge 

effluent limitation. Non-contact cooling water from the modernized smelter will be directed to the lined East and 

West Process Water Ponds and recycled in smelter operations or to the Copperton Concentrator via Pump Station 

No.4. 

A hydrometallurgical plant uses the acid plant blow down and related acidic water from the smelter gas cleaning 

area to process solids from the flash smelter furnace electrostatic precipitator to recover copper and precious metals. 

The flow of acidic water to the hydrometallurgical plant is approximately 250 gpm. In addition, an estimated 50 

gpm of refinery bleed electrolyte, precious metals plant blow down, and miscellaneous bleed streams will be 

directed to the hydrometallurgical plant for use as a reagent. An average flow of 250 gpm of gypsum/water slurry 

from this plant is routed through internal Outfall 104 to the tailings impoundment via the slag concentrator tailings 

pump system. This flow, from the hydrometallurgical plant, is regulated under the effluent guidelines applicable to 

acid plant blow down and refinery spent electrolyte with appropriate mass based limitations. The volume of effluent 

from the hydrometallurgical plant is mmiitored using an inline flow meter. Flow data is used both to calculate the 

mass effluent limitations using concentration data from Outfalls 002,007, and012 to account for the discharge of an 

equivalent volume of treated tailings water through Outfalls 002, 007 and/or 012. 

The STP was constructed to treat sewage from the north end facilities, which include the modernized smelter, 

refinery, Praxair, Power Plant, Railroad support and tailings impoundment support facilities as well as neutralized 

laboratory wastes from the process and environmental laboratories. The plant includes flow equalization, 

chlorination, and aerobic digestion of sludge. The STP is sized to treat 165,000 gallons per day and a peak hourly 

flow of 47,250 gallons of raw domestic sewage, based on a total work force of 1350. Discharges from the plant will 

consist of a clarified and chlorinated effluent, which reports directly to Pump Station No. 4 and from there to the 

concentrators for use as process water, and a waste sludge. The sludge is managed in accordance with applicable 

regulations. As described in the summary of previous permit changes, internal Outfall lOS was eliminated from the 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page6 

UPDES permit, in 2001, because there was, and continues to be, no direct discharge of the effluent to waters of the 

State. 

Water from the Tooele, Section 17, Japanese Springs, and non contact storm water can be dischru:ged at Outfall 004, 

Outfall 008 or Outfall 012 via the Hazelton Pump and Smelter Return Canal. Surface water flows from wetlands 

and artesian groundwater flows can be discharged directly through Outfall 008 consistent with applicable discharge 

limitations. 

The mine pit and mine storm runoff (without leach water) can be treated near Copperton and discharged through 

Outfall 005. The cemetery pond portion of this system was approved Aprill3, 1984 for irrigation quality water on 

an emergency basis. The historic discharge location was to Bingham Creek near the Jordan River; this Outfall 

location was subsequently changed to the Jordan River. There has been no discharge at this location for years, nor is 

any anticipated; the Outfall is retained for operational flexibility. 

SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS PERMIT 

The last major permit renewal was issued on May 21,2001. After issuance of this permit renewal, a minor permit 

modification was issued on December 5, 2001, an update to the Statement of Basis was issued on March 27,2002, 

major and minor permit modifications were issued on May 30, 2002, a major permit modification was issued on 

August 27, 2002, and a minor permit modification was issued on March 26, 2003. The following contains a 

summary of these permit changes: 

May 21, 2001 -Permit Renewal 

List of Substantive Permit Changes 

New Outfalls 011 (Adamson Spring) and 012 (to the Great Salt Lake) were included and Outfall 001(C-7 Ditch) was 

deleted. 

Outfall 105 from the sewage treatment plant was deleted in the permit since there is not a direct discharge to the 

environment. 

An interim selenium limitation of 0.054 mg/L was included for discharges from the tailings impoundment to the 

Great Salt Lake. This was based upon studies performed by the permittee and is subject to change in the future if 

Great Salt Lake data suggest modification is needed. 

Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) testing for the tailings discharge to the Great Salt Lake in the 2001 permit included a 

different test species than that required for the tailings discharge to the freshwater C-7 ditch in the 1995 permit. 

The zinc limitation for the tailings impoundment discharge was decreased to a daily maximum of0.5 mg/L and 30-

day average of 0.224 mg/L. 

The monitoring frequency for high discharge flows from tailings impoundment outfalls was increased. 

The tailings water storage volume needed to qualify for the storm exemption was increased. 

Limitations for Outfall 005 were reduced based on lower flow and higher TDS in the Jordan River. 
Lower limits were included for Outfall 010 (Butterfield Tunnel discharge). 

Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page7 

Phenol, iron and nickel monitoring and recycle rate limitations were deleted for the tailings impoundment 

discharges based on the results of monitoring data indicating further monitoring was not necessary if recycling 

continues as prescribed. 

December 5, 2001 - Minor Permit Modification 

REASON FOR MINOR PERMIT MODIFICATION 

The facility requested a minor modification oftheir UPDES permit to relocate Outfall 004. 

As a result of CERCLA remediation activities, the Slag Lagoon and the 1-80 Pond were reconfigured and the 

Hazelton Fresh Water Pond (HFWP) was constructed. The resulting changes to the water management system 

necessitated relocation of Outfall 004. 

Water reporting to the new HFWP and reconfigured Slag Lagoon and 1-80 Pond included flows that previously 

reported to the old Slag Lagoon that were permitted for discharge from Outfall 004. The water discharged from the 

relocated Outfall 004 also included storm water previously discharged from SW5, thereby discontinuing the need 

for a separate permitted storm water outfall. 

The relocated Outfall 004 was permitted to discharge directly to the Great Salt Lake. Flow measurements and 

monitoring requirements for Outfall 004 remained the same but the sampling location description was updated. 

March 27, 2002 - Statement of Basis Update 

An update to the Statement of Basis was issued to make minor clarifications to process water flow descriptions. The 

minor clarifications did not constitute a modification to the permit. 

May 30, 2002 - Major and Minor Permit Modifications 

REASON FOR MAJOR PERMIT MODIFICATION 

The 2001 Permit Renewal was issued without storm water provisions anticipating a separate storm water permit. 

The permit was modified to consolidate all UPDES permitting for KUCC by including storm water provisions for 

Outfalls SW1, SW2, SW3 and SW4. 

REASONS FOR MINOR PERMIT MODIFICATIONS 

During the period of January 2000 to June 2001, KUCC successfully conducted fifteen acute WET tests using 100% 

effluent concentrations at Outfall 012. The results demonstrated that there are no acute toxic effects to the test 

species Cryprinodon variegatus (Sheepshead minnow). Part l.D.12 ofKUCC's UPDES permit stated that "ifthe 

results for one year of testing indicate no toxicity, the permittee may request a reduction in testing frequency and/or 

reduction to one species." Based upon this permit condition, the permit was modified to reduce the acute toxicity 

sampling frequency at Outfall 012 from monthly to quarterly when the flow is greater than 1 MGD. 

On December 5, 2001, the DWQ issued a modified permit for KUCC that approved the relocation of Outfall 004. In 

the Statement of Basis for the modified permit, it was stated that, "samples shall be taken from a flume prior to 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 8 

entering the culvert beneath I-80. ''Due to unforeseen circumstances out of KUCC' s control, the flume could not be 

constructed. The modified permit reflected that compliance samples for Outfall 004 would be taken prior to mixing 

with the receiving water. 

Additional clarifications were also made in the modified permit and included standardizing the units used for 

selenium, correcting the pH monitoring frequency to make it consistent with other monitoring requirements, 

clarifying the individual flow requirements for WET testing, correcting references to erroneous footnotes for 

Outfalls 005, 009, 010 and 012 and updating the pool volumes for the tailings impoundment storm exemption 

provisions. 

August 27, 2002 - Major Permit Modification 

REASON FOR MAJOR PERMIT MODIFICATION 

A permit compliance schedule was included in KUCC' s renewal permit effective May 23, 2001 for Outfall 008, i.e., 

the May 21, 2001 Permit renewal, to allow time. to reroute the high selenium sources to the tailings impoundment 

and complete treatment and water management studies defining how best to meet the new permit limitations. Outfall 

008 consists of artesian water from the Garfield Wells, Kessler Spring, Section 17, springs from the Tooele area, 

wetland discharges, and other natural springs. 

As part of the permit compliance schedule obligations, KUCC implemented management practices to reduce the 

amount of selenium discharged at Outfall 008 including the removal of contaminated soils from the Garfield 

Wetlands which historically contributed to the amount of selenium that could report to Outfall 008. KUCC also 

contained the artesian ground water sources with elevated selenium levels that formerly reported to Outfall 008 and 

now routes them into the process water circuit for treatment and use at the Copperton Concentrator. The permit 

modification clarified that, on rare occasions, the artesian sources may not be able to be routed into the process 

circuit, and authorized as a contingency, routing of all flows previously discharged out Outfall 008 to the 

downstream side of the pipeline for Outfall 012 (through a piped connection). Outfall 008 will discharge directly to 

the Great Salt Lake under those circumstances rather than via the West C-7 Ditch. The permit modification 

establishes that the limitations for Outfall 012 are applied to Outfall 008 except for cyanide and biomonitoring. 

March 26, 2003 - Minor Permit Modification 

REASON FOR MINOR PERMIT MODIFICATION 

The renewal UPDES permit for KUCC issued in May 2001, specified that "Selenium will be analyzed by the 

"KUCC modified selenium hydride procedure" [Modified EPA Method 7742] as approved in the October 24, 1997 

letter from Gilbert Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement". This method was accepted by 

the Division ofWater Quality (DWQ) at the time over a standard EPA method in order to avoid positive selenium 

interferences associated with elevated dissolved solids concentrations in the effluent. Recent advances in analytical 

instrumentation now enable the use of a standard EPA method, specifically EPA Method 200. 8, for measuring low 

concentrations of selenium in elevated salt matrices. 

On February 8, 2003, the DWQ received KUCC's request to modify the permit to allow for the use of either 

Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8. The permit was modified to allow KUCC the use of both 

methods for the measurement of selenium. 

WATER MANAGEMENT CHANGES 

This permit renewal incorporates changes in water management related to facility operational changes as well as 

other water management system improvements. This section lists facility operational changes already completed 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 9 

during the term of the 2001 permit, ongoing water management activities that will continue to be implemented 

during the term of the renewal permit, and facility water management changes anticipated during the term of the 

renewal permit. 

Facility operational changes already completed during the term of the 2001 permit included: 

• The North Concentrator was permanently shut down 

• The tailings disposal from South to the North Tailings Impoundment transition was completed 

• The UPDES permit included coverage of storm water discharges 

• Sewage treatment plant (STP) effluent was piped to Pump Station No.4 for inclusion in KUCC's process 

water circuit 

• Outfall 105 (STP) was eliminated from the UPDES permit 

• Outfall 008 was connected to Outfall 012 

• Outfall 004 was relocated to enable KUCC to monitor the entire drainage area subject to the CERCLA 

removal activities 

• Selenium contaminated soils were removed from the Garfield Wetlands 

• At the Garfield Wetlands, spring discharges, artesian ground water discharges, and wetlands drainages with 

elevated selenium levels were contained and routed to the process water circuit for treatment and use at the 

Copperton Concentrator 

Water management activjties that will continue during the term of the renewal permit include: 

• Continued management of storm water runoff, meteoric drainage, and leach water drain down from waste 

rock 

• Continued management of groundwater extracted from the acid plume downgradient of the former Bingham 

Reservoir, as part of a CERCLA remedial response action 

• Continued management of remediation waters containing elevated concentrations of selenium and arsenic 

Facility water management changes anticipated during the term of the renewal permit include: 

• Smelter area storm water runoff management through process water system, including SW1 and SW2 

overflow management via the Smelter Return Canal process water system (resulting in deletion of Outfalls 

SW1 and SW2 from UPDES permit) 

• The pool volume range required for storm exemption on the North Impoundment was updated 

• Commencement ofBameys Canyon heap leach system rinsing and drain down following closure ofBameys 

Canyon 

• Full~scale operation of expanded Reverse Osmosis Plant 

• Management of treated sewage effluent through the tailings line 

• Utilization of Outfall 008 for direct discharge of wetlands drainage or artesian ground water flows consistent 

with applicable discharge limitations 

DISCHARGE 

DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE 

The KUCC has been reporting self-monitoring results on Discharge Monitoring Reports on a monthly basis. A 

summary of the last 3 years of data is attached and there were no significant violations. 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 10 

RECEIVING WATERS AND STREAM CLASSIFICATION 

The primary receiving water for the tailings impoundment discharge is the Great Salt Lake. Collected spring water, 

and occasional tailings impoundment discharges, flow into the C-7 ditch which flows into the former lower Lee 

Creek drainage and from there to the Great Salt Lake. Mine drainage and mine storm water can also be discharged 

to the Jordan River if necessary. Inactive mine tunnels discharge to Butterfield Creek, and an ephemeral stream in 

Tooele County, and Pine Canyon Creek. 

The Great Salt Lake is classified a Class 5. The C-7 ditch is classified a Class 3E. Butterfield Creek is classified a 

Class 2B, 3D and 4. The Jordan River at 7800 South is classified a Class 2B, 3A and 4. Pine Canyon Creek is 

unclassified and presumptively classified as Class 2B and 3D. 

Class 2B 

Class 3A 

Class 3D 

Class 3E 

Class 4 

Class 5 

-Protected for secondary cunlad. r~.::creation such as boating, wading, or similar uses. 

-Protected for cold water species of game fish and other cold water aquatic life, including the 

necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain. 

-Protected for waterfowl, shore birds and other water oriented wildlife not included in Class 3A, 3B, 

or 3C, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain. 

-Severely habitat-limited waters. Narrative standards will be applied to protect these waters for 

aquatic wildlife. 

-Protected for agricultural uses including irrigation of crops and stock watering. 

-The Great Salt Lake. Protected for primary and secondary contact recreation, aquatic wildlife, and 

mineral extraction. 

BASIS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 

The Kennecott operations are covered by US EPA Effluent Guidelines for the Ore Mining and Dressing Point 

Source Category, the Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Point Source Category, Utah Secondary Treatment 

Standards, and Utah Water Quality Standards. 

OUTFALL 002, 007, AND 012 TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT 

The flows from the mine and concentrators are usually greater than 90 percent of the flow to the tailings 

impoundment. Federal Ore Mining Guidelines for these categories of wastewaters have concentration based 

limitations. The State has concluded and EPA Region VIII has concurred that concentration limits are 

appropriate for the discharge of this water from the tailings impoundment. A small amount of discharge to 

the tailings impoundment is from the hydrometallurgical plant. The flow to the hydrometallurgical plant is 

from the smelter acid plant, refinery bleed electrolyte, precious metals plant blow down, and related refinery 

minor bleed streams. Federal Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Guidelines for these categories of 

wastewaters have mass based limitations. The effluent from the hydrometallurgical plant to the tailings 

impoundment is mass based and calculated using the flow of this stream to the tailings impoundment and the 

concentration of applicable constituents in the discharge from the tailings impoundment. 

The appropriate Ore Mining Effluent Guideline limitations in 40 CFR 440.102, best practicable technology 

(BPT), and 40 CFR 440.103, best available technology (BAT), for copper, lead, gold, silver and molybdenum 

ores for copper or molybdenum froth flotation are listed in Table 1. 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

. lff0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 11 

•• , "-}#• ~- ....... 

.. ' TABLE 1 ~ORE MINING EFFLUENT GUIDELINES :i:,·-··~r;· -~t:~,',4-~q: ., .· -t .K _,,~ . -;_ ,J ·/ . -~ Effluent Limitations _:. ''t-? ;~1Jnns Parameter ' Monthly Average Dally Minimum Daily MaXimum 

Total SuspendJld SoJids (TSS) 20 NA 30 mg/L 

":_ •- r. Copper(Cu) 0.15 NA 0.30 mg/L 

~'~ ! Zinc (Z,) ' 0.5 NA 1.0 mg/L 

!• Lead (Pb) 0.3 NA 0.6 mg/L l_ 

M~rcury (Hgl 0.001 NA 0.002 mg/L -·· 

l• Cadmium (Cd) ~- ~ 0.05 NA 0.10 mg/L ,, pH ~ ;-~ NA 6.5 9.0 su I "- .-.. ~ 

NA- Not Applicable 

The pH is limited by the Utah Secondary Standards, Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Section R317-1-3.2 to a 

range of 6.5 - 9.0 standard units. 

The limit for arsenic and zinc are based on the previous permit. Total cyanide is limited to the former permit limit 

of 0.1 mg/L monthly average and 0.2 mg!L daily maximum. 

Mercury is based on 40 CFR 440. 

The oil and grease limitation of 10 mg!L maximum is based on Best Professional Judgment. 

An interim effluent limitation of 54 ug!L for selenium for Outfall 012 is established based upon Kennecott 

consultant studies of selenium concentrations that are protective of algae and invertebrates that inhabit the Great Salt 

Lake and to ensure that the residues present in these species do not accumulate in the food chain and pose any risk to 

bird reproduction. A detailed report presenting the derivation of the selenium permit limit for Outfall 012 was 

submitted as an addencium to the 2001 permit renewal application. This permit limit is considered interim at this 

time because no numeric selenium standards have been established for waters of the Great Salt Lake. However, the 

permit will contain a reopener clause in the event additional data demonstrate the need to modify the selenium 

effluent limitations. · 

The US Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit for the North Expansion contains a selenium limit of 12 ug!L in lower 

Lee Creek water north ofl-80 that is protective of wildlife at the Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve (ISSR). Accordingly, 

Kennecott is required to manage discharge from Outfalls 002 and 007 consistent with meeting the 404 permit limit 

for selenium in this water. 

The previous permit contained a recycle flow rate requirement. Since the permittee continues to recycle, a permit 

limitation is not considered necessary. The permittee is expected to be able to comply with all of the tailings 

impoundment effluent limitations. 
• , 

1\..ennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 12 

\ 1{ Effluent Limitations, Self-Monitoring·.and Rewrting Requirements Outfall 002 and 007. · .·· ·-· 

t\rt~irnum Monthly Daily Daily .· Sample ·~ 

Parameter ~~ncy ·Unhs Average Maxirnum Minimum . Type 

Flow " NA NA NA Continuous Recorder MGD ·"• 

TSS 20 30 NA 3 XWeekiy Composite mg/L 

Tota!As 0.25 0.50 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L 

Total Cd 0.05 0.10 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L 

TofaiCu 0.15 0.30 NA 3XWeekly Composite mg/L 

Total Pb 0.30 0.60 NA 3XWeekly Composite mg/L 

Total Hg 0.001 0.002 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L ____:_..__ - .. 

• Total Zh 0.224 0.50 NA 3 X Weekly Composite mg/L 

Total Se aJ 0.012 NA NA Monthly b/ Grab mg/L 

Total Cyanide 0.1 0.2 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

Tatal Dissolved Selids NA NA NA Monthly Composite mg/L (TDS) 

on. and (lreas~ NA 10 NA c/ Grab mg/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 3 X Weekly Grab su 

·c ;. ' ·n ··~!;. Effluent LlmitatioflS, Self-Monitorin.g_ and R~porting Requirements Outfall 012 ! ,, .,, 

Parameter Maximum Monthly Daily Daily Frequency Sample Units Average Maximum Minimum Type 

Flow ' NA NA NA Continuous Recorder MGD 

TSS '.'1'' 20 30 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

Total As 0.25 0.50 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

' Tot~l~ 0.05 0.10 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

.: Total Ou 0.15 0.30 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

Tetal Pb 0.30 0.60 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

"Fetal Hg 0.001 0.002 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

., ~ Total Zn 0.224 0.50 NA Daily d/ Composite mg/L 

Total Se NA 0.054 NA Daily d/ b/ Composite mg/L 

iotal Cyanide 0.1 0.2 NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

TDS NA NA NA Monthly Composite mg/L 

Oil and Grease NA 10 NA c/ Grab mg/L 

.. ~ pH NA 9.0 6.5 Daily Grab su 

NA- Not Applicable 

I 

a/ 0.012 mg/L is consistent with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 

Permit #199450301 and shall not be exceeded at the Lower Lee Creek location north of 

Interstate 80 during a discharge from outfalls 002 and 007. 

b/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 13 

approved in the October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau 

of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8 or 

alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement. 

c/ Oil and grease will be sampled when sheen is observed. 

dl The monitoring frequency is two times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 1 MGD and 5 MGD, three times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 5 MGD and 10 MGD, five times per week when the weekly average flow is 

between 10 MGD and 15 MGD, and daily when the weekly average flow is greater than 

15 MGD. Measurement frequency is only required weekly when the Sunday through 

Thursday average flow is less than 1 MGD and the total flow for the week is less than 10 

MGD for that discharge. The frequency of monitoring may be modified by the Executive 

Secretary after one year of monitoring demonstrates compliance with concentrations 

below permit limits. 

Tailings Pond Storm Exemption 

The current permit allows a storm exemption for the tailings impoundment when there is a pool volume equal to the 

10-year, 24-hour storm plus a volume equal to the 24-hour accumulation of process water. Recycle of tailings water 

to the concentrators, maintaining treatment, and minimizing the amount of overflow is required. For storm events, 

the USEPA storm exemption requirements of 40 CFR 440.13l(b) for facilities allowed to discharge will apply. 

Since issuance of the 2001 permit renewal, Kennecott completed its active operational transition from the South to 

the North Tailings Impoundment. The updated pool volume required for storm exemption is calculated below: 

North Expansion 

Source 

Normal Pool Volume 

Mine Storm Water at 10,000 gpm 

Mine Water at 2,000 gpm 

' 

Concentrator process water discharge at 45,000 gpm 

Hydrometallurgical Plant, Slag Tailings water at 2,000 gpm 

Power Plant Ash Sluice at 1,000 gpm 

Direct precipitation (1017 acres) x (2 inches)x (1 foot/12 inches) 

Tailings Impoundment/Embankment surface area 3294 acres 

Runoff from 10-year, 24-hour storm (2.0 inches),Runoff Coefficient (0.3) 

Runoff (3666 acres) x (2 inches) x (1 foot/12 inches)(.3) 

Total Capacity in acre-feet to Qualify for Storm Exemption 

*Dependent on Actual Pool Volume prior to storm event 

Acre Feet 

5500-9000 

44 

9 

133 

9 

5 

170 

183 

6053-9553* 

Information which must be submitted as part of the storm exemption includes the appropriate tailings 

impoundment/embankment surface area and pool area, amount of precipitation or snowmelt at the tailings 

impoundment and/or mine, North Expansion decant pool volume prior to the discharge, effluent concentrations, 

concentrator flow rate to the tailings impoundment, return flow from the tailings impoundment to the concentrators 

via Pump Station No. 1, and other steps taken to maintain treatment and minimize the amount of overflow such as 

maintaining the pH in the range of 6.5 to 9.0 in the tailings impoundment to minimize metals in the discharge. 
h...ennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 14 

OUTFALL 104 S.MELTER AND REFINERY DISCHARGE 

The discharge from the refinery and smelter are regulated by USEPA Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing 

Metallurgical Acid Plant, and Spent Refinery Electrolyte point source categories. USEPA regulations require no 

direct discharge of smelter process wastewater but discharge is allowed from the acid plant. The acid plant is 

designed to produce 7.7 x 106 lbs/day of H2S04. The Refinery is designed to produce 2.0 x 106 lbs/day average 

cathode production. The limitations for the smelter acid plant and refinery are mass limitations. 

The gypsum/water slurry effluent from the hydrometallurgical plant is regulated by the mass limitations for 

metallurgical acid plants and spent refinery electrolyte. Refinery casting is not included in the determination of 

applicable effluent limits after completion of the new smelter, because the refinery casting has been moved to the 

smelter casting area and there is zero discharge from this area. 

The modernized smelter is regulated under new source performance standards (NSPS). Table 2 contains NSPS for 

the smelter acid plant and hydrometallurgical plant effluents and Table 3 contains the smelter acid plant and 

hydrometallurgical plant mass discharge limits. 

TABLE2 

Smelter Acid Plant and Hydrometallurgical Plant Mass Discharge Guidelines 40 CFR 421.94 

Effluent Limitations 

Parameter Monthly Maximum lbs/106

lbs Daily 

,,; "\:i,· - - H2S04 Maximum lbs/106

1bs H2

S04 

4 "' 

•. ,, .. ,. TSS ... ' 30.650 38.310 

_'i•< - As ~ 1.456 3.550 

" Cd 0.204 0.511 "· ~~~· 

' Cu " .. •· .n• 1.558 3.269 

,1 '" Pb . 0.332 0.715 

" Zn .. 1.073 2.605 

~;1 . pH l (1) (1) 

TABLE 3 

Smelter Acid Plant and Hydrometallurgical Plant Mass Discharge Guidelines 40 CFR 421.94 

Effluent Limitations (Based on H2S04 production of 7. 7 X 

Parameter 106 lbs/day) 

Moothly Maximum Daily Maximum 

~ .. lbs/day lbs/day 

TSS 236 295 I As 11.2 27.3 ., Cd 1.57 3.93 

'· Cu ~ 

c-::.:·-"' ...; 12.0 25.2 - Pb 2.56 5.51 

-" Zn - 8.26 20.1 

~· .. ,. pH (1) (1) 
l\..ennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 15 

(1) The pH is limited by the Utah Secondary Standards, Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Section R317-l-3.2 to a 

range of 6.5 - 9.0 standard units. 

Small flows of spent refinery electrolyte are subject to the Spent Refinery Electrolyte effluent limitation guidelines. 

Table 4 contains the effluent limitation guidelines for the refinery spent electrolyte effluent and Table 5 contains the 

refinery mass discharge limits. 

0.0281 (2) 0.068 

0.030 0.063 

0.018 0.027 

(1) (1) 

1.18 

0.06 0.14 

0.060 0.13 

0.04 0.054 

(1) (1) 

(1) The pH is limited by the Utah Secondary Standards, Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Section R317-1-3.2 to a 

range of 6.5 - 9.0 standard units. 

(2) The Arsenic number differs from the effluent limitation guidelines in that it is more stringent and is continued 

from a previous permit consistent with the anti-backsliding provision of the CW A. 

In order to calculate the allowable discharge limits from Outfall 104, DWQ added the values in Tables 3 and 5 to 

produce total mass limits in Table 6 applicable to the smelter acid plant, hydrometallurgical plant, and refinery 

discharge. The discharge is directed to the tailings impoundment where further treatment through precipitation, 

sedimentation, and clarification occurs in the tailings impoundment decant pond to meet the mass limitations, 

especially for total suspended solids. Compliance with mass limitations is calculated by first multiplying the flow 

from the hydrometallurgical plant by the ratio of tailings impoundment wastewater discharge rate divided by the 

total wastewater inflow to the tailings impoundment to determine the portion attributable to the hydrometallurgical 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 16 

plant. Finally, this discharge flow rate is multiplied times the tailings impoundment discharge concentrations to 

determine the mass discharged. 

TABLE 6 ~· -

Smelter Acid Plant!Hydrometallurgical Plant/Refinery Mass Discharge LimHs Outfall1 04 

· Effluent Limitations 

Parameter Monthly Maximum Daily Maximum 

c·, _J lbs/day lbs/day 

TSS 237 296 

As 11.3 27.5 

'(·,!· .... Cd ~.,_ 7, 1.57 3.93 F 

;, Ou . _!. 12.1 25.3 .. •'1. Pb ...,. 2.56 5.51 

. ~· ...!..,. .• , Zn '" 8.26 20.1 

OUTFALL 005 MINE WATER 

The discharge was originally approved for storm water and mine drainage discharge from the mine in 1984. It has 

not been used recently because the water now normally flows to the tailings impoundment. In the event operational 

failure prevented usage of the mine water collection, diversion and treatment system, mine water and additional 

storm water could be neutralized with lime, treated and discharged to the Jordan River subject to the Ore Mining 

Limitations and Water Quality Standards. A wasteload analysis of 5 MGD discharge to a low flow of 32 cfs and 

TDS of 1175 mg/L in the Jordan River is attached. The sources of ore mining limitations 40 CFR 440.103, previous 

discharge quality, or water quality WLA are listed in the following table. Due to a new WLA: total cadmium, 

copper, lead, mercury, iron and selenium are more stringent than in the previous permit. 

" 

.; '"' ·'i·· Effluent Limitations, Self-Monitoring and Reporting Requirements Outfall 005 · ']t' ,, 

Parameter 

Maximum Monthly Daily Dally Frequency 

ample Units Average Maximum Minimum Type 

Flew NA NA NA Daily a/ Measured MGD 

i SS 20 30 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total As NA 0.23 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total Cd 0.0028 0.0198 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total Cu NA 0.12 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total 'Pb 0.063 0.510 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

TotaiHg 0.00006 b/ 0.00077 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L .. 

Total Zn 0.75 1.50 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total Fe NA 3.06 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Selenium cJ 0.014 0.056 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L 

Total Dissolved Solids NA 1200 NA 2 X Weekly Grab mg/L (TDS) 

Oil and Grease NA 10 NA d/ Grab mg/L 

. ; pH NA 9.0 6.5 Daily Grab su 
h ... cnnecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 17 

a/ For intermittent discharges, the duration of the discharge shall be reported. 

b/ Kennecott will voluntarily analyze mercury using a low level total mercury analysis. 

c/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as approved in the 

October 24, 1997letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA 

Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

d/ When sheen is observed 

NA -Not Applicable 

During the first week of discharge, aluminum, and silver shall also be sampled and analyses submitted with the first 

discharge report. 

OUTFALLOOS 

Outfall 008 consists of artesian water from the Garfield Wells, Kessler Spring, Section 17, Tooele Spring, wetland 

discharges, and natural springs. Surface water and artesian groundwater with elevated selenium levels will continue 

to be contained and routed to the process water circuit for treatment and use at the Copperton Concentrator. 

However, surface water or artesian groundwater meeting discharge limitations can also be discharged through 

Outfall 008. The discharge is monitored quarterly for the same parameters as Outfall 012 except for cyanide and 

biomonitoring. Selenium limits are considered interim at this time until selenium standards can be established for 

waters of the Great Salt Lake. 

EffToent Umltations, Self-Monitoring and R~P~rting Requirements Outfall 008 ~._;_:·'·::~t.(ii• \.: 

Parameter Maximum _Monthly Dally Dally Frequency Sample 

.t"~h' i ,~ , . • ~Verage Maximum Mrn1mum '• 'TY¢. ··! u'l~~ F ... Flow NA NA NA Quarterly Measured MGD 7 

~' \':; TSS 20 30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

, .. ·'-' Total A~ 0.25 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

\ Totai'Cd 0.05 0.10 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

total Cu 0.15 0.30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Pb 0.30 0.60 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Hg 0.001 0.002 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Ta~IZn 0.224 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Selenium NA 0.054 NA Quarterly Grab mg!L 

Total Dissolved Solids NA NA NA Quarterly Grab mg/L (TDS) 

011 and Grease NA 10 NA a/ Grab mg/L 

pH NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

a/ When sheen is observed 

NA -Not Applicable. 
OUTFALL 004 RUNOFF AND ARTESIAN WATER 

Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 18 

Storm water runoff from the drainage behind the smelter through the Kessler drainage channel, the flow from 

Japanese Springs, excess water from Tooele Spring and Section 17 which has not been used for process can be 

discharged at relocated Outfall 004. The discharge will be sampled and reported for the same parameters as Outfall 

008. 

OUTFALL 009 PINE CANYON TUNNEL 

Outfall 009 consists of less than 30 gpm of water from the Pine Canyon Tunnel, a former mine. The majority of this 

water seeps into the ground before it reaches the intermittent stream. The discharge will be limited to the same 

concenirmions as Outfall 002 excepr for cyanide and biomoniroring. Company dara indicares rhar dissolved solid 

concentrations after mixing with the stream (when flowing) are not likely to exceed the Class 3D standards and are 

characterized by lower constituent concentrations than documented in storm water in this drainage . 

•. r. Effluent Llmitatlor:ts, Self-Monit(:)ring and Reporting Requirement~ Outfall 009 -

•, '·' 

r Maximum Mor:tthly [!)ally Daily Sample Parameter Fre:qu~ncy Units ~ Average Maximum Minimum Type 

II .~; Flaw I <'· NA NA NA 2 X Yearly Measured MGD 

I\ ·~- TSS 20 30 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

¥I Total As 0.25 0.50 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

,; TotaiCd 0.05 0.10 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L ~ •· Total Cu 0.15 0.30 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

lt . .. Total Pb 0.30 0.60 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

'J!: Total Hg 0.001 0.002 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

· .. • Tatal Zn 0.224 0.50 NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

Selenium b/ 0.012 NA NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L 

Total Dissolved Solids NA NA NA 2 X Yearly Grab mg/L ~TDS) 

Oil and Grease NA 10 NA a/ Grab mg/L 

• ~H NA 9.0 6.5 2 X Yearly Grab su 

a/ When sheen is observed 

b/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as approved in the 

October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA 

Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

NA- Not Applicable. 

OUTFALL 010 BUTTERFIELD TUNNEL 

Outfall 010 consists of water from the Butterfield Tunnel, a former mine. The discharge will be sampled and 

reported for the same parameters as the tailings impoundment except for cyanide. The discharge is to comply with 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 19 

the most restrictive standard from Ore Mining guidelines 40 CFR 440.103, class 3D aquatic life or class 4 

agricultural water quality standards listed in the following table. The agricultural standard is used as a maximum for 

total dissolved solids, arsenic, and lead because the existing quality is significantly better than the calculated effluent 

limitations. 

Effluent Umitations. Self-Monitodng ancl..Re.porting Requirements Outfall 010 :•· .·• .~ .J. " . . ," Maximum Monthly Daily Daliy .;_ ... smnple Parameter Average Maximum Minimum Ftequ6mcy Ty.pe Ullits 

·Flow NA NA NA Quarterly Measured MGD 

TSS ~ 20 30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

~ .. Total As . J NA 0.10 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total~ -, . '.'• 0.0044 0.015 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

·f -:t:otal Ou 0.050 0.083 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L ~ Tetal Fe .. '-:'!.' NA 1.52 ~ NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

X "~t: .Totai 1Pb ,,.- . 0.023 0.100 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

,. .t· i Total Hg ~~:~ I 0.00002 a/ 0.00023 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

iJ · ~\~: Total Zn 0.446 0.493 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L I.-' Seleniumb/ 0.007 0.029 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

r alai Dlssalved Solids NA 1200 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L (TDS, . · ;· Oil and Grease NA 10 NA c/ Grab mg/L 

-~ '. . ........... pH ·» NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

a/ Kennecott will voluntarily analyze mercury using a low level total mercury analysis. 

b/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as approved in the 

October 24, 1997 letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA 

Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. / 

c/ When sheen is observed 

NA- Not Applicable. 

OUTFALL 011 ADAMSON SPRING 

This discharge is a natural spring. However, there is the potential for relatively small amounts of process water to 

commingle with the spring water. The discharge will be limited for total suspended solids (TSS), copper and zinc as 

listed in the Ore Mining Effluent Guideline limitations in 40 CFR 440.102, best practicable technology (BPT), and 

40 CFR 440.103, best available technology (BAT). These limitations are more restrictive than the ground water 

permit. The pH is limited by the Utah Secondary Standards, Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Section R317 -1-3.2 

to a range of 6.5-9.0 standard units. Oil and Grease is limited by Best Professional Judgment to 10 mg/L. 

Maximum limitations for arsenic and selenium are based upon the ground water permit for this spring. Maximum 

limitations of 0.01 mg!L for cadmium and lead are Best Professional Judgment based upon Company sample data 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 20 

for total metal concentrations of the proposed discharge from Outfall 011. These limitations are higher than the 

ground water permit because they are for total metals instead of dissolved and are maximums instead of average 

values. 

Total dissolved solids (TDS) are to be monitored but not limited because of the proximity to the Great Salt Lake. 

Effluent LtmHatlons,r1Self-Monitoring and RepOrting Requirements Outfall 011 :• ,, ' 

Parameter Maximum Monthly Daily Dally Frequency Sample Units Average Maximum Minimum Type . 

Fl0w NA NA NA Quarterly Measured MGD 

TSS ,.. 20 30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total As NA 0.013 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

TotaJCd NA 0.01 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Total Cu 0.15 0.30 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

n· ~~;/..::Total Pb NA 0.01 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

TotaiZn 0.224 0.50 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

.self)flium a/ NA 0.013 NA Quarterly Grab mg/L 

Oil and Grease NA 10 NA b/ Grab mg/L 

. pH NA 9.0 6.5 Quarterly Grab su 

a/ Selenium will be analyzed by the "Kennecott modified selenium hydride procedure" as approved in the 

October 24, 1997letter from Gilberto Lopez of the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory Improvement, Modified EPA 

Method 7742 or EPA Method 200.8 or alternative method approved by the State of Utah Bureau of Laboratory 

Improvement. 

b/ When sheen is observed 

NA- Not Applicable 

Leach System 

The Ore Mining and Dressing Point Source Category, 40 CFR 440.103 (c), requires that there be no discharge of 

process wastewater to navigable waters from leach operations except under defined circumstances. The zero 

discharge provisions do not apply to drain down of water from the inactive waste rock leaching operations or other 

inactive facilities in the process of being closed. In that regard, Kennecott is treating drain down from inactive waste 

rock leaching operations with the neutralization capacity contained in copper tailings, and discharging the treated 

drain down to the tailings impoundment. No leach water or drain down water is authorized to discharge to Bingham 

Creek or the Jordan River. 

Treatment of waste rock drain down is expected to continue during the term of this permit. Section 40 CFR 

440.131 (c) authorizes a discharge of process water if the facility is designed, constructed and maintained to contain 

the maximum volume from a 10-year 24-hour precipitation event. The capacity of the Small Bingham Reservoir is 

79.3 acre-feet and the total combined capacity of the Zone 1 and 2 Large Bingham Reservoirs is 1770 acre-feet. No 

such flows are authorized to discharge to Bingham Creek or the Jordan River. The zero discharge design has been 

and will continue to be sufficient to prevent a discharge to Bingham Creek or Jordan River. 
SELF-MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

K.ennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 21 

The permit will require reports to be submitted monthly, quarterly and yearly as applicable, on Discharge Monitoring 

Report (DMR) forms due 28 days after the end of the monitoring period. Lab sheets for biomonitoring must be 

attached to the biomonitoring DMR. 

STORM WATER 

STORMW ATER REQUIREMENTS 

Rather than having a separate storm water permit, the discharge of storm water shall be covered under this permit. 

The principal storm water requirement is the development of a Pollution Prevention Plan, as detailed in the permit. 

The plan may be modified to reduce but not eliminate the inspection frequency, training, etc. where there is 

containment of the 25-year, 24-hour storm runoff at new facilities. It may also be modified to reduce but not 

eliminate the frequency of these where there is containment of the 10-year, 24-hour storm runoff at existing 

facilities. 

Smelter Area Storm Water Runoff Management in Process Water System 

KUCC has developed a comprehensive storm water management system for the modernized smelter, which includes 

containment of the 25-year 24-hour storm at the modernized smelter. The revised management system eliminates the 

need for storm water Outfalls SW1 and SW2. The following briefly describes the system. 

Storm water discharges are collected and channeled through the smelter area utilizing a series of engineered 

channels and piping to convey storm water to a pair of storm water ponds not designed to discharge. Runoff from the 

operating facilities is routed to either the West Storm Water Pond, with a 3.5 million gallon storage capacity; or the 

East Storm Water Pond, with a 6.5 million-gallon storage capacity. A 40-acre area drains to the West Storm Water 

Pond. Of this, approximately 37 acres consists of impervious asphalt surfaces and building roofs. Facilities draining 

to this pond primarily consist of the west parking area, office areas and the asphalted area once occupied by the 

former Acid Plant 7 and 8. An area of 90 acres drains to the East Storm Water Pond. Of this, approximately 58 acres 

consists of impervious asphalt surfaces and building roofs. Primary facility areas draining to this pond include the 

repair and machine shop area, the modernized smelter and reclaimed areas. 

When storm water collects in the HDPE-lined West and East Storm Water Ponds, up to 350 gpm and 600 gpm 

respectively are pumped to the smelter West and East Process Water Ponds. In response to a significant storm event, 

any overflow from the West or East Storm Water Ponds will flow to the process water system through the Smelter 

Return Canal. The West and East Storm Water Ponds accept overflow from the West Process Water and East 

Process Water Ponds, respectively, during plant upset conditions such as power failures. When normal operations 

are restored, the water in the Storm Water Ponds is pumped back to the Process Water Ponds. 

Non-operational areas will have storm water runoff routed to three different locations. Approximately 127 acres of 

native and reclaimed areas on the west side of the facility will drain to Japanese Springs via diversion channels 

reporting to the newly reconfigured Hazleton Fresh Water Pond or used for process makeup water with eventual 

discharge to the tailings impoundment or Great Salt Lake. Approximately 79 acres of east side native and reclaimed 

areas will drain to operational wetlands northeast of Praxair via diversion channels. An additional 3500 acres of 

land including both native and reclaimed areas, the smelter landfill, and Kessler Canyon will drain to the Kessler 
Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 22 

drainage channel which flows to the Smelter Return Canal for recycle back to the concentrator or to the Great Salt 

Lake via Outfall 008. The majority of this acreage is attributable to Kessler Canyon at 3450 acres. 

Outfall SW3, Little Valley Storm Water 

Storm water runoff from the area southeast of the North Concentrator complex may flow to the Little Valley Wash 

in the event of a significant storm. Outfall SW3 will be the monitoring point for this flow. Discharge from Outfall 

SW3 will only occur in response to a storm larger than a 10-year 24-hour event. Best Management Practices required 

for this discharge are that the discharge will occur only in response to a storm event and the discharge will be 

sampled as soon as practicable after flow is observed by personnel in the area. Test results will be reported for the 

same parameters as the tailings impoundment except for cyanide and biomonitoring. 

Outfall SW4, Pine Canyon Storm Water 

Outfall SW 4 consists of storm water runoff from the Pine Canyon drainage to Pine Canyon creek. The discharge 

will be monitored and sampled, if present, as soon as practicable after a major storm event. This shall occur at least 

twice per year, if discharge is present. Test results will be reported for the same parameters as Outfall 009. 

PRETREATMENT REQillREMENTS 

There is currently no discharge of process wastewater to the community of Magna sanitary sewer system. Any 

process wastewater that the facility may want to discharge to the public sanitary sewer in the future, either as direct 

discharge or as a hauled waste, would be subject to federal, state and local pretreatment regulations. Pursuant to 

section 307 of the Clean Water Act, the permittee shall comply with all applicable Federal General Pretreatment 

Regulations promulgated, found in 40 CFR section 403, the State Pretreatment Requirements found in UAC R317-

8-8, and any specific local discharge limitations developed by the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) 

accepting the waste. 

BIOMONITORING REQillREMENTS 

As part of a nationwide effort to control toxics, biomonitoring requirements are being included in all major permits 

and in minor permits for facilities where effluent toxicity is an existing or potential concern. Authorization for 

requiring effluent biomonitoring is provided for in UAC R317-8-4.2 and R317-8-5.3. The Whole Effluent Toxicity 

(WET) Control Guidance Document, February 15, 1991, outlines guidance to be used by Utah Division of Water 

Quality staff and by permittees for implementation of WET control through the UPDES discharge permit program. 

Outfall 012, which discharges directly to the Great Salt Lake, requires WET testing using the species Cryprinodon 

variegatus (sheepshead minnow) on a quarterly basis when the flow is greater than 1 MOD. Testing of Mysidopsis 

bahia (mysid shrimp) indicated that calcium concentrations above 350 mg!L effected Mysidopsis bahia. Monitoring 

of the calcium concentration will be performed and if the concentration drops below 350 mg!L, additional testing of 

the mysid shrimp is required to determine the appropriateness of this species. 

Additionally, if KUCC discharges from Outfall 002, it should conduct WET tests using Ceriodaphnia dubia. Those 

tests should be performed monthly if the monthly average flow exceeds 10 MOD. Monitoring is only required 
1\..ennecott Utah Copper Corporation 

UT0000051 

Statement of Basis 

Page 23 

quarterly when the monthly average flow is less than 10 MGD. Because Outfall 002 discharges to a class 3E stream, 

only acute toxicity testing has been required. 

If KUCC discharges from Outfall 007, it must conduct WET tests quarterly using Cryprinodon variegatus if the 

quarterly average flow has exceeded one (1) MGD. 

A limitation of no acute toxicity (LC 50) has been required to be effective since June 1, 1993 and will continue upon 

there-issuance of the permit for Outfalls 002 and 005. No acute toxicity at 012 for sheepshead minnow is now 

required. Provisions are in the permit for additional testing in the event 50 percent toxicity occurs and for 

conducting a toxicity reduction evaluation (TRE) in the event it becomes necessary at Outfalls 002 or 005. 

Only a yearly biomonitoring test using Ceriodaphnia dubia is required for Outfall 010 because it is not an active 

mine portal. Biomonitoring is also required quarterly of discharge 005 because there is normally no discharge and 

the flow is not to exceed 5 MGD. 

PERMIT DURATION 

It is recommended that this permit be effective for a duration of five (5) years. 

Drafted by · 

Jennifer Robinson, Discharge 

Tom Rushing, Storm Water 

Utah Division of Water Quality